Dr_Arrow

I am an aerospace engineer and develop flight control systems, everything that is put into practice is simulated at first, I work with dynamic aircraft models which will eat your PC alive, so please DO NOT tell me how long something can or cannot take...

I would gladly pay full price even for the updated graphics/cockpit model and bug fixes without any new systems if it just didn't take them two years to develop :(

How it is done in RL BIS and works very well in DCS also (Flight for maximum MACH or maximum ALT from RL BIS manual), it needs some training:

I am afraid we are approaching a state where the resources are too thin and basically any development is approaching a halt. MAC is on hold, A-10C cockpit upgrade with a very slow progress, KA-50 moved to sometime in 2020 (not really much confidence in it), P-47 more than five years in development, Mi-24 more than 5 years, ATC has been talked about for some 5+ years, Hornet some 10 years, older stuff deprecating and not being updated that much. Probably only F-16 is showing some progress. Hope I am mistaken ... but my feeling is not that good about the current progress of things, but I can understand it as it is very complex and with growing list it becomes impossible to maintain everything.

This bug will soon celebrate it's fifth birthday, good job ED in keeping it well fed and healthy :D

basically it should be similar to C* in Airbus aircraft, where it is specifically written in the manual that in pitch the control inputs are made to alter the flight path NOT to hold it.

Sorry, orbit does not work. Aerobatics does the trick, just order them in waypoint actions to do an aileron roll and they will switch off the lights. I hope that I am mistaken about development of the Mig-21 as I love the aircraft and I backed it up as soon as its development was announced ages ago, but I remain pessimistic given its development in the last years.

It is possible to give them orbit with zero duration command in waypoint actions and they used to switch those fracking lights off. For wingmen it is possible to give them pincer command and they will retract those lights. This indicates for me that there has to be a simple code-wise solution to this problem. I do not fly the Mig-21 anymore, there has not been a single change in the last 4 months and the module seems to be progressively degrading so I am not keeping my hopes up high for any future fixes.

m4ti140: nice analysis, thank you, you're right. If SPS operates from 50% N1 for R-25 engine then it indeed corresponds to around 20-25% of throttle travel dependent on approach speed. I was under false assumption that it operates above 80% N2 as previously written by others in the thread, sorry.

It is an old engine, where LPC is NOT controlled by the throttle! - I did not write anything about LPC revs as they will be dependent on N2 and outer conditions (temperature, velocity, pressure, humidity, etc). At ground they and zero velocity N1 will be at around 75% with N2 at 80%. SPS detent is NOT at 20%, there is the are of "Maly Gaz" - idle, it is in the range around 40-50%, and this is how it is correctly modeled in DCS.

I was referring to a speed around 80% of the N2 (hi pressure turbo-compressor) rotational speed of the engine, this is where the SPS detent is (at 50% throttle travel). SPS system needs 2.5 kg/s of air to operate.

The shaking is probably realistic, what is not realistic in Su-25A and T is that the whole camera shakes even with little vibrations, this creates an exaggerated unrealistic effect. The solution would be to have only the cockpit shake and leave the eye positioned camera stable and shake the camera only when vibrations are very strong. I believe this is how it is modeled in newer aircraft. However I highly doubt anything will be done about it for Su-25, there are bugs which were reported and acknowledged five years ago and were not addressed. Like cockpit frame bug, reversed engines, CCRP mode problems, Su-25T autopilot, etc. There is even a rumor that the whole 3D model of the Su-25A has been lost, so no changes possible... it is really sad...

+1

Ironhand: a great landing with Mig-29, should be put as tutorial thumbup::thumbup::thumbup: Hyundae: As has already been said, Russian school prescribes certain landing weight, heights above inner and outer markers and speeds above them, as well as rates of descent. You really do not work the throttle that much especially in older aircraft as the engines are quite unresponsive/sluggish (L-39 is a prime example of that). Flare level out 1 meter above runway is also quite important in order to land on the main wheels. In DCS most people smash Russian aircraft on the runway on all three wheels like there is not tomorrow :) Most people believe that Russian aircraft are very resilient in landings, this might be true for a single use, but not for standard aircraft operations where the number of landings for each air-frame is counted and landings over maximum weight can only present a certain percentage of total landings (and aircraft need to be thoroughly checked after every hard landing). I have access to a Mig-21MA, which was landed hard, although standard landing in DCS as seen in youtube videos :) and its fuselage is bent in a way that the aircraft had to be scrapped as it was impossible to trim it at higher speeds after this landing.

Oh no, I did not know that, I used his AAA pack in nearly all my missions for older scenarios, what a loss :cry::cry::cry:

unfortunately the MOD does not work in 2.5.5, can anyone please update it, if possible at all...

Yep Holton, this is what I am suggesting. It is probably a classical Russian system and I only extrapolate that it works similarly like in L-39ZA or other Russian aircraft. If you have malfunction and cannot fire missiles/rockets (S-8,S-13,KH-25ML,etc.), you will use the emergency launch button. If you have bombs or you want to drop the rocket container (S-8, S-13, etc.) then you use emergency drop and you can do this in armed mode or unarmed for the bombs.

It is probably not a good translation - For the black button, it actually says in Cyrillic - Avar Pusk, this means emergency launch. And the red button says in Cyrillic - Avar Sbros - this means emergency drop/jettison, definitely not launch. So there is either incorrect Cyrillic or English description :)

I just hope that we will get two versions of the shark. One without the new fancy systems for older late 90ties scenarios and one upgraded for the current ones.

I'd happily pay even for the cockpit/3D model upgrades. I understand all difficulties of running such business on a niche within niche market and I fully understand difficulties and complexities of flight and systems modeling, it is nothing like monogramming some FPS or RPG games. This needs engineering/scientific/programming skills of the highest level. Thank you ED for upgrading and supporting the Shark, I'll gladly buy it again, it has given me hundreds of hours of entertainment and after the upgrade many more await me.

+1, so disappointed after opening the thread.

There is some nice new activity regarding the Mig-21BIS now, new cockpit is coming - could it maybe include a new model of the 490l tanks (Hiromachi, anyone) ?

I have the real ASP-17 sight and what I can tell you that it is really very very reflective, the lamp reflects in the sight a lot, the glass is also a bit dim. The game has it correctly modeled.

Hypetrain bandwagon probably left for the station F-16...But anyway, this update about AI from 31.12.2017 does not fill me with much confidence.

This for Su-25A, but the technique is quite similar for Su-25T. 500 kg of Fuel, 2xS-13, Empty drop tanks, landing by the RL manual numbers: 260-280 km/h above inner marker, 220-240 km/h touchdown on main landing gear, aerobrake until 180-190 km/h: