Cold War 1947 - 1991

[The_Tau]

59 minutes ago, Schmidtfire said:

One thing I have always wondered about the MiG-21bis... engine flameout. Was it really this easy to flame out the engine in real life? 

Well its negative Gs, Just dont push the stick...

[BonerCat]

If my memory serves me well, it used to be much easier to kill the engine back in 1.5, when it was under leatherneck

That, or i was just shit at flying it

Edited May 24, 2021 by BonerCat

[Schmidtfire]

I think it's the same. Just wondering if it was this particular and sensitive with negative G's in real life, or if it is a DCS-ism.
You know, a little bit overmodelled - like the VRS for the helicopters. 

[The_Tau]

2 hours ago, Schmidtfire said:

I think it's the same. Just wondering if it was this particular and sensitive with negative G's in real life, or if it is a DCS-ism.
You know, a little bit overmodelled - like the VRS for the helicopters. 

Page 35, point 20 in MiG 21 manual. Its not engine flameout in negative G as its a fuel starvation  Dem Russian tanks need gravity to work properly

Edited May 24, 2021 by The_Tau

[rossmum]

6 hours ago, Schmidtfire said:

One thing I have always wondered about the MiG-21bis... engine flameout. Was it really this easy to flame out the engine in real life? Reading about aerobatic like furballs in middle east conflicts. And also comparing it against all other jets currently in DCS... Can it be that flameout on MiG-21bis is a bit overmodelled? Flying as carefully as I can during combat, it seems almost impossible to avoid at least 1 engine restart per sortie. If this was true in real life, the TF-30 compressor stalls of F-14 would be peanuts in comparison.

Not looking for a change here. Im used to it by now after all these years. Just curious if flameout a bit overdone and exact to the second when pushing a "non recommended maneuver".      

 

It will flame out for one of two reasons. Reason 1 is zero/negative G being sustained too long, so the service tank drains faster than it can refill. You have something like 10-15 seconds in dry thrust and maybe 5, sometimes less, in afterburner. In emergency afterburner you have about 3 seconds. The simple solution here is not to force the nose down while in burner (neither airframes nor human bodies cope well with negative G in the real world anyway, so pilots generally avoid it because it absolutely sucks) and just roll inverted and pull like you're flying an early Spitfire or Hurricane with a float carb. I haven't had a flameout due to this in something like 6-12 months, and the last time I did, it was because I was intentionally trying to spin the aircraft and ended up in a tumble. The other risky time for this is trying to perform a tailslide or hammerhead.

 

Reason 2 is you're overspeeding, and if you're having to restart literally every sortie, this is probably the actual cause. Don't use emergency afterburner in level flight and don't make extended dives in afterburner. The engine will conk out between 1350 and 1400km/h IAS, which is probably a much milder consequence than you'd actually get for passing that speed limitation, which pilots were absolutely forbidden from doing - and IIRC the emergency burner switch was lockwired in peacetime.

 

Pretty much the only reason I need to airstart these days is if I carelessly slip past my maximum speed while chasing somebody, or if I've tried for an altitude record and need to relight on the way back down. It's still worth having the switch bound, though.

 

e/ worth mentioning - the zero/negative G limitation is common across a great many combat aircraft. Some in DCS model it, some don't. The reason and specific time limit varies, but more often than not it's either fuel starvation due to the header tank not being able to keep up, or oil starvation/oil pooling. Good habits in the 21 will translate to good habits in other modules if/when they model their own limitations.

Edited May 25, 2021 by rossmum

[Alpenwolf]

Server News:

 

Operation Open Range:

- Added air defences at Nalchik and Krasnodar P airbases.

 

Operation Two Towns:

- R-60 and R-60M missiles removed. The latter was only available at Senaki-Kolkhi airbase for Su-25's.

- Su-25T's removed.

- Su-25's moved to Kutaisi airbase. Senaki-Kolkhi airbase is now neutral.

- R3S (mostly), R-13M1 and limited R3R missiles.

- AIM-9P - instead of 380 missiles it's now 280 at mission's start.

- GAR-8 (AIM-9B) - instead of 32 missiles it's now 76 at mission's start.

- RB-24J missiles removed - RB-24 missiles increased in numbers - 112 instead of 84.

- Clouds and weather adjusted.

Edited May 25, 2021 by Alpenwolf

[Schmidtfire]

14 hours ago, rossmum said:

 

It will flame out for one of two reasons. Reason 1 is zero/negative G being sustained too long, so the service tank drains faster than it can refill. You have something like 10-15 seconds in dry thrust and maybe 5, sometimes less, in afterburner. In emergency afterburner you have about 3 seconds. The simple solution here is not to force the nose down while in burner (neither airframes nor human bodies cope well with negative G in the real world anyway, so pilots generally avoid it because it absolutely sucks) and just roll inverted and pull like you're flying an early Spitfire or Hurricane with a float carb. I haven't had a flameout due to this in something like 6-12 months, and the last time I did, it was because I was intentionally trying to spin the aircraft and ended up in a tumble. The other risky time for this is trying to perform a tailslide or hammerhead.

 

Reason 2 is you're overspeeding, and if you're having to restart literally every sortie, this is probably the actual cause. Don't use emergency afterburner in level flight and don't make extended dives in afterburner. The engine will conk out between 1350 and 1400km/h IAS, which is probably a much milder consequence than you'd actually get for passing that speed limitation, which pilots were absolutely forbidden from doing - and IIRC the emergency burner switch was lockwired in peacetime.

 

Pretty much the only reason I need to airstart these days is if I carelessly slip past my maximum speed while chasing somebody, or if I've tried for an altitude record and need to relight on the way back down. It's still worth having the switch bound, though.

 

e/ worth mentioning - the zero/negative G limitation is common across a great many combat aircraft. Some in DCS model it, some don't. The reason and specific time limit varies, but more often than not it's either fuel starvation due to the header tank not being able to keep up, or oil starvation/oil pooling. Good habits in the 21 will translate to good habits in other modules if/when they model their own limitations.

 

Thanks for the detailed description and tips! 

I suspect that the afterburner usage is the culprit. Im a heavy user of AB and Emergency AB. Need to be a bit more careful when going downhill as I tend to have it engaged a lot
during combat. I know it's not good pushing the nose over, but it's hard sometimes to resist taking that shot or getting into a better position. Not being in afterburner in those situations should buy me time from flaming out and then I can re-engage burners when in a better condition.

Overspeed is usually not an issue, only time is when I need to escape on the deck and push it too hard. At one point I tried to set the nosecone manually to prevent this, but nowdays Im just keeping it in auto.
      

[Get_Lo]

16 hours ago, Alpenwolf said:

Server News:

 

Operation Open Range:

- Added air defences at Nalchik and Krasnodar P airbases.

 

Operation Two Towns:

- R-60 and R-60M missiles removed. The latter was only available at Senaki-Kolkhi airbase for Su-25's.

- Su-25T's removed.

- Su-25's moved to Kutaisi airbase. Senaki-Kolkhi airbase is now neutral.

- R3S (mostly), R-13M1 and limited R3R missiles.

- AIM-9P - instead of 380 missiles it's now 280 at mission's start.

- GAR-8 (AIM-9B) - instead of 32 missiles it's now 76 at mission's start.

- RB-24J missiles removed - RB-24 missiles increased in numbers - 112 instead of 84.

- Clouds and weather adjusted.

 

Is there any particular reason for these missile changes?

[Alpenwolf]

5 hours ago, Get_Lo said:

Is there any particular reason for these missile changes?

 

Other than breaking the routine and mix it up a bit? Not really.

[Alpenwolf]

Server News:

 

* Operation Battle Over Sukhumi Unleashed is now offline.

 

* Operation Catch Me If You Can is back online:

- R-60's and RB-24J's removed.

- More R-13M1, R3S and limited R3R missiles.

- Less AIM-9P, more AIM-9B (GAR-8) missiles.

- The Blue FARP (Red has no helicopters and no FARP's in this mission) has been upgraded - See image below.

- Weather and clouds adjusted.

 

[Get_Lo]

5 hours ago, Alpenwolf said:

 

Other than breaking the routine and mix it up a bit? Not really.

Fair enough lol, ill be hitting the server hard with GRILLER squad this weekend, ill let you know how it goes. 

here is a funny video from your server (a while back) of a MiG-21 interception gone wrong 

 

[Admiral_ZIPANGU]

One thing I was wondering when I was doing the Five points unleashed mission, is there an equivalent to the Su-25T ELINT pod or Kh-25MPU on the Blue side ?

[The_Tau]

36 minutes ago, Admiral_ZIPANGU said:

One thing I was wondering when I was doing the Five points unleashed mission, is there an equivalent to the Su-25T ELINT pod or Kh-25MPU on the Blue side ?

nope. We got way too modern Harrier with Sidearms, or F18/16 with HARMs to choose from on Blue side...

[Alpenwolf]

Just out of curiosity, you guys don't like the mission Kiryat Shmona or is it just that many have problems with the Syria map? If it's the former then I could replace it with one of the 3 other Syria missions. However, if it's the latter then no more Syria missions on the server, I guess, until...

[Admiral_ZIPANGU]

1 hour ago, Alpenwolf said:

Just out of curiosity, you guys don't like the mission Kiryat Shmona or is it just that many have problems with the Syria map? If it's the former then I could replace it with one of the 3 other Syria missions. However, if it's the latter then no more Syria missions on the server, I guess, until...

The Syria mission may be a heavy load on the PC for some people. In my case, I can fly it comfortably with my current PC configuration, but with my previous GPU, the load was too heavy and it did not run satisfactorily, especially near the airfield.
Or it may be due to the mission configuration. If my perception is correct, the victory or defeat of that mission is almost always decided by the tanks. I have never seen aircraft contribute much to ground combat. In particular, most of the main battlefield is covered with trees, making it difficult for aircraft to see ground vehicles. I'd like to see other missions if possible, but if ground combat is going to take place, I'd prefer to see it in the open desert as much as possible.

[Alpenwolf]

3 minutes ago, Admiral_ZIPANGU said:

The Syria mission may be a heavy load on the PC for some people. In my case, I can fly it comfortably with my current PC configuration, but with my previous GPU, the load was too heavy and it did not run satisfactorily, especially near the airfield.
Or it may be due to the mission configuration. If my perception is correct, the victory or defeat of that mission is almost always decided by the tanks. I have never seen aircraft contribute much to ground combat. In particular, most of the main battlefield is covered with trees, making it difficult for aircraft to see ground vehicles. I'd like to see other missions if possible, but if ground combat is going to take place, I'd prefer to see it in the open desert as much as possible.

 

Yeah, I thought so. Thanks for the reply.

[ConkersBFD]

3 hours ago, Admiral_ZIPANGU said:

The Syria mission may be a heavy load on the PC for some people. In my case, I can fly it comfortably with my current PC configuration, but with my previous GPU, the load was too heavy and it did not run satisfactorily, especially near the airfield.
Or it may be due to the mission configuration. If my perception is correct, the victory or defeat of that mission is almost always decided by the tanks. I have never seen aircraft contribute much to ground combat. In particular, most of the main battlefield is covered with trees, making it difficult for aircraft to see ground vehicles. I'd like to see other missions if possible, but if ground combat is going to take place, I'd prefer to see it in the open desert as much as possible.

Agreed 100%. 
I'd personnally love more Syria missions, choppers are a delight to fly on this map.

Regarding the ground battles I feel it's about the same result as in Search and Destroy. If a tac-comm moves the units situated in cities (Jahrom or Fasa) it becomes really tedious to try and find them. It's usually pretty hard to hit them by air since it takes a while to even locate one tank in such cluttered areas. And unless the teams are heavily unbalanced you rarely have time to stay long before getting slammed. While I totally understand the ground warfare realism behind it, I remember trying to find one last remaining tank with an abrams for hours in Fasa (with JTAC humvee that never managed to find it) to finally give up on it and check Tacview out of curiosity before going to bed
 

Edited May 27, 2021 by ConkersBFD
Typos

[NELLUS]

I love the Syrian missions, but as mentioned the tanks are hard to spot.. unless they are driving and revealing their position with a dust cloud. 
It’s realistic, and looks great, but bloody hard to find them all. 
 

Maybe if the objective capture areas were tighter, and in an open area, it would be easier to spot them. 
The AAA units are easy to spot though, they just love revealing them selves.   

 

 

Edited May 27, 2021 by NELLUS

[Dirt_Merchant]

Just came here to say this is the best fckin MP server on DCS. Thanks for everything Alpen and team!

[ConkersBFD]

1 hour ago, NELLUS said:

I love the Syrian missions, but as mentioned the tanks are hard to spot.. unless they are driving and revealing their position with a dust cloud. 
It’s realistic, and looks great, but bloody hard to find them all. 

Maybe if the objective capture areas were tighter, and in an open area, it would be easier to spot them. 
The AAA units are easy to spot though, they just love revealing them selves.   

 

 

To add my 2 cents to this thought, I find that Fight Island works quite well in that regard. The cap zone around Queshm has a few hiding zones but not too much so you can still hide a sneaky unit but it wouldn't take hours for a ground unit or by air to find it. 

Plus the units have to expose themselves quite a lot to even get to the cap zone. 

 

(I know it's not on Syria but you get the idea) 

 

 

 

Edited May 27, 2021 by ConkersBFD

[The_Tau]

Maybe instead of one giant trigger zone, create couple smaller ones around key crossroads?, So to capture like Jahrom objective, you have to  control like 3 key crossroads to prevent gamey tactics to hide tanks in someone's garage. You can still do it to hide from enemy air superiority, but it wouldnt count towards objective capture

[Alpenwolf]

Was asking about Syria missions actually, you guys ended up talking about Search & Destroy

I get the points though and they're valid no doubt.

 

It wouldn't be any different in real life in any terrain with lots of trees and/or buildings. Hunting enemy ground units would be mainly done by ground units. You can't orbit around in your striker plane or attack helicopter with so many fighters around. So players should be smarter than to take their strikers to the TA, as for example in Search & Destroy, while enemy fighters are everywhere. Should your coalition gain air superiority (and this happens quite often) and last for a while, then go ahead and grab your striker/attack helicopter. Most players enter the server and grab the aircraft they want to fly regardless of whether it's needed or possible to do considering the current situation. Yes, we love to challenge ourselves sometimes, I get that, but that's not the case with most.

 

As an avid helicopter pilot myself, currently nothing is more beautiful than flying Syria missions. And I know how difficult it is to spot ground units but certainly not impossible as I quite often manage to get some kills in e.g. the Ka-50 before I RTB or maybe get jumped by some annoying F-5 And I'm not saying that to brag but only to share the following: The more challenging the battlefield terrain is, the more hide and seek backed by LOADS of patience is required. I don't mind hopping around in my Ka-50 for 1-2 hours and even without getting one kill looking for targets. Especially if I make back home. To me (and that's just me personally) that counts as a successful sortie. Now, if you take a look at your average DCS player, they want to have immediate action and preferably as quickly as possible so they end up being more frustrated than having fun.

 

I will consider your suggestions regarding the capture zones in Search & Destroy and other missions as well. I will also consider reducing the number of the available aircraft slots to once again reduce air quakes and provide in some missions a scenario where helicopters and strikers could actually operate.

[Enigma89]

Is there a discord server for this server?

[Get_Lo]

On 5/27/2021 at 8:15 AM, Alpenwolf said:

Just out of curiosity, you guys don't like the mission Kiryat Shmona or is it just that many have problems with the Syria map? If it's the former then I could replace it with one of the 3 other Syria missions. However, if it's the latter then no more Syria missions on the server, I guess, until...

Not many people have Syria and it runs poorly. I wouldnt use Syria for this server even though its a GREAT setting. I say keep the mission saved for F2P events and such for when everyone can enjoy

[ConkersBFD]

12 hours ago, Enigma89 said:

Is there a discord server for this server?

There's an unofficial Discord server here : https://discord.gg/6Mf3W5eS
And an official TeamSpeak server as well : ts50.gameservers.com:9132