PL-5EII for the MiG-21? Maybe??

[Jonne]

No need to be mean mate. Grom has been there for so long and so many users like it, that at this point removing it would do more harm than good. Nobody is forced to use it and no mission maker for multiplayer is obliged to put it, so anyone looking for 100 % accurate scenario can avoid it.

 

Disabling weapons is currently such a mess in DCS, that I also rather see it removed.

[QuiGon]

Disabling weapons is currently such a mess in DCS, that I also rather see it removed.

+1

[Airhunter]

I mean, we already have a PLAAF livery and chinese cockpit option by default so why not get the PL-5 and maybe even allow 73's? You know, just as an option, that doesn't hurt anyone.

[TLTeo]

Eh, imo there's a difference between giving an aircraft a fictional livery to allow it to act as a stand-in, and giving it capabilities the specific module shouldn't have to fill that role better

[WinterH]

Eh, imo there's a difference between giving an aircraft a fictional livery to allow it to act as a stand-in, and giving it capabilities the specific module shouldn't have to fill that role better

 

Exactly. There's a huge difference at that.

[Jonne]

I mean, we already have a PLAAF livery and chinese cockpit option by default so why not get the PL-5 and maybe even allow 73's? You know, just as an option, that doesn't hurt anyone.

 

Disabling weapons is currently such a mess in DCS, that I also rather see it removed.

 

Have you ever tried to disable weapons in DCS? If not, sorry but do not comment, if you know nothing. It really is a PITA and will hurt every mission builder. At the end it will be like all unrealistic nonsense options: The MP server mission creators will not bother with it and all that unrealistic stuff gets used on a regular basis. See the Mirage missile warning system (never used on that model) and the F-16 with its AGM-154B (again never used).

 

So we have a little bit of unrealistic BS here and there and well if we already have, why not add some more...

 

I say remove all that crap and keep DCS to its name.

[ResonantCard1]

Regarding the Kh-66 Grom being used in the MiG-21bis: According to Yefim Gordon's Famous Russian Aircraft: MiG-21 book, all variants from the MiG-21PFM onwards can carry it.

 

[Jonne]

Regarding the Kh-66 Grom being used in the MiG-21bis: According to Yefim Gordon's Famous Russian Aircraft: MiG-21 book, all variants from the MiG-21PFM onwards can carry it.

 

[ATTACH]223782[/ATTACH]

 

And the monopulse-radar RP-22 of the MiG-21Bis cannot produce a beam to guide it. So either the book is wrong, or the late MiG-21 versions could carry it but not launch and guide it, which makes it utterly useless.

[Art-J]

Although Gordon't book were (still are) the best general knowledge books about Soviet planes published for English-speaking world after collapse of Soviet Union, they're just that - general knowledge books with a fair share of mistakes in them. For those of us living on the east side of ex-Iron Curtain, it's just easier to spot these mistakes.

 

That's all irrelevant anyway - devs themselves confirmed years ago that Grom, RS-2US and cannon pods were added strictly for gameplay reasons rather that technical accuracy.

[AeriaGloria]

A certain arcade game has 21bis with gunpods that must have been inspired by the DCS module for this reason, how else could gunpods end up on bis

Edited December 26, 2019 by AeriaGloria

[TaxDollarsAtWork]

A certain arcade game has 21bis with gunpods that must have been inspired by the DCS module for this reason, how else could gunpods end up on bis

Gun pods have been on the MiG-21 in that franchise since 2011

 

3 years before the DCS MiG-21