Ironhand

What you describe can only occur, if the missile is fired at extremely close range. And, if that’s the case, you won’t have the time to maneuver as you describe. At longer range, yes, the missile will maneuver and shed some energy but you are nowhere near either its gimbal limits or it’s G limits.

This seems like an very odd statement to me. If it has the energy to hit you, then it can produce the Gs to hit you. It’s converting the energy into Gs. If it can’t produce the Gs, it didn’t have the energy it needs to hit you.

Unfortunately, it’s not something that can be selected.

Oh, I know there’s that no update is planned. Just having a bit of fun, while wishing it was so.

Relax…this will all be fixed in the new, updated Caucasus map, when it’s released.

Out of curiosity, what would be to penalty to the player for constantly mishandling the aircraft he flies? Or are you just proposing this for virtual squadron use, where the individual would be penalized by his squadron members? I know it’s done in civilian sims where the emphasis is only on the flying itself. DCS, however, tends to place the focus on how well you blow things up. While I, personally, like to fly well, I’m still not sure this is something I would use.

Sounds like fun. Too bad it was so underappreciated. Unfortunately, I get the impression that a lot (most?) folk who get online just want to jump into their aircraft of choice and go kill something. Don’t make me waste time reading briefings and thinking seriously about how to best do it.

+

Let the good times roll.

You might find what you want here: https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/mig-29-avionics.102/#post-9330 You have to register but he seemed to be the moderator (site owner?) at the time. Scroll down the thread a bit. He’s PaulMM. Unfortunately, the images are gone. Only the text remains.

I knew that was how it worked in the FC3 pit and ED usually mimics reality pretty well unless they have a financial reason not to. So I dove into a manual and that’s how it’s described. That seems to be the way the two missing FC3 “automatic” modes work, too. It’s AT HOLD that makes them “automatic”.

Not sure what you mean, since altitude hold can’t be engaged in the MiG-29 cockpit unless attitude hold is engaged first. Works that way in the sim and in RL.

That would probably be easiest, when changing altitude. I suppose, too, that you could select LEVELING mode (LAlt+7, IIRC) first. But that's not really what it's for.

Using them together can be handy, if you want to orbit at a certain altitude or something similar. And, in fact, you can't engage ALT HOLD without ATT HOLD engaged. But, to the OP’s point, the override function is now screwed up. Even if you’re careful to re-engage the AFCS at the same airspeed it had been previously engaged, there are often severe oscillations to the point that you’ll lose the aircraft unless you take back manual control. When less severe, it’ll eventually return to stable flight on its own. The only way not to have any bobbing is to remain at the same altitude (when using ATT along with ALT HOLD). This seems to be a bug, though I haven’t delved into the Russian MiG-29 manuals to see what they say about the AFCS. I doubt, however, that the actual system behaves this way.

Actually, it was a case of GIGO. I failed to change the TAS units from knots to km/hr in the conversion formula. It should be M 5.1. @Fran11player I’ll attach the TRK file to this post later, once I’m back at my computer. But, like I posted, this was not a launch against a target. I didn’t even bother turning the radar on. And it’s the radar range that’s actually the most limiting factor. EDIT: Attached TRK file. Like I said, there’s no target. Just wanted to show that the numbers you get (and sometimes see reported) depend on how the test is conducted. Unless you know the test parameters, you have no real understanding of what the numbers mean. R-27ER Range and Speed1.trk

IDK. In a quick test, my R-27ER went 200km and reached a top speed of roughly M 9.8 (5650 km/hr at 20,500 ft). Obviously, that's not shooting at a target but, then again, what are the actual conditions under which the published numbers are generated?

At what altitude? That makes a lot of difference where Mach is concerned.

Excellent. I was thinking that might be the one. I had ordered it earlier this AM.

Out of curiosity, what book are you referencing? Specifically, the ISBN number.

No. It’s the radar antenna position mark. By the time the diamond is halfway to the HUD margin, the target itself is well outside of the HUD. Or isn’t that your question?

That would be a welcome upgrade. There are more than one type of AIM-120 available in the sim. The same should be true for the R-27 series.

Yes. But what if we prefer not to wait 20 years for ED’s Google Earth-type model to arrive?

It’d be an interesting map to fly, especially if it extended south and included a part of the Arabian Sea. Then the naval aviation folks would have a place to play, too.

LCtrl+Y

While I like the idea itself, I can already see what’ll happen. Folks will load up missions with “people” in the interest of “realism”. Game fps will slow to a crawl. Folks will then complain and demand a fix. What, exactly, is the upside for ED?