Few small things to improve the Fulcrum combat effectiveness and realism

[BlackPixxel]

It is sad to read that there is no interest of ED to do easy improvements for the FC3-modules.

 

They still cost money, and you still pay 1/4th of a full fidelity module. But most of them share the same systems, so it is just copy and paste for ED.

 

A little more effort by ED would be very appreciated (these improvements + plane to plane datalink for example)

[Tempest]

Nice informative, forum string.

 

Guess I will hold off purchase. :(

 

Thanks all for your observations.

[TOViper]

for ED

 

Just as information for ED: The developers did a superb job on the MiG-29 so far, really!

 

I am having this idea since months:

 

I would pay another 50 bucks if they somehow start pulling it out of FC into a fully scaled fully clickable DCS module, like others. The FC version can exist in parallel of course.

I assume they would have many things already finished/coded, the outstanding 3D-model, the FM, some avionics, some this and thats. Why not doing this step?

 

 

 

I want to be the first customer :)

[FoxAlfa]

Nice informative, forum string.

 

Guess I will hold off purchase. :(

 

Thanks all for your observations.

 

Tempest, don't get this tread wrong... the Fulcrum PFM is excellent now (with the right curves) and I can't recommend it enough... I spent over 100 hours and got around 200 kills in it on the Blue Flag and loved every single minute of it... this small things are more comfort of life things then any deal beakers...

Edited September 1, 2019 by FoxAlfa

[Harlikwin]

Just as information for ED: The developers did a superb job on the MiG-29 so far, really!

 

I am having this idea since months:

 

I would pay another 50 bucks if they somehow start pulling it out of FC into a fully scaled fully clickable DCS module, like others. The FC version can exist in parallel of course.

I assume they would have many things already finished/coded, the outstanding 3D-model, the FM, some avionics, some this and thats. Why not doing this step?

 

 

 

I want to be the first customer :)

 

Politics mostly.

 

I'd love to see a Full Fi F15C or A10A, which at least avoids the modern red air problem.

 

Interesting that Chiz hinted at Full Fi mig29 though.

[pepin1234]

The aircraft still have a lot of tricky new features that is not supposed to be like that. It is FC3... all right, understood that, but what about all the realistic flight models for F-15? All the simulation that bring high difficulty drive level is coming for Russian fighters in FC3. While F-15 still keep with high maneuvers with wigs fuel tanks. Making Turns that nobody know if that amount of Gs shown in the information bar is showing the thrust. While the new Mig-29 PFM is a nightmare in trimming setup. After every single high Gs maneuvers we can’t counter attack without before trimming the whole aircraft. Still we keep jumping 10 meters high after make a slight mistake in landing... I personally use more Mig-29 than any other aircraft in DCS and is the aircraft with more accidents in landing after the new PFM. (Mig-21, Mig-19, Mig-15, Su-27 no problem at all, in Mig-29 a tiny mistake is a 10-15 meter bounce to secure you died in the try. This RWR is just a mess, They fixed it for a while and brought the RWR bug back again... like something was too good and should be broken back. I fly Mig-29 more than Su-27 and I know what I am talking about. Mig-29 have a lot of new features that make you think twice if this is a serious simulation, even more if you look to F-15 that is in the same FC3 improvements, as PFM or whatever they want to make you believe. At end of the day is like Mig-29 should remain so because someone like it so.

Edited September 3, 2019 by pepin1234

[Kid18120]

Maybe some interesting "ports" from FC-form to FF-form might come after MAC releases. IIRC they are pulling FF modules and limiting them to fit in MAC-form, so they might as well be developing the needed underlying structure for the opposite to happen.

Only time can tell for sure though.

[FoxAlfa]

I would also add as 9. the top part of the hud needs to be lighter and much more see trough.

 

Many times I wasn't able to pick up the target since the HUD is way too dark.

 

Real hud:

 

DCS hud:

[draconus]

Real hud:

It's different version than you show.

Edited September 11, 2019 by draconus

[FoxAlfa]

It's different version than you show.

 

It's not a different version, its the different angle.

 

The camera is well above head, so light is staying longer in the tinted glass thus making it darker. Similar effect to the angled armor and the round going trough it. And even if you compere it from that angle the one from the videos are still lighter then in the DCS.

 

Its a small tweak but a very needed one.

[Krippz]

+1

[draconus]

It's not a different version...

So the hex bolts and side mounts are just additional equipment?

[FoxAlfa]

So the hex bolts and side mounts are just additional equipment?

 

I think so, probably GPS mount. Here are more pictures of the HUD with minimal difference in lower and top part

 

 

[FoxAlfa]

Smoke out of the engines should be reduces on low RPM:

[DmitriKozlowsky]

ED should just rev up MiG-29G to DCS level. They already have a fairly realistic PFM for Fulcrum. They could use NATO MIG-29, from Germany, Poland as template. They have aircraft on display, and I am not certain about how many are combat coded and mission-ready.

[wasserfall]

+1

[FoxAlfa]

another small bug...

 

[FoxAlfa]

Adding radar lookdown adjustment as number 11.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=268058

 

and marking 9. as fixed

[FoxAlfa]

SPO-15 lights too dim again

[BlackPixxel]

Where do we know from that SNP only works in PPS/ZPS, but not in AVT?

[Tarres]

Lights too dim seems a general issue in this update.

[FoxAlfa]

Where do we know from that SNP only works in PPS/ZPS, but not in AVT?

 

It is more complex in the real aircraft, but this is just that you can't do that on FC3 aircraft standard way without the bug. I didn't check that recently, it could have been fixed.

[BlackPixxel]

I noticed with SNP that sometimes targets will only show up for a splitsecond after each radar cycle. But when I go to the normal observe mode I see them perfectly fine.

[FoxAlfa]

I noticed with SNP that sometimes targets will only show up for a splitsecond after each radar cycle. But when I go to the normal observe mode I see them perfectly fine.

 

Yeah, there is some blinking, I still haven't narrow it down to report it, to many variables.

[Ironhand]

Where do we know from that SNP only works in PPS/ZPS, but not in AVT?

No AVT in SNP for the Su-27's radar per the manual but haven't searched through the MiG-29's manual.