Dr_Arrow

Ad 3) It is afterburner engagement/disengagement. Mig-21BIS models afterburner as a separate engine, therefore its engagement creates engine startup/shutdown event.

A proper Eastern GCI would be great also for the Mig-21BIS. The intercept officer was much more responsible for the success of the interception than the pilot. Moreover the intercept officer would also direct an aircraft to turn on/off radar as well as engage afterburner, disengage. There was even an automated system for Lasour equipped Mig-21s as described in the book by A. Mladenov: The interceptor was designed from the outset to cope with fast, high- altitude targets; in addition to the radar it boasted dedicated guidance equipment, represented by the Lasour-1 integrated onboard automated system to receive intercept information, datalinked from the ground control station of the Vozdukh-1 intercept operations control system. Intercept commands (such as heading, altitude and speed), generated by the system’s analogue computer, were received by the Lasour-1 equipment and displayed on the respective instruments using bugs (special moving markers on the instruments scale, showing to the pilot where he has to position the indicating needle for altitude, speed, etc.). Lamps were used to issue discrete commands such as afterburner on, zoom climb, and switching on the radar when entering into the terminal attack phase.

Not good enough :) I have reviewed all your tracks, once more thanks for them and will try to do it your way and see if it improves, once more thanks :thumbup:

Thanks a lot for the advice, I'll try the second burner and late stick pull. I was also able to take-off 9 times without problems the way in the track, only on one attempt the tires have burst. The early stick pull could probably cause it, but it is a standard take-off technique written in manuals that I have - pull the stick to 2/3, 3/4 (or even fully) at a speed of 100 - 150 km/h, it can be seen in this video for example (1:11 min.) after the front wheel lifts off ease up on the stick to stabilize at take off AoA:

I was practicing take-offs with SPS jammer pod at 9800 kg takeoff weight. Out of my 10 successful attempts, my tires burst once. I was well within speed and AoA parameters and I cannot find a reason why it happened. I am attaching a track and a screenshot. So any thoughts why did the tires burst? I would like to avoid it in the future or there might be some bug, which causes this. mig-21tyreburst.trk

Nice update, regarding the 3D model, I would love to see correct sized PTB-490 external fuel tanks. The current ones look really funny on the aircraft once you install the mod with their correct size.

Since the last patch, the tracks replay for Mig-21BIS have finally been corrected. So now the tracks with Mig-21 play reasonably well and I can finally review my take off/landing performance.

Fully agreed, I am tired of all the toxic comments by folks against RAZBAM. Certainly the radar can be improved by redoing the ground clutter, but it won't make much difference in how you use it. Moreover there is no ground radar code for 3rd parties as far as I know and all solutions that have been brought by other developers in AG, like Heatblur needed a lot of time to bring the Viggen's radar up to today standard (some two years) and it is still only a workaround. I am sure that we will see improvements from RAZBAM and even if not, I consider it a minor thing which will not spoil my experience of using Mig-19P. I am thankful that they are doing this wonderful aircraft as today the only developer doing Eastern aircraft. If you cannot live without full ground clutter simulation, which when done properly would eat performance of your PC than do not buy Mig-19 or anything from RAZBAM, but please refrain from toxic and bashing comments, which only demotivate and create bad atmosphere in this very small community. Just my two cents.

Because the radar has not been giving launch/lock indications since 2.0, I think it is pointless, but I flip it anyway. Moreover there is a lock tone for both IR/RADAR missiles, I am not sure if this is correct.

I think that given complexity of today's bar in aircraft simulation, I think we won't see any bug-free feature complete simulated aircraft anywhere soon. I do not see any module in DCS stable, which would be much better than Mirage 2000, even A-10C has a fair share of its problems (like something as fundamental as cockpit lights does not work, making it nearly impossible to fly at night, formation lights, CCIP mode problems, etc.). Even simple FC3 aircraft have a lot of really long standing bugs, which have been there for more than 5 years (CCRP problem with Su-25A, autopilot in Su-25T, texture bugs, etc. etc. etc.). Viggen is still getting a lot of substantial fixes, F-14 will be no different. Simulating these complex systems is often as difficult as designing/reverse engineering them and we need to be tolerant here and expect bugs/problems/missing features and I've learned to enjoy what I have. You would be surprised that also real aircraft are full of "bugs" and systems problems which take years to solve and some even remain unresolved as far as my experience goes in aircraft industry and avionic (AFCS) systems. I also applaud RAZBAM for what it is doing and I hope they will continue to bring us some more interesting (eastern) aircraft like Mig-23ML and I will support them as much as I can in order to keep our niche high fidelity sim market alive and diverse.

In my opinion, it is because there were two versions with ARU-3 and ARU-2, versions with ARU-3 mechanism needed more bulged front fairing, the versions with ARU-2 were more sharp/streamlined.

It can be downloaded here: https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3205514/?sphrase_id=11261055

yes, the short needle does not work correctly and is quite misleading without the fix from Frederf, which works fine although I have to update it after every patch (as well as the small PTB-490 drop tanks).

I recorded a video, although no sound and no external views, because of the track playback. I could continue the roll on the main wheels and take off again.

I've tried to replicate the touchdown like in the videos and it is possible by following the RL procedure. Level out one meter above runway, let the speed drop to 260/280 km/h and just as the wheels touch the runway, pull back the stick to prevent nose falling down and at the same time cut the throttle to arrest the nose. The key is the low weight and low speed at touchdown with correct leveling out just above the runway. I would post a track, but unfortunately my tracks do not play well at all with Mig-21.

I am just curious if the current legacy FC3 aircraft will get updates with MAC, like new cockpit textures for Su-25A/T, A-10A and have some old standing bugs remedied (like CCRP for Su-25A, reversed engine animations, autopilot in the Su-25T, etc). Thanks.

I have also tested this, with PAC engaged I also get consistent 40ft radius at 0.7nm. I think that it is quite correctly modeled. I can hit any target with A-10C gun very reliably. On the other hand Su-25A/T have guns with very low dispersion, I have a very hard time to hit anything , because a small aiming error or wind makes all rounds go near the targeted vehicle. Controlled dispersion is in my opinion a very good thing in employment of high caliber guns in A/G or A/A shooting.

This is indeed the correct technique and a very good post :thumbup:, according to our former pilots it is important to level out 1 meter above the runway and let the aircraft to settle, most people fail here and land the aircraft without flaring - this would be considered as a bad landing what I've talked to some former pilots I am in contact with. The correct flare, touchdown is very nicely shown in the following video:

As far as I know it raises the seat height only when the HUD is set to the lowest position. I find this OK as it gives you better vision for level bombing and CCRP deliveries in general.

I think that Frederf is right. It should work the same for SU-25 and L-39ZA, whereas in DCS it does not. The WCS in philosophy is that you have two indicators. One is for indication of weight on a pylon and one as the weapon ready indication. Upper light means that there is weight on the pylon (yellow light in Su-25, upper square light on L-39ZA) and if you spend all rockets from an UB pod, only the weapon ready light should go out, but you should have an indication that there is something hanging on the pylon. Only after jettisoning the pod, the weight on a pylon light should go off. Currently in all aircraft both lights go out when you spend rockets from an UB pod, which is incorrect behavior.

It is also a safety feature on the Su-25, when the brakes fail or you are running out of runway (aborted takeoff) - you are supposed to retract the landing gear on the ground in order to stop the aircraft as the last measure.

Wel,l I have a little hope that this will ever be fixed, but indeed after a lot of testing I have found that if ripple quantity is set to single, the bombs will not be released under any conditions. So the solution is - when ground locking a target, have the ripple quantity set to single and change it to the desired ripple quantity only during your attack run with your trigger held.

Cannot confirm, ZU-23 shooting alright at me even on average skill no ROE set (I tested all skills as well as mounting on URAL):

On the other hand, apparently - the real thing has quite strong reflections on the HUD glass, so the mod might not be too realistic:

It is in \Bazar\World\Shapes\su-39.edm.json and copy it over \Bazar\World\Shapes\su-25T.edm.json (of course back-up Su25T.edm.json first)