Kazansky222

So it looks to me like the JF-17 has a high fuel flow in a apples to apples static test. So.... looks accurate to me. Your 30k ft tests are invalid because they are at such radically different speeds. And doesn't account for inlet design which can count for almost half the "thrust" of an engine in depending on design, design speed ect... https://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/inlet.html for informational purposes. But this one is impossible to fake out. the RD-93 burns more fuel installed in a static test vs the RD-33. So again, your own results show that its... pretty spot on.

I think an interesting test would be to have a Mig-29 and JF-17 sitting on the ground somewhere, near sea level and another test where they are at the highest airport in the game both with the same amount of fuel onboard say the 5100lbs that the Jiff carries. And have them both siting there with 1 engine running, crank them up to full AB or mil or whatever with the brakes held and let them sit and see who burns out of fuel first. and time it. maybe even try to record the fuel drop rate on the gauges. It would be more of an "apples to apples" seeing as they would both be at zero airspeed, same altitude ect.... Now if they are wildly different then there is def something going on. But if they are about the same, like the percentages expression from your time tests then I don't think there is a problem, or at least not a huge one.

I see what you're saying, but I mean, But you have to admit, it is odd that when you simulate single engine fuel flow at the Mig-29 design speed and JF17 design speed, provided by your time data, that fuel flow seems to match up almost perfectly with the RD-93 when speed is taken into account.

hmmm.... never tested it with AI jf17, but I know for player flown ones they def to not appear in the inner ring at 100nm :) Sounds like a bug to me.

Probably just going to run them out of life before upgrading to newer engines. Thats what I would do anyways. saves money.

What mode did you have the RD-93 in in your tests? I've noticed higher fuel flow when in "combat" mode rather then default or training mode. Just using your test data to make some comparisons between the fuel flow, speed, and fuel capacity between the Mig-29 and Jiff Fuel flow appears to be almost identical (single engine comparison), Its just one plane is alot faster then the other.

I've often hoped for this also, using the unguided RBK500 is not the easiest thing in the world to do, especially against targets with shorads/manpads ect.. around them. I'd be happy to be able to CCRP a SPBE RBK500 from a Mig-29 :)

Now we wait.... Great post.

Well I remember ED saying something about IADS a long time ago, since lazur was part of the IADS system maybe it will come with that rework... but its been quite sometime and no news on that front so, chalk it up to, I wish this would happen, should happen, won't happen.

Yea having that circuit to drop the center-line separately would be great... ED please? :)

oddly enough fro my in VR the cockpit lightning in the 29 looks better now then ever, maybe even still a little to dim.

<64>Kazansky MiG-29A

I was watching this interesting video that brought up a good point about FW190 G loading. The pilots legs in the FW190 A-8 are almost stretched straight forward, as opposed to most fighters where they sit more traditionally, one could surmise that it would lead to better G tolerance from the pilot.

Try running at 120hz either small or normal fov, I found that running at anything other then 120 the gpu catalyst causes crazy judders. I know it doesn't make sense, but just try it.

Try it both ways first, for me, if I set to 90 or 120 fps then it judders hard the entire time. But set at 60 it only judders when cpu frametimes randomly spike or when GPU frametimes drop bellow 60. But when set to 40 it almost never judders. I know it makes no sense, there is some funky software magic happening in the background that nobody here is going to really understand.

Credits to A hamburgler for giuring this out, I just want to make a separate post so it doesn't get lost in the 157 pages of the pimax thread. For your info my system is an 8600k at 5.1ghz and a 1080ti, 32GB 3200mhz CL14 mem. So first watch this video Do what he says. Then watch this video Do what he says. Then make your DCS settings this with 1.0 PD https://drive.google.com/file/d/1BtHIMo4S_xV4U66WPxgvGeJm2mOCG3-_/view?usp=sharing Then open up your pitool and made it look like this https://drive.google.com/file/d/1spxebKmDgpX9VmpgaBhKtKQkhOVgfac_/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1oQ5s4AQYilq93Pvdk0mUkSkDWu1Jc6R1/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ehSNmm8SA6Ql4VjfLJpKP0qFCqWcA9UO/view?usp=sharing Then apply and save. Then make your steam VR SS look like this https://drive.google.com/open?id=1N6shGyyKoOLqtaGbwACz1AyHHjD6LXOO TBH I'm found that anything between 36 and 42% runs ok. depends on which server you play on, BFPG destroys your CPU frametimes so you can run a little higher on it, but not too much. but if you play in SP or a server with less crap going on destroying framerate adjust accordingly. Then make your Nvidia CP look like this https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Fg4OiRrnmoLcmyjOWqrPVldonyRbzfka/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1__Ba4TCXa2X79M78b98yBX8gxTkN4K5Y/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RSlGz5RREDTbrK9h8MdfmqHe7-qXK_Zl/view?usp=sharing Then restart your PC, and note everytime you adjust your Pitool GPU Catalyst you need to restart your PC for it to work right. They say just reboot the HMD, but I've found that only makes it work half the time. I took a screenshot of me sitting on the ramp started up ready to go in a JF-17 on BFPG with like 40 players online getting 60fps ASW butter smooth no drops, but for some reason VRFPS doesn't show up on my screenshots. *edit* So my buddy was experimenting with my settings and found that judder can be completely avoided by setting nvidia FPS to 40, in game you still run at 60 ASW 99% of the time but when it can't maintain 60 it will drop a bit but as long as it stays above 40 you won't get the judder. Also I'm now running 1.5 on pitool setting, and 38% on steam VR SS. So far a quick SP instant action looked a little better then old settings and no judders yet. Need to test MP.

I did exactly what you did, and I am getting locked 60 fps now, feels very smooth, but I'm getting double vision in both eyes, as in, even if I close 1 eye, that single display is doing double vision. *edit* fixed double vision by setting nvidia control panel pre-rendered frame to 3

Yea my thoughts exactly. I would absolutely love to have a HMD, but only if its been retrofitted onto the Jf-17 that we fly in DCS. which I think it was planned for seeing as their is already a switch for the HMD on the AAP panel. (not to mention a switch for the IRST on the same panel) *edit* Also if they want to put it on as a "fictional" just make it an option to set in special options or something. If you want to fly the PAF jiff, you can, if you want to set it in special options to have the jiff fitted out for everything i twas meant to have given an unlimited budget, your choice.

No, release like Deka did, with the Jiff feature complete, bug fixes after.

Fitting into the time frame? Welcome to how the Mig-29 and SU-27 drivers have felt since forever. Personally I would have been happy if ED made 1989 or 1991 the cutoff date. But that didn't happen so here we are.

yea....

yea thats what I figured.

I just read the newsletter and faq real quick, didn't see anything about weapons, specifically meteor, thats really all I care about. Has anybody seen anything said about that? Meteor = hype no meteor = new plane, same air to air weapons... cool.

Meteor Missile?!

No you! ;) *ahem, Mig-25PDS please*