FoxAlfa
-
Posts
729 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by FoxAlfa
-
-
For the documents, there are books that give information per example:
https://www.amazon.com/MIG-29-Flight-Schiffer-Military-History/dp/0764313894
and others...
ISBN number and Library of Congress number and all... so you make MiG-29ED according to that book, and not any document.
I don't think virtual pilots would be disappointed
-
1
-
-
What is lacking and needs improvement in DCS, isn't that you can destroy the plane by over G,
Its that plane should give way more feedback both visual, tactile and audio that you are doing that.
-
1
-
1
-
-
26 minutes ago, =475FG= Dawger said:
I suspect you are being purposely dense so I will be clear.
There are NO examples of the F-15 shedding its wings at 12+ G ( Car crashes causing death of occupants) while there are multiple instances of the F-15 sustaining 12+ G without catastrophic wing failure. ( car crashes with no dead people)
“Guesstimating” that a brand new fighter aircraft will shed its wings the very first time it achieves 1.5 its published G limit is a ridiculous standard. To add insult to injury, this ridiculous standard is arbitrarily applied to the F-5 while others suffer from no such adverse application.
Have ALL F-15 or large amount done 12.5g and survived?
No, because Good pilots Don't do that because people who actually DESIGNED the plane told them not to do that since it will DAMAGE the plane! And there are plenty exemples of planes being damaged from over G.
Pushing any aircraft beyond its design limits that far no matter the reason, is BAD airmanship and having surived is just as much luck as anything else.
As such represent a very small set of case that can't be used as rule.
All in all in DCS you CAN do 12G, under almost all circumstances.
You literally have to full Drop tanks and go very fast, and pull 10-11+ G to brake your wings in Eagle C, and sorry but that is on 100% on the pilot.
-
1 hour ago, =475FG= Dawger said:
Except you have no examples where the people died in the car crash, only instances where they didn’t.
I can clear mind say people die in car crashes, and it is exactly and equally correct as statement people survive car crashes until later you factor in all other factors and conditions, and that was exact point.
Eagle C in DCS can do 12.5G all day if you don't try it with stupid weights.
Weights like of 100% fuel and 4 120 4 aim7 have no issue at 13g in DCS.
Also you can't make a DM model based on one time events with lot of pulp and apply it to ALL scenarios.
But you can guesstimate based on the aircraft manual and limitations... and DCS F-15c can do 12.5g on any weight it is rated at 9g in the manual. On higher weights were its rated, lower, per exemple 7.5g or so, it can't and I find that quite fair.
-
12 hours ago, SparrowLT said:
(still unrealistic as the 15C wings will take 12Gs irl , with damage certainly but wont snap off clean, one even pulled 12Gs in a dogfight with a MIG-25 in Irak and kept flying the mission without issues, tought maintenance probably wouldn't be happy after he returned)
Its like saying you can survive a car crash cause a people survived it ... yes, you can, but there are way more other determining factors that don't allow for making such a blanket statement.
-
Time stamped... you are welcome!
-
1
-
3
-
-
If I am not mistaking burn times seam to correspond to the ones, we are having in DCS currently, not sure about the impulse and weight.
@Маэстрo or @Chizh,maybe can give input.
-
2
-
-
Mi-8 "Getto Gunship" upgrade plz.... ATGMs, Bomb sight, Nose NSV, 3d cockpit update.... or Mi-2 Light helo to offset Light Blue helos.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, bies said:
ED wanted to make Soviet or WarPac 1983 MiG-29 9.12, they already have all the data to model it, documentation, subject matter experts etc. Russian government new law forced ED to withdrawn. Maybe some 3rd party developer will try in the future.
And you are basing this on what source?
-
14 minutes ago, Dudikoff said:
I would presume it would not make sense since IIRC the standard MiG-29 (9.12 and 9.13) already had problems with asymmetric load when one of the two R-27 missiles was launched. Putting these heavy missiles even further away down the same wings would only make matters worse, at least without some kind of digital FCS to adapt to these configurations. I would also wager that the wings weren't designed for big loads on these outer pylons as well, especially during A2A manoeuvring.
Presuming they could withstand the load, you could launch them in pairs, perhaps, but I have a feeling the pylons were not spaced far enough so there's not enough side clearance between the missiles since they are launched from these rails so you'd have to fire the inner pair first which leaves you in a not ideal configuration again.
The picture is of a MiG-29M 9.15 prototype.... thus, digital FCS and new wing and another pylon off-picture so a different pylon arrangement a bit.... all in all, you are absolutely correct
-
-
13. HPRF and MPRF (PPS and ZPS) switch animation. At lower ranges then 30km it is more beneficial to use MPRF, but if you are in STT there is no way to tell which one is currently used. The animation for the switch is already in the game but not connected with the code.
14. Instrument brightness and floodlight control or tweak. Namely instrument backlighting\floodlight is it is now too bright and it can be turned off or controlled separately
-
3
-
-
It would be interesting to see how this values compere to the ones in DCS
-
1
-
-
- SF-260
- M-346FA (YAK-130)
- AW-129 Mangusta
-
1
-
50 minutes ago, Chizh said:
Как минимум F/A-18
Я думаю применять 120D могут все носители ракет АМРААМ, но вероятно не все смогут использовать преимущества новой ракеты.
I guess Aim-120A is also on the wish list?
-
At high range it is always useful to pull up before the launch, it preserves missile energy better since it doesn't need to do it with its limited energy source.
-
1
-
-
Is it just me, or it would be more beneficial to push for update to the new API and AP of the R-27s and R-77 so there is more foundation to up its priority then to ask for a nitch versions of R-73?
-
7
-
-
MiG-29a
<64>Fox -
15 hours ago, turkeydriver said:
yup, thats it for the CE
It's a very good representation of the actual screen. Thats all I'm going to say about that.
Not trying to contradict you and I am not sure if it is due to video encoding or other youtube wizardry/messing up.... but compering to this:
The clutter looks quite digital, Streight cut and same strength lacking any bloom/glow or fall off...Again, this could be due to WIP status of the radar or Videos encoding issues.
null
About the nature of the simulation itself I will refrain from commenting till I get my hands on it
-
3
-
1
-
-
On 5/30/2022 at 5:07 PM, Jack1nthecrack said:
The bug is 3 years old??? Why hasnt it been fixed by now?
Honestly, I would prefere that bug of AP (jamming) indication in STT disappring get fixed first.
Once R-27 family get updated so they don't use pure but PN in HOJ, that will be much more important for missile employment.
-
7
-
-
8 hours ago, Jack1nthecrack said:
Why when selecting R-27T/ET it does not give you an audible tone in BVR, Vertical Scan, or Helmet modes, but in longitudinal aiming mode it does give you a tone? Is this a bug?
Yes, it should, here is the link on Robert Hierl distinctly saying it should. So, it is a missing feature.
-
6
-
-
4 hours ago, Gypsy 1-1 said:
Yeah I don't have time for this and pretty sure I saw all of the stuff posted in here
I am pretty sure you didn't, since I know what I posted now for few years, including stuff you were asking about. So ether put the time or don't complain.
Manuals are out there, you just need to put the time in to find them. And in current climate not body is send them that easy.
-
1
-
-
16 minutes ago, Gypsy 1-1 said:
Can you link them? I think this will mostly come down to ISP.
Has anyone done an overlayed chart of the current DCS performance vs. those official charts?
All on this topic, you just have to go pages back...
-
2
-
-
14 minutes ago, Gypsy 1-1 said:
DM me a link to said Mig-29 manual which has R-27ER references in it.
There are MiG-29 manuals available with charts for R-27ER, the one from the manual has been posted on this forums multiple times. Also you are missreading the chart as R-27 aero/range, but is chart to give pilot idea when to expect 'PR'.
Also CFD of AoA 0' helps, but isn't the magic bullit, since its been performace/speed loss when turning that was the issue before, not the streight line one.
But I think we all agree all A to A missiles need to be done in the same way and same level of modelling. Hopefully soon.
-
4
-
Persian Gulf 1997-1
in Tournaments & Events
Posted
Fox Mig-29