Argo Navis
-
Posts
52 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Argo Navis
-
-
I didn't miss it.
I bought this module in September 2014!
-
That's just the reality of a small team mate.
50USD is the reality. Look at today's update. What a list for modules in the same price category. The small team excuse has been around for a while. Why don't you ask for help? A great sound mod was released a few days ago. A bit unfair to ask for this much money and have modders sell your module.
-
Hey Nin,
This is great work, I find it absolutely amazing!
I am more interested in the cockpit sounds as I only fly in VR. You did mention that without the source code your control over the sound is limited, however, this is really close to the real thing as far as one can compare it to youtube in-cockpit videos. I really like how you can hear the compressor whining in the cockpit.
I can't remember if the sound after touch down was there originally, or you put it there. It sounds amazing, you can hear the wheels rolling. The only thing missing is the louder noise after the nose wheel touches down. I am not sure about the gear up and down thumps. In the footage I can only hear the nose wheel thump on retraction and extension. However, these videos are recorded with a gopro with its one microphone probably. I asked a guy who flew the type, he says you can hear the gears lock on retraction, but not that much on extension. On some videos you can clearly hear the nose wheel thump when the guy selects gear down. On most videos I can not hear it at all. Maybe the 21 fans can look around more and post videos with good sounds, but I am sure you watched them all. My opinion at the moment is that the thumps are too loud, and it would be awesome to add the nose wheel touchdown sound as well, if possible. I can't watch these videos any longer, my hearing is going.
Keep it up, it is really nice to see some improvement on this module.
-
Hi Jonne,
It is in the russian Mig-21Bis manual. The manual does not go into detail about what happens if you overspeed or exceed limitations, and it is not supposed to anyway. However, there is a graph in the manual that tells a lot about directional stability. It also says that directional stability decreases but remains adequate up to Mach 1.9-2.0 with two rockets or clean, and up to Mach 1.4-1.5 with one central droptank. The emphasis is on the word adequate. The whole reason for this is that the shock cone interferes with the airflow around the vertical stabilizer as you accelerate towards Mach 2.
In real life, if the aircraft started to yaw and oscillate left and right lightly at these high speeds even before reaching mach 2, you had to abort the exercise and decrease speed. A friend of mine who flew this aircraft says he could only hit Mach 2 once or twice. Even though he attempted the max speed exercise countless times he had to stop before reaching mach 2 most of the time due to fuel constraints. A lot depended on atmospheric conditions like tropopause levels, temperatures etc, and it was easier to get to Mach 2 during the winter months. Here is the graph. Directional static stability coefficient against mach number:
-
The maximum speed limit is due to aerodynamic reasons, and the engine has nothing to do with it besides burning the necessary fuel to go faster. The engine could accelerate the aircraft beyond mach 2 easily had it had more fuel. Above mach 2 however, the aircraft starts to suffer from stability problems that can lead to total loss of control mostly because of directional stability decreases. Loss of control above mach 2 could easily lead to in-flight breakup. For this very reason people didn't try to break personal speed records in this aircraft but stuck with the rules. Even on maintenance test flights, which required a test pilot, the max speed limit was M2.05.
Why the devs chose to cut the engine at these high speeds I am not sure. Maybe it's there to give you a second chance.
-
The AOA indicator was designed for the MF version. If you look up pictures of the MF's instrument panel, you will see this instrument is oriented the right way up in a different location. In the Bis it is installed around 45 degrees rotated. The simple reason for installing it like that is because it only fits this way. The screws on the instrument case can be lined up only this way. In order to have this instrument installed the right way up they would have to change the way it is manufactured. To save cost they just left it like that.
About the SPO-10: Schmidtfire is right. I remember the devs decision on changing its location in order to see it better in game.
The Bis has two subversions: The 75A and 75AP, or using different names the LAZUR Bis and the RSBN Bis. We have the RSBN version in game, and in that one the SPO-10 is indeed at a different spot on the main instrument panel. In the LAZUR version it is where we have it in game. That's the little change the devs did and Schmidtfire called it artistic freedom. Now, I am talking about the original designs. It is correct that countries did change them around with different mods and avionics, so you shouldn't be bothered by it at all.
-
Hey Rudel, Thanks a lot, it worked!
However, DCS still doesn't show up in the program list, the uninstall.exe also missing from the DCS folder. There is no way to uninstall it at the moment.
-
Hello all,
I am running the stable version and want to switch to open beta. I want to uninstall the stable version because I don't have space for both versions. I can't uninstall it, DCS doesn't even show up in the programs list.
A year ago or so I moved the DCS folder from a hard drive to an ssd by simply copy/pasting the whole DCS folder. I didn't change anything in the registry. It worked, however, something must have gone wrong.
Should I just delete the folder as mentioned above by BIGNEWY?
Thanks
-
When he adds power you can hear the jetpipe blowing. Can't really tell when he switches reheat on. When he reduces the power you can hear the compressor whistling. And yeah, that really looks like a nose wheel shimmy at the end.
-
When the Mig-21F-13 entered service it didn't have a two seater version, so every new Mig-21 squadron had some Mig-15 trainers in order to conduct prof checks, IF training, etc. And that's when this instrument became a problem. The Mig-21F-13s had the AGD-1 attitude indicator with the blue on top while the Mig-15UTI still had the old AGI-1 blue on bottom indicators. After some time these two seater Mig-15s got the new AGD-1 indicators to eliminate the confusion. I don't think many Mig-15UTIs got this instrument since the 2 seater Mig-21U also entered service a few years after the F-13 started and there was no need to have Mig-15s in the Mig-21 squadrons anymore.
-
Wow, thanks man! I just missed it by a few minutes.
-
Hello Overstratos,
It's been almost two weeks since that nice picture you uploaded. I have been checking the FB page as well but haven't seen anything new on the Mig-19P.
Please give us some news on the development.
Thanks.
-
Sent you a PM.
-
Hello Foxbat,
I said sort of home made. Believe me, had you seen the quality of this design you would have called it home made as well. I worked on a Mig-17PF for 2 years in a restoration project. A few parts went through my hands. The holes cut into these tubes/glare shields were cut literally with a pocket knife. This sort of a jerry-rigged solution is not something an engineer would come up with. Now picture this: parts made in a factory come off the assembly line then a guy comes with a hacksaw and a pocketknife and cuts holes into them. Doesn't make much sense. However, if it's a modification it does make sense. Ever heard of service bulletins issued by the manufacturer?
In the Warsaw Pact almost every country had their own aircraft repair plant. Most of them were type specific. The one in Plovdiv, Bulgaria had an international contract to overhaul Mig-19s and 17s. For example the Hungarian Mig-17PFs and 19PMs had their major maintenance and overhaul work done by this facility even though the Hungarians also had their own plant to overhaul their own and other nations' aircraft but not these types. I don't know about other air forces but I wouldn't be surprised, if some of the other countries in the eastern block also sent their aircraft to Plovdiv. That might explain why you see the same solutions on different nations' aircraft. On the other hand, you might be right and the guy did show up with the pocket knife and carried out the mod in the factory just before aircraft delivery :shocking: . It is definitely cheaper than redesigning a part after all.
existed few variations and developers are able choose most practical version from DCS point of view.I totally agree with you on that one, sir.
-
In this image what you see there is the opening that was cut on the bottom of the tube in order to see some instruments while your face is against the tube. They attached an aluminium cover to it that keeps the rubber tube more rigid and doesn't let too much ambient light into the tube. This modification was not done in the factory. It was sort of "home made". You can even see in the other images in the link that the metal tube was cut into as well in order to accommodate this opening at the right place. Obviously this opening is not lined up in this image correctly. The rubber has shrunk and is in a bad condition.
-
Well, it might look like that there are two different tubes, but there isn't. There are probably a lot of variations. In this image you can see that the rubber tube is attached to the metal one with a clamp. You can slide this rubber tube in and out on the metal one in order to make it somewhat comfortable for the pilot. The length of the metal differs widely. As I said I have seen shorter and longer ones.
-
Foxbat, in your picture half of the rubber tube is actually missing. This is the typical museum example as I wrote above. You can see the metal tube onto which the rubber tube slides on.
These pictures are from the same Mig-17PF. Originally this rubber tube was a long one. On the other hand, I have seen shorter and longer tubes but the differences weren't more than 3-4 inches.
-
Thanks YoYo!
-
Sorry, I meant if you had any real photographs of the radar's hood/glare shield, like the ones you posted about the gun camera.
This shield was made from rubber. It used to slide on to a metal tube that was attached to the screen by three bolts that could be loosened by hand for easy installation. Aircraft that have been on display under the sun in museums for decades are usually don't have the shield anymore. The rubber disintegrates due to heat, sunlight and age. And yes it was cumbersome and difficult to use. They cut a hole on its left side, so when you had your head against it you could still see some instruments, but only the AH was really visible which is not enough to fly on instruments.
-
Overstratos, you are right. I don't think that camera blocked the visibility that much. Forward visibility from this aircraft was bad because of her big, fat nose especially on final approach in bad weather. And you can't remove the nose, can you? :huh:
What about the radar screen's glare shield? Do you have any pictures on that?
-
Hello OverStratos,
It looks fantastic!
I can't help notice that the so called "tube" is missing from the radar screen in all screenshots. You guys did a ton of research, so I am sure you know what I'm talking about.
The screen had a rubber tube on it during the day in order to shield it from sunlight. Without this tube you couldn't see anything on it. The screen didn't need the rubber tube installed for night flying. It only needed a filter to reduce screen flicker.
I saw on your FB page that people are already asking to make the gun camera removable to improve visibility from the cockpit. If you model the radar screen's shield, I am sure the same guys will start to complain about that as well. On the other hand, in reality the aircraft flew with these annoying things anyway.
Keep up the good work!
-
Hi Hiromachi,
You sound like you have some inside info on Magnitude. Can you tell us what's happening? Are we going to see some long awaited development on the Mig-21?
-
It is great marketing and it works. I have never been interested in the F-18. Now, with these daily updates I am hooked. I'm gonna buy this thing!
-
I only have this issue with the Mig-21. I only have 4 modules though. I am not bothered with the deferred shading that much for now. I am bothered by the fact that this module is getting neglected more and more.
Dynamic Sound Overhaul Mod (New Sounds and SDEF's) 2022 **V3.0 NOW RELEASED**
in MiG-21Bis
Posted
Nin, that is great news!
That hopefully means you will have full control over the sounds. Did you find a way about adding the nose wheel touch down sound? Or is it a DCS thing and can't be done?