What are the most realistic modules apart from A10 and KA-50?

[splash]

IMHO, MiG-21 is not one the most realistic modules in DCS. There are many shortcomings that aren't second nature.

 

Thanks to the work of people like Tarres, in our squad we are flying the MiG-21 as realistic as possible (radial interceptions, realistic ordnance, etc.), but there are some limitations that we cannot overcome.

[mwd2]

IMHO, MiG-21 is not one the most realistic modules in DCS. There are many shortcomings that aren't second nature.

 

Thanks to the work of people like Tarres, in our squad we are flying the MiG-21 as realistic as possible (radial interceptions, realistic ordnance, etc.), but there are some limitations that we cannot overcome.

 

What parts are not realistic or limitations in the MiG-21bis?

 

The A-10C is also not 100% realistic - something like 70% --> cause of the classified informations.

[davidrenaud12]

I only flew si far the a-10c, KA-50 and the mig21bis. I think that the hardest one to fly, overall is the A-10c. The A-10c is actually very easy to fly (flying around, the gun, dropping a simple bomb) but to get the most out of it, there is a lot of reading, study and practice to do. The black shark would be the second hardest out the 3 that I fly because of all the systems and the possibilities.

 

The mig21bis is the hardest to fly and the one that doesn't give you a second chance if you're not careful enough but managing the plane and the systems is very easy compared to the 2 others

[Drag0nWIng]

In the future, maybe I'll only buy the ED and BST's module, I don't want my DCSw become another Flight Simulation Steam Edition. Hope ED and BST could work on the F-14 and MiG-23MLD and some other iconic air superior aircraft.

P3D, it's a product of Lockheed Martin, they use the free licenced fun module as their spokesman. It's strange and not strict. It's a problem of attitude towards the PCFS on civil market.

[Tarres]

@mwd2.

Unfortunately, all the navigation (RSBN/PRMG system) and radar/gunsight system, alongside with some weapons acting like a 9X or a R-73M instead of a late 60´s missile or have weapons that the WCS can handle.

 

It´s like in the A-10C module you have TACAN and ILS in all the airports of the map for example or have the ability to carry and fire an GBU-15(V) or an AGM-88 HARM or an F-16A with AIM-7.

 

The developers say that these choices are for a better gameplay balance but I would like to have the option to have a functional system like the RSBN of the L-39 and fly the Fishbed with real systems.

 

The best choice in the medium term would be to have these two approximations (real and developer choice) as an option for the customer.

 

Maybe I´m too old.

 

Regards.

[Farlander]

In the future, maybe I'll only buy the ED and BST's module, I don't want my DCSw become another Flight Simulation Steam Edition. Hope ED and BST could work on the F-14 and MiG-23MLD and some other iconic air superior aircraft.

P3D, it's a product of Lockheed Martin, they use the free licenced fun module as their spokesman. It's strange and not strict. It's a problem of attitude towards the PCFS on civil market.

 

I doubt that ED will do an f-14 when LNS is already doing it..

[QuiGon]

In the future, maybe I'll only buy the ED and BST's module, I don't want my DCSw become another Flight Simulation Steam Edition. Hope ED and BST could work on the F-14 and MiG-23MLD and some other iconic air superior aircraft.

P3D, it's a product of Lockheed Martin, they use the free licenced fun module as their spokesman. It's strange and not strict. It's a problem of attitude towards the PCFS on civil market.

 

DCS F-14 Tomcat: http://www.leatherneck-sim.com/f14/

[Manuel_108]

L-39, Uh-1, Mi-8 are on the same level in most areas.-

[Vincent90]

@Tarres

 

From what I understand the ONLY unrealistic aspect of the Mig-21's navigational systems are that the RSBN coordinates are stored inside a file instead of a live feed from a ground system, or am i missing something?

 

 

radar/gunsight system, alongside with some weapons acting like a 9X or a R-73M instead of a late 60´s missile or have weapons that the WCS can handle.

Could you be a bit more specific as to how the radar, gunsight and missiles are acting unrealistic?

[splash]

What parts are not realistic or limitations in the MiG-21bis?

 

The A-10C is also not 100% realistic - something like 70% --> cause of the classified informations.

 

Gunsight (taken from Su-25), invented RSBN, PRMG and NDB stations, radar, outer/middle beacons, overpowered missiles (R-3), etc.

[blkspade]

I mean from that list of those 3, by no means is the A-10C hard to fly when in the sky!

P-51 is a bugger too!

 

Yeah the A-10C is pretty easy, the system aren't even too bad with a decent hotas or the Warthog). I don't even fly it anymore as I got bored rather quickly. Though I did only buy it as a curve reduction tool for the F-18C.

[Tarres]

@Vincent90.

 

Radar: It seems that the radar that we´ve got is a mix between the old RP-21 (PF/PFM/SM) and the RP-22 to enable the use of the old beam riders RS-2 and KH-66 in the most modern Izd75 aka 21bis.

 

WCS, linked to the radar.

 

Navigation systems: the ED L-39C features a real and functional RSBN (it´s the same model that the 21bis has). The LN RSBN lacks the manual mode (heading and distance) that allows navigation outside a RSBN area.

RSBN and PRMG are different systems, like a VOR/DME and an ILS in the western aircrafts. RSBN is for civilian and military and PRMG is only for military.

RSBN-4 has a maximum of 40 channels for the RSBN and PRMG, not 99 (this is trivial)

The LN approach links the MRP-56 marker beacon system to the RSBN, so if you don´t put a RSBN station in an airfield you don´t have marker signals.

It´s like if in western airfields you have to got an ILS and a VOR/DME in every airfield to have a functional markers beacon.

The LN RSBN have a range of 200km, IRL RSBN have a range of 400-600km , like the depicted in the L-39C.

 

ARK-10 system: IRL 9 presets and 8 "bands" something like the ARK-5 of the MiG-15. The inner-outer selector is used to select the 9 presets (pushbuttons) and the knob selector for the outer. So maybe 17 stations, not 72 stations. And the ability to setup this frequencies in the ME not in a LUA.

 

The ASP-PFD, well it´s WiP so I´m sure that we will got in the medium term an accurate gunsight.

 

Ground handling, tuned down for easier gameplay.

 

I think that LNS made a great job with the 21bis and maybe the next ones will be better. It will be modules designed and programmed by the team from scratch.

 

Maybe in the medium term, LNS can borrow the RSBN and ARK system from ED and solve I´m sure that they will resolve the problems with the ASP-PFD.

 

I hope that in the long run, this module will be as good as the ED/BST projects.

 

But I think it´s better to know their "deficiencies".

 

Sorry for my English.

 

A link for the 21 flight operations manual:

http://www.avialogs.com/index.php/en/aircraft/ussr/mikoyangurevitch/mig-21/mig-21bis-pilot-s-flight-operating-instructions.html

Edited January 4, 2016 by Tarres

[pepin1234]

Yes. I agree with Tarres. The Mig-21 need some fixes. I think ED should care about the mistakes of the 3Th Parties. For example how a 3Th parties can release another module if they have modules in the market with bugs, and. non functional systems.

 

About the best module... Is hard choice, maybe the Ka-50 is the best, also is the most killer machine in AG task.

[Andrei]

@Tarres

Excellent summary, everything to the point.

[Drag0nWIng]

I agree with pepin1234's opinion.

[Fred00]

Yes. I agree with Tarres. The Mig-21 need some fixes. I think ED should care about the mistakes of the 3Th Parties. For example how a 3Th parties can release another module if they have modules in the market with bugs, and. non functional systems.

 

About the best module... Is hard choice, maybe the Ka-50 is the best, also is the most killer machine in AG task.

I agree, but I don't think Leatherneck or the MiG-21 have anything to be ashamed about. It's regarded as one of the best modules in DCS by many people. And Leatherneck is the developer that has most interesting things going on in my mind.

 

A bigger problem is developers like Belsimtek who seem to move on to new products far too early. F-86F was released quite a while ago and still there's no full manual, no training missions and no campaign.

 

Edit: The above may be a bit off-topic though...

Edited January 5, 2016 by Fred00

[eekz]

P-51D

[Deathbane]

Im really loving the Mig21, it has a very good feeling to the flight model and its general systems. Despite its shortcomings as mentioned it feels otherwise solid, and the devs seem to be maintaining it well looking at their public bug tracker.

 

I also have been heavily enjoying the MI-8, which seems a complex aircraft to actually fly due to relying on a tail rotor.Still much to learn and waiting until i get new rudder pedals to really dive in..

 

Note the most complex are KA 50 and -10c id argue, and thats all down to the complexity of the electronics. That doesnt mean they are necessarily hard to fly (KA 50 is very stable for a helicopter due to coaxial config.. just need to learn how autopilot 'assists' you)

 

My two cence

[WinterH]

I have all modules except MiG-15Bis. In my opinion, most realistic modules aside from Ka-50 and A-10C, would be :

 

MiG-21Bis

P-51D

Mi-8 / UH-1

 

In that order.

 

All have issues alright, but I guess it is a given that we'll pretty much never have a flight sim that is %100 or even %95. With that in mind, I find the modules I've listed to be quite well done. MiG is the module by far I enjoy most in DCS, but that depends a lot on personal taste as far as aircraft abilities / systems capabilities go.

 

Rest of the modules are also mostly pretty good but bothering in enough ways to consider ones above to be better modules.

 

One I can't comment on is MiG-15Bis since I don't have it.

 

Leatherneck is the development house I have most faith on currently (well apart from ED I guess). I don't share some people's enthusiasm with Belsimtek for example (yet I'll get F-5 and Mi-24 and AH-1 since those are stuff I just can't resist). A year since their first releases, both Aviodev and VEAO have a lot to prove too (and I hope they will). Too early to comment on RAZBAM yet, though Mirage is already off with a pretty decent start.

 

So, for finding most high fidelity modules, my personal suggestion would be to look at development studios, and prefer the ones made by ED or Leatherneck.

[Cibit]

I think the scenario's you fly in are as equally important to the whole experience. ED has certain criteria that all modules must achieve before granting release. So on the whole most modules are as realistic on final release as possible within the limitations of the Sim itself.

 

Now take the huey for example and fly with 20+ other hueys in a night time community MP event suddenly the module in itself is almost secondary to the experience.

 

Your heart is pumping as the ship in front of you lifts and your scared you will screw up and spoil others enjoyment. This makes you more aware of the aircraft and you concentrate so hard not to hit anyone while flying in formation with NVG's

 

Gunships spark up on the radio(TS) with contact reports, tracers are going up to meet the gunships as salvo's of rockets fly off the sides of the hueys and KA-50's.

Suddenly you arrive, still in formation you start to decend, now the tracer is coming towards you pinging off the airframe as you double the concentration to avoid crashing into other flight members or the flight in front of you and avoiding VRS killing yourself your crew and the 8 grunts you loaded up at the FARP.

 

Sorry I ain't Norman Mailer but you get the drift I hope:)

 

Check out this AAR for a more eloquent description of a prior similar mission

 

http://www.mudspike.com/dcs-world-airmobile-assault-mp-event/

[Bogart]

The Mig-21 if he had done according to real, talking about systems, navigation and weaponry could not play with him in the PvP servers. However we see some demolished F-15 with. Therefore I think it is not real, that if fun if it is. Sorry to use google translator.

[pepin1234]

A bigger problem is developers like Belsimtek who seem to move on to new products far too early. F-86F was released quite a while ago and still there's no full manual, no training missions and no campaign.

 

That's not true. See in this thread how many implemented systems they made for the Mi-8 in the last few months. They work, they do support.

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=143573

[Deathbane]

Seconded, Belsimtek have continued to support MI-8 very well.

[TomCatMucDe]

@ Terres,

 

I was also wondering why 3rd party developpers dont borrow some finished things from ED. It seems that ED isn't flexible in giving code. Look at the Mirage for example, a lot of the unfinished features could be taken from ED but they didn't.

 

But again, my own guesses.