Mig 29 6DOF Cockpit in DCS 1.5

[Plushanubka]

29S varian should have datalink by default. http://www.airwar.ru/enc/fighter/mig29s.html

ED is too busy to model it probably.

[Whuping]

29S varian should have datalink by default. http://www.airwar.ru/enc/fighter/mig29s.html

ED is too busy to model it probably.

 

I can confirm - however I believe that would be the later designs of the Mig-29S.

 

The early versions of it did not have the data-link capability. I am still looking into how the data-link would work with the MFD.

 

Theoretically speaking I would suppose that Intel would be sent to the fighters in an intercepting mission and would display on the HUD.

 

However if that's the case of ED being too busy to model it - does the Mig-29S and G have under wing fuel tanks in-game? Just an off topic question of no relevant priority.

 

I would also assume that the Mig-29 in-game would be the first variant and is just a placeholder for the Mig-29 G and S until later down the road they'd implement different designs for each respective Mig variant.

[Plushanubka]

I can confirm - however I believe that would be the later designs of the Mig-29S.

 

The early versions of it did not have the data-link capability. I am still looking into how the data-link would work with the MFD.

 

Theoretically speaking I would suppose that Intel would be sent to the fighters in an intercepting mission and would display on the HUD.

 

However if that's the case of ED being too busy to model it - does the Mig-29S and G have under wing fuel tanks in-game? Just an off topic question of no relevant priority.

 

I would also assume that the Mig-29 in-game would be the first variant and is just a placeholder for the Mig-29 G and S until later down the road they'd implement different designs for each respective Mig variant.

29s have been produced in one party. It shouldn't have different versions. Personally I would buy fully moddeled 29s as module.

[Alfa]

 

EDIT: I still can't quite find the exact variant of the Mig presented in the OP's picture...

 

Its one of the former Luftwaffe MiG-29s now in service with the Polish airforce - note English labelling, radio equipment and the switch for ejection of wing droptanks(just below the G-meter).

 

..but it's definitely a modernized version of the Mig-29, because the Mig never had a Refueling Capability until now.

 

Ehh what? :)

[pepin1234]

If ED thinking make the Mig-29S as DCS full module, then they have their own reasons to erase the Data link of the present Mig-29S.

 

I mean FC3 give much for few money and all these aircrafts can became real DCS modules at any time. :smilewink:

 

ED please just give me this bird with the real 29S capability and the money to pay will be guaranteed for sure :thumbup:

Edited October 4, 2015 by pepin1234

[foxbat155]

German aircrafts modified to G variant after reunion had data link removed. All others early variants should have data link, ordinary 9.12 (A) or 9.13 (S) or 9.51 (UB). Only difference is that Soviet AF aircraft had a bit more complex and sophisticated data link compare to export machines.

[foxbat155]

German modified aircraft in place of data link panel got big western IFF panel and TACAN panel.

 

 

Original Soviet data link panel for 9.12/9.13/9.51 variants.

 

 

Data link panel for export aircrafts, here on MiG-29A 9.12.

 

The same panel like above on MiG-29UB 9.51.

 

Although original Soviet and export panel looks similar, in reality those aircraft have different types of data link equipment with different capabilities.

[Pikey]

Why do people keep harping on about Flaming Cliffs modules being simplified and or innaccurate?

[Alfa]

German aircrafts modified to G variant after reunion had data link removed. All others early variants should have data link, ordinary 9.12 (A) or 9.13 (S) or 9.51 (UB). Only difference is that Soviet AF aircraft had a bit more complex and sophisticated data link compare to export machines.

 

Yes but the datalink system on "baseline" MiG-29 variants is only for connection to GCI with the information displayed on the HUD(which in turn is replicated on the HDD).

 

It does not have the more sophisticated fighter-to-fighter/AWACS system with separate tactical display on the HDD that the Su-27 has, so removing the ability to turn it on for the MiG-29 was the right move by Eagle.

 

If people want to complain about something in this regard, then it would be more valid to address the lack of GCI :) .

 

P.S. I am pretty sure that the cockpit in this photo:

 

 

....is of a MiG-29B(non-Warsaw pact export variant) - note the lack of IFF controls.

Edited October 4, 2015 by Alfa

[foxbat155]

Well, I didn't say that MiGs data link is te same class like those from Su (but honestly we really don't know what he can because we don't have appropriate documentation ).

Photo shows cockpit of Hungarian aircraft, lack of IFF panel have different reason. Hungarian aircrafts got in late 90's western IFF and his panel was fitted above weapon panel on cockpit's left side and the original Soviet was deleted.

[Alfa]

Well, I didn't say that MiGs data link is te same class like those from Su (but honestly we really don't know what he can because we don't have appropriate documentation ).

 

Yes we do :)

 

Photo shows cockpit of Hungarian aircraft

 

Which is the MiG-29B variant :)

 

...lack of IFF panel have different reason.

 

I meant "lack of IFF controls" as in not being visible in your photo - i.e. relocated from the original position ;)

[Weta43]

Now that clients can be added into the same flight or put into any position of the flight, shared datalink info with the Su27 or Su33 should be shared between the clients.

 

Why should it? If your argument has anything to do with realism then you have your answer.

 

 

If ED thinking make the Mig-29S as DCS full module, then they have their own reasons to erase the Data link of the present Mig-29S.

 

I mean FC3 give much for few money and all these aircrafts can became real DCS modules at any time. :smilewink:

 

ED please just give me this bird with the real 29S capability and the money to pay will be guaranteed for sure :thumbup:

 

Why do people keep harping on about Flaming Cliffs modules being simplified and or innaccurate?

 

 

To me, neither of these responses is even remotely helpful and either could easily be taken as trolling.

[21stCenturyPilot]

I can believe the original A model could be like this, maybe downgraded export versions, but the current S model with many upgrades in service with the Russian air force why have a useless screen in the cockpit which basically does nothing. I don't buy it.

[foxbat155]

Yes we do :)

 

 

 

Which is the MiG-29B variant :)

 

 

 

I meant "lack of IFF controls" as in not being visible in your photo - i.e. relocated from the original position ;)

 

This is a great news, be a good man and share with me the source ( of course I mean Soviet not export data link documentation ).

 

Yes Hungarian it's B what doesn't change anything because data link is the same. Regards.

[Esac_mirmidon]

Your choice.

 

Russian Mig-29 9-12/9-13 don´t have a HDD with tactical display. Only HUD repeater mode.

 

And the Mig-29 cockpit and 3D model is a free update for FC3 owners. Don´t need to buy anything.

[Brisse]

And the Mig-29 cockpit and 3D model is a free update for FC3 owners. Don´t need to buy anything.

 

Lol, that's not what he meant. :)

The expression "I don't buy it" usually means the same thing as "I don't believe this". The word "buy" is not to be taken literally here.

[Esac_mirmidon]

Spanish here.

 

Sorry for my mistake.

[ekg]

To clarify, the MiG 29 doesn't have an MFD just a HUD repeater? How does one navigate or do BVR with AWACs?

[Alfa]

This is a great news, be a good man and share with me the source ( of course I mean Soviet not export data link documentation ).

 

Doesn't matter if its export or Soviet in this regard. Whatever difference there is, we know that it doesn't extend to what the Su-27 has...which is what this whole discussion is about - i.e. ED's decision to remove the ability to turn it on for the MiG-29 in the game.

[Esac_mirmidon]

Using the cockpit instruments for navigation. ADI + HSI + Distance to WP on the HUD + Inertial Navigation System on the right side.

 

Awacs.

 

With the radio. XD. The Mig-29 was designed to link with ground GCI and the Lazur system is precisely for this.

[Doum76]

Hi all,

 

I'm having a little problem with the Mig-29, i've installed FC3 a day before 1.5 came out, it was all new to me, but i had an issue with the view, guess it has to do with 6DOF? There is no way i could see back of the bird inside the cockpit, the back seat was blocking my view, not able to zoom or move the eye sight up down, front back... i've seen in a video the guy didn't had my view he could see the vertical stab and the wings, and now with 1.5, when i load my missions done in 1.2.16 i still have this problem, but when creating a new mission, i do get the view the guy had ans the one seen in the video at the first post of this thread.. any way i can fix this? i wanna save up my mission and being able to fly the mig in it, but with that view, it's unflyable, i can'T see my 6 and get sot real quick.. here's a screen shot of my view. I can't even move right or left, all i can do is move forward or back.

 

Thanks

 

 

[Esac_mirmidon]

Have you copied your config/view files from 1.2.16 to 1.5?

 

If you have do it, make a repair to recover the 1.5 original ones.

[Doum76]

Have you copied your config/view files from 1.2.16 to 1.5?

 

If you have do it, make a repair to recover the 1.5 original ones.

 

only thing i copied was my control settings which i imported/loaded inside the control menu of the option menu and my missions. Anyways i should post in a new thread for this problem and not taking over this thread.

Edited October 7, 2015 by Doum76

[foxbat155]

Doesn't matter if its export or Soviet in this regard. Whatever difference there is, we know that it doesn't extend to what the Su-27 has...which is what this whole discussion is about - i.e. ED's decision to remove the ability to turn it on for the MiG-29 in the game.

 

So, it's means no source?.:music_whistling:

[Alfa]

So, it's means no source?.:music_whistling:

 

How about I reverse the question.

 

You said that the Soviet 9.12 has a more sophisticated datalink than export versions, then you said that there is no documentation available for it.

 

So how exactly can you know its more sophisticated......source?