Mig is still buggy

[Nooch]

I like realistic sims but at what costs? *irony on*

Delete the Grom? Ok than you can delete the nuclear weapons too. There is no damage modeling for it. Maybe we should simply delete the complete A/G part because DCS uses a hit point system for damage modeling. Thats so BF4...You can even respawn... *irony off*

I think we should take a look on real problems. You will never get it 100%. If you can live with it, enjoy DCS. Otherwise I suggest you enlist in your countries airforce. There you get everything, including the only one life mod :)

 

Of course 100% realism can't be achieved in a commercial sim and some compromise have to be made. Can't you understand that implementing a non realistic feature right from the start is a completely different topic?

Edited December 9, 2014 by Nooch

[FSKRipper]

Yes I know what you mean. In many things I would be on your side on this topic, like the ASP. I'm pretty sure that we will see some option for that in the future when the way radars work improve with DCS. The Grom is another point. It is no fictional weapon and older models of the 21 were able to fire beam riders in A/G even the RS-2US. So for me it's more like fitting an F-35 with a dumb bomb than screwing a JDAM on a plane from the sixties...

 

The point is this is the closest method normal people can come in flying the MiG. Instead of hammering on the developers how this module still can contain bugs (in my version it's still listed as beta) we should focus on serious problems one after another (See the dozens of bugs already fixed since release).

 

In my opinion it's no proplem posting bugs, even if they aren't bugs. It's the intonation that is used sometimes on these forums.

Edited December 9, 2014 by FSKRipper

[Slipp]

Now it's too late. Unrealistic implementations for the sake of "gameplay" shouldn't be there in the first place. It's DCS, not freakin Battlefield 4...

 

People can simply not use it if they want full realism and think that Kh-66 is out of place on a Mig-21Bis.

 

But Kh-66 is great for people who want to have some fun every once in a while and aren't total nitpicks. And I'm one of them. :)

Edited December 9, 2014 by Slipp

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

Can't you understand that implementing a non realistic feature right from the start is a completely different topic?

It's in the OP, though. :music_whistling:

[313_Nevo]

Slipp, the problem could be that people expected full real modules in DCS and after some time we all realize that it is not full truth. Something is not modeled, something unrealistic added. The modules are 'most accurate' but not 'fully accurate'.

Its not showstopper but there is the conflict between our expectations and the reality.

 

IMHO it will be very welcomed to have some note in the manual that Kh-66 Grom is not real deal but gameplay element. Case closed :)

 

PS: anyway, this 'Key feature' from DCS store is completely misleading, should be also corrected (or the missing 'bis' at the end makes it valid?) ;)

"Fully modeled avionics and weapons suites – exactly as they appear and operate in the real MiG-21."

[Stealth_HR]

Actually, regarding the Kh-66... most resources online list it as available on the MiG-21 from MiG-21PFM onwards (up to and including the 21bis), including later modifications by the Yugoslavian Airforce (one with radio guidance similar to the Kh-23, the other with a TV seeker head). However, it was supposed to be carried on the center pylon alone.

 

Can't confirm if that source is correct - but if it is true, makes me wonder which position the weapon selector switch should be in in order to launch from the centerline pylon.

[xxJohnxx]

Both the RS-2US and the Kh-66 could not be guided by the new RP-22 radar, as the RP-21 had a different method of tracking. The RS-2US definatelly could not be launched by the Bis, and the Kh-66 has the same guidance systems, so the existing Kh-66s are definatelly incompatible.

While it might has been possible that there was a Kh-66 with adopted guidance, it is very unlikely.

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

Well, just don't lock the beam when utilizing the Grom.

 

Not hard.

 

Also:

http://www.mig-21.de/english/technicaldataarmament.htm

 

Kh-66 radar guided air-to-ground missile APU-68UE 1 2 / 4 all single-seaters from PFM on

RS-2US radar guided air-to-air missile APU-7 1 2 / 4 all single-seaters from PF on

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Mikoyan-Gurevich_MiG-21_variants#Armament

 

The lack of RS-2US on the bis armament field may be due to the fact that by the time the first bis examples reached flight lines, the RS-2US was long retired.

Edited December 11, 2014 by MiG21bisFishbedL

[xxJohnxx]

This post I made a while back explains the technical reasons why neither the RS-2US nor the Kh-66 were usable with the RP-22.

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2220318&postcount=3

[Art-J]

I'd hazard a guess "most resources online" base their information on Yefim Gordon's book about MiG-21, which is considered by Western readers to be as sort of an ultimate "bible" of this machine. It does indeed suggest Kh-66 could be used on any version from PFM. I admit it is a cool book for getting basic info about the plane, but the more you get into details and crosscheck them with other sources, the more errors you spot, sometimes blatant ones (for example info about front wheel being steerable).

 

Other sources related to tech details of Russian weapon systems seem to confirm xxJohnxx's info about RS-2US and Kh-66: RP-21 radar (probably M and MA version) - OK (MiG-21 PFS/PFM, most of M and MFs); RP-22 - not OK (S, SM, SMT, Bis).

[Flagrum]

Does this mean that the radar we have in the Bis is basically only built into the plane for the R-3R? Is that really viable, considering the wide® range of available IR missles? And what is the beam mode for then anyways?

[xxJohnxx]

Does this mean that the radar we have in the Bis is basically only built into the plane for the R-3R? Is that really viable, considering the wide® range of available IR missles? And what is the beam mode for then anyways?

 

Well, not only for the R-3R. The RP-22 radar has some big advantages over the older RP-21.

Some of the differences are:

- Higher frequency

- Change of the basic operation mode (Glimmertracking ("Flimmerpeilung") was changed to Monopulse-Tracking).

- Signal processing

-Off-bore tracking (tracks 30° off-bore sight in all directions except towards ground (because of ground clutter reflections). The RP-21 couldn't do this, you had to have the target directly in front of you to lock and track it).

 

On the RP-21 (and subsequently the RP-22) the beam mode was actually intended for use against airborne jamming targets or whenever other disturbing signals could prevent normal operation. The RP-21 originally did not send any orientation information, used by both the RS-2US and Kh-66, when being operated in fixed beam mode. Fixed beam mode was just used for ranging.

 

With the introduction of the Kh-66 however, the RP-21 was adjusted to also send orientation information when in fixed beam mode, which allowed it to fire both the RS-2US and the Kh-66 in that mode.

 

While the RP-22 radar, which the MiG-21Bis has, can also be operated in fixed beam mode, it is a bit different. The frequency was changed from 2.4GHz (RP-21) to 3.2GHz (RP-22), and no orientation information was sent.

Therefore you could neither guide the RS-2US nor the Kh-66 with the Bis.

While in theory they could have adjusted the Kh-66 to the higher frequency and changed how the RP-22 operates (both being quit complicated/expensive) at a later point, it is pretty unlikely given the fact that the Bis wasn't really a ground pounder and if it would have been really necessary they would have included it from the start.

[Flagrum]

Yes, I read your posting you linked to earlier already, the RP-22 is better than the RP-21 in several aspects. But my question is: what is it good for if there are no weapons available for the Bis that really make use of it? If I understood this thread correctly, then the Bis with the RP-22 does not allow to use beam riders, right? So, why having the beam mode then anyways? Or does it then work in conjunction with the R-3R in case of being jammed?

 

But even then, basically the RP-22 is only really usefull with the R-3R. Yes, it gives also ranging information for other weapons ... but that could probably accomplished also by a more simple radar, right?

 

Why did they decide to build in that RP-22 and not just focussed more on IR missiles and scrapped the radar and the R-3R?

[xxJohnxx]

That's a very good question. I guess beam mode is used for getting the range on a jamming target, but I am not sure if you could guide a R-3R. This would actually be something worth trying out in the sim.

 

Well yes, the radar can give you range (as could a simpler radar) but if you try to fight an enemy, the RP-22 has a lot of advantages over the RP-21. While you loose the capability to fire RS-2US you get the benefit of firing the R-3R. That alone together with the improved situational awareness probably is enough that speaks for the RP-22.

 

And even with the IR missiles the RP-22 is quit useful. In bad weather conditions, at night or even during the day, it is much easier to get a lock with one of the IRs if you have locked the target with the radar first.

If you bring the locked-target symbol on the radar screen into the circle (that is showing up in the middle, lower part of the screen) you have the target right in the IR seeker bore-sight. Once the IR return is big enough, the seeker will immediately pick up the target, without you having to move the nose across the horizon hoping for your IR seeker to find the target.

[ff4life4]

Fixed mode is used for ranging purposes for ground attacks with rockets/cannon. Also fixed beam can be used to lock up fighters when they are close in.

 

The radar is useful for searching for targets, especially bombers. And yes, I guess technically it is only good for guiding the R-3R, but if you check out the Mig21 vs Modern fighters thread, you will see that over 80% of our kills on F15s and Su-27/33 are done with R-3R. No other IR missile from the Bis time period has all aspect capability. R-3R despite being only a 2km range weapon, is the best for going against fighters in most circumstances.

 

ADD:

Also the biggest thing (for DCS) is the IFF functionality thats coupled with the radar. Without it we would have no idea what we were shooting at in an aerial engagement.

 

2nd add:

 

I really cannot emphasize how usefull the R-3R is. When I first started flying on the 104th with the Mig, I'd always take all all IR loadout. I had a couple kills, but I had a ton of missed opportunities on aircraft that were approaching head on. Then I started carrying a pair of R-3R's and I have never not gone into A/A without a pair. Adds another level of options for what you can do when attacking an enemy. IR is still good for after a merge, or if you spot them and are tracking them visually, you don't need to turn your radar on and alert them to your position. But for everything else R-3R is fantastic.

 

2 more things:

 

It would be impossible to acquire any targets without the radar. Radar has a range of 30km, and it would be difficult to spot aircraft visually at that distance.

 

Second the radar is good at giving you information about when to launch missiles. Its been very accurate for me, especially with the R-3R, if I fire within the paramaters it will hit. And its useful for ranging IR missiles as well. Its surprising how much less range the missiles have when they are running full AB away from you, and how much extra range they have when they are really closing on you very quickly (R-3R for head on).

 

 

Sorry I just love my RP-22. Its primitive, and old but it gets the job done when you use it properly.

Edited December 11, 2014 by ff4life4

[Flagrum]

Thanks @ all! That cleared it a bit up for me. As a ground pounder I am not really familar with A2A, but that was somewhat inspiring, ff4life4! :o)

[Art-J]

One has to remember, that RS-2U was designed in mid 50's, for the first interceptor versions of MiG-17 and -19. By the late '60s it was already seriously outdated and soon-to-be replaced by R-55s, so there was really no point in making new RP-22 version of "Sapphire" radar "backwards-compatible" with this old piece of weaponry.

 

The Kh-66 didn't have a long and stellar career either. Designed in '68 it proved to be not quite what air force wanted, so already in early-to-mid '70s it started being replaced by next, better developed generation of AG missiles.

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

One has to remember, that RS-2U was designed in mid 50's, for the first interceptor versions of MiG-17 and -19. By the late '60s it was already seriously outdated and soon-to-be replaced by R-55s, so there was really no point in making new RP-22 version of "Sapphire" radar "backwards-compatible" with this old piece of weaponry.

 

The Kh-66 didn't have a long and stellar career either. Designed in '68 it proved to be not quite what air force wanted, so already in early-to-mid '70s it started being replaced by next, better developed generation of AG missiles.

 

Well, it was out of service by the time the bis even first flew, which would make sense. It left the PVO in 1967 and the bis didn't even fly until something like 1972. It'd be nice to see Dolphin weigh in being that he's an actual Fishbed jock. I'm going by what my actual copy of Yefim Gordon's Fishbed book is saying and a number of sites, but what xxJohnxx is saying makes a lot sense, especially his technical post. After all, why would you gimp your kit to accommodate a missile that is so utterly obsolete in performance, it's actually funny? Or make an accommodation for this old worthless missile that adds a layer of complexity that seems to be at odds with all of the design philosophies exemplified in this MiG?

Edited December 11, 2014 by MiG21bisFishbedL

[T0x1s]

Why didnt you go for realistic implementation of those systems?

In my opinion this is supposed to simulate as close as is technicly possible the MiG-21bis not some make belive plane.

Its is same as with the ground steering "feature" (which is still not fixed good enough imho)

Well maybe Im alone in this, but I would like it "fixed".

 

If i remember correctly they were not planning to include it but there was a big support for the kh-66 and they included it. I think its great we can have another weapon to play with.

[313_Nevo]

T0x1s, were are going in circles. there is no problem that kh-66 was added, but there is problem with the following

...

IMHO it will be very welcomed to have some note in the manual that Kh-66 Grom is not real deal but gameplay element. Case closed :)

 

PS: anyway, this 'Key feature' from DCS store is completely misleading, should be also corrected (or the missing 'bis' at the end makes it valid?) ;)

"Fully modeled avionics and weapons suites – exactly as they appear and operate in the real MiG-21."

[default762792]

First off, overall it's a fantastic module, and I appreciate all the hard work that Leatherneck has put into it. It's beautiful. But it does seem strange that the magic ASP altitude data and 25% rudder authority on the ground are concessions for the sake of gameplay.

 

Without even referring to the example of the (presumably far wider in their appeal) Fw-190 and Bf-109 modules, which even many deeply experienced simmers find extremely difficult to get off the runway in, just on its own the MiG-21 presents so many other peculiar challenges (flimsy pylons, proneness to negative-g flameout, alcohol-cooled radar that barely outranges the 23mm cannon, etc.) that the limitations of the gunsight and awkward differential braking seem like they would disappear into the background for someone who wasn't already a fanatic.

[FlankerKiller]

First off, overall it's a fantastic module, and I appreciate all the hard work that Leatherneck has put into it. It's beautiful. But it does seem strange that the magic ASP altitude data and 25% rudder authority on the ground are concessions for the sake of gameplay.

 

Without even referring to the example of the (presumably far wider in their appeal) Fw-190 and Bf-109 modules, which even many deeply experienced simmers find extremely difficult to get off the runway in, just on its own the MiG-21 presents so many other peculiar challenges (flimsy pylons, proneness to negative-g flameout, alcohol-cooled radar that barely outranges the 23mm cannon, etc.) that the limitations of the gunsight and awkward differential braking seem like they would disappear into the background for someone who wasn't already a fanatic.

I agree completely. They could make the odd braking, KH-66, and ASP all options in the "special" page of options. I for one want this, and all DCS modules to be as real as possible.