fjacobsen

But still... the F-86 was announced to have been released yesterday, though today it´s still in open beta. No offence if the update for the release version will be available in short time, but then at least I guess we can expect the manual to be more finished too - or ?

I really wonder how it can be regarded out of beta, when only released for the public DCSW open beta version. The manual alos looks rather unfinished. On many recent DCS module releases the terms beta and release version has really become blurred and it´s really hard to gather what makes a module move from beta to full release version. FinnJ

In my opinion a similar table if entry speed, altitude, dive angle and sight settings should be issued. The Mig-21 module has been released as an advanced model and thus simulation and documentation should reflect this. I really like the Mig-21 modulr and thus I find emphasise should be on fixing radar and ASP-sight bugs.

Question is if this not only is in tracking mode and not search. The RP-21 is also stated to be stabilized, but at least in search mode the radar is not stabilized towards the horizon. FinnJ

As far as I know the RP-22 is an enhanced version of the RP-21 with a detection range at appr 30 km and slightly different scan angles in the vertical. Even the various controls are very much the same. The pictures are quite interesting, but does not really tell much about the stabilisation mechanism ( what is the stabilisation mechanism and what is the scan mechanism ? - probably it's the same, just being controlled by a mix of inputs from scan and stabilisation control circuitry). So the best info that can be gathered is on the RP-21.

What I did not tell in my above description is that the beam is inclined 1,5° when using the R-3 & R-3S and declined 1,5° using the R-2 missiles. This is relative to the fixed 3° declination. Also in the low altitudemodes the first setting simply removes the low search pattern - effectivly reducing the "bar" scans from 3 to 2 and thus not looking 8° below inorder to reduce ground clutter. In the second setting this is also true, but additionally the scan is inclined by 1,5° to further reduce ground clutter. So tecnically seen the RP-21 / 22 radar has some relative complex mechanics build in. Question is really how close the LN simulation has come to this, or maybe that in-sim possibilities restricts the full implementation of these mechanics. What I see is not a perfect rendition of the real radar, but I don´t either regard it as bad the way it works right now, but I would expect the radar to be more able to pick up targets being at co-altitude. FinnJ

As far as I have uderstood the scanpattern works quite differently in the Mig, but covers what could be regarded as 3 bars. (Try to draw the below pattern): It starts at the left (30°) mid (0°) position. Then moves to right (30°) mid (0°) position. Then to right (30°) low (8° declined) position. Then to left (30°) low (8° declined) position. Then to left (30°) high (8° inclined) position. Then to right (30°) high (8° inclined) position. Then to right (30°) mid (0°) position. Then to left (30°) mid (0°) position. Then to left (30°) low (8° declined) position. Then to right (30°) low (8° declined) position. Then to right (30°) high (8° inclined) position. Then to left (30°) high (8° inclined) position. Then to left (30°) mid (0°) position. Then starts over.... The radar beam is a baseballbat shaped signal with the thick end at the far away position. This beam is 4,8° and rotates exentric to form a 9° beam inorder to have a "signal even zone". By the movement between mid, low and high angle (±8°) the beam covers 9/2 (roughly half the beam) + 8 + 8 + 9/2 (roughly half the beam) = 25° (effective only 24° due to the rotating beam form). All this is declined by 3° to compensate for the normal aircraft pitch attitude. This pattern is stabilised between ±70° in roll, but not stabilised in pitch, thus as the descriptions I have tell - the search pattern will follow pitch movement and the "target below", "target inline" and target above" indications are not relative to altitude, but to the Mig's longitudal axis. Look here (in German): http://www.mig-21-online.de/ Under: Mig-21 "Fishbed" -> Flugzeugsysteme -> Funkmessvisier FinnJ

I have read further info the radar. Most info is from the RP-21 though. mainly here: http://www.mig-21-online.de/ But also from a reallife Mig-21 manual. I´m not sure how the stabilization should work, but common description tells that in search mode the radar will search ±30° on azimuth and ±12° in pitch (though the pitch values are differently described by various sources). The search line is depressed by 3° inorder to compensate for average aircraft pitch relative to the horizon due to AOA. This 3° is further adjusted slightly up or down depending on which type of missile is selected. The indication for whether the target aircraft is above, below is NOT relative to aircraft altitude, but relative to where the nose is pointed i.e sightline. So it seems that current implementation isn't far from reality. FinnJ

As far as I know its ÷1.7 - 17° standard pattern Which casn me raised by 1.5° in low alt mode. But still its should be stabilised in both roll and pitch, thus the 0° radsar line is relative to the horizon and not aircraft horizontal reference i.e pitch attitude. But Cobra has allready confirmed this issue as pointed out in his post above. FinnJ

Thank You Cobra. The Mig-21 is still awsome and one of my favorite aircraft in DCS :) FinnJ

With the latest update I find that finding targets with the RP-22sma Sapphir Radar has become much more difficult. I have setup some tests, which makes me conclude that the Radar Dish no longer is stabilised in pitch (and maybe also not in roll) Stablisation is, according to various sources, ±40° in pitch and ± in roll. The scans vertically between ÷1.7° - +17° - this should be relative to the horizon. But what I see is that this now is relative to the Aircraft direction, which is dependent on angle of attack. So flying with an AOA of +4°, the radar is actually not looking 1.7° down, but: ÷1.7 + 4.0 = 2.3° up. This means that inorder to track a target at a range of 30 km, You must be 1500 m below the target. Being sligtly below or at the exact same altitude puts Your target below the radar scan zone - all depending on Your AOA. For a radar that has been reported to be gyrostabilised, this doesn´t look right. FinnJ

Update with the latest patch released yesterday. (Open beta until further)

I also assume that when in STT and with ±15° and ±30° azimuth, the arc should center on the locked target. Right now the scan arc might point fully to the right f.ex, but the locked target is at the left edge, though outside the scan arc. FinnJ

I think ingress should be at 470 km/h according to the table, which is achieved with roughly 97% RPM. When starting the roll in I bring the throttle to idle.

Stutter due to flucturating FPS is not only a DCS World problem, but a general problem in games. A low, but more steady fps is better than high flucturating fps. If You see high flucturating fps, then You will probably find the sim much smoother locking the fps at a lower number like Kuky says. For a 60 hz monitor locking fps at 59 will probably give a much smoother experience - Your monitor doesn´t update faster anyway.

That's simply called accelerated stall.

Also the whiskey compass is garbled. FinnJ

Yeah, but a target that are displayed at 60 nm in the 80nm range should also show up when changing to the 160nm range, just closer to the bottom of the display.

Bug with special tabs in the ME has been reported and confirmed by ED. This bug also affects other modules. FinnJ

I re-installed the Mig-21 in 1.5.3 Beta, but will wait until after friday to activate the Mig-21 in 1.5.3 Release version and 2.0. FinnJ

I simply uninstalled the Mig-21 from 1.5.2 Release versions, 1.5.3 Beta and 2.0.1 Alpha and now wait until friday to see what will happen. I think many, if not most, runs all 3 versions, so having checked interoperations beforehand by the devs would now have required alot, but well... shit happens and as long as we all learn... FinnJ

While You are right about the alpha and beta versions, I just want to let You know that my DCSW 1.5.2 Release versions also is wrecked now due to this issue. I have no problems with bugs and missing features, but a "simple" protection system should not be that intrusive. The weird thing is that these activation problems with the Mig-21 has been persistent way longer than for any other modules. FinnJ

Stupid activation system.... I installed 1.53 beta.. Started the Sim.. Was asked to re-activate the Mig-21. Activation window would not close after finishing activation Had to shut it down via Task manager. Worked then Started DCSW 2.0 Was asked to re-activate the Mig-21 again Activation window hanged again and crashed. Closed it via Task manager Worked then in DCSW 2.0 Started DCSW 1.5.3 Same issue How cone that there are so many problems with the Mig-21 activation each time new updates has been installed ?? FinnJ

Not sure - but.... Mk-82 can only be released in CCRP with the M2000C, which means HADB cannot be conducted. ...But I might be wrong. FinnJ

In Pikeys video I would say he is too close for a 530D shot. Most misiles needs some time inorder to start guiding and reach sufficient speed for control. But I still agree that none of the M200C missiles are very efficient.