Schlingel mit Kringel Posted March 14 Share Posted March 14 (edited) New forum header Edit: when i posted the header, it was because i was happy to see the MiG-29 in it and it fueled hope to maybe see news soon; maybe see some speculations going in the thread. I am not very familiar with liveries and hence did not pay attention to it. Took me a few days to realize what folks below my post were talking about. Agree with HansPeter this was a bad choice, especially when you add a "no political discussions" policy on top. What did they think would happen?! "Here is a bone, but don't dare to chew on it!". One needs to be quite diluted to not see yet another political message here. Cookie cutter opinions and reminders forced down your throat on every corner. I am so tired of this. Edited March 17 by Schlingel mit Kringel 5 Be aware of spam links posted on the forums Wishlist: Make textboxes scale like polygons | Eastern Caucasus map | Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HansPeter1981 Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 (edited) 12 hours ago, Schlingel mit Kringel said: New forum header As much as I am looking forward to this Module getting released this year, I Initially was quite excited to see it in the Forum header. But eventually it could cause some concerns here. Given the current times I would have chosen a different Livery for this banner, here in the Forum and also on the Webshop. I enjoyed the strict neutrality until now! Also given it will be released as a 80s module it should be advertised with an according Livery. Edited March 15 by HansPeter1981 5 1 My System specs: Cpu 5800x3d liquid cooled GPU 7900XTX Ram 32GB 3600mhz cl16 Motherboard B550M MSI, Windows 10 PRO on NVMe Drive, DCS on its own SSD, Monitor Philips 32" 4k curved adaptive Sync framerate capped at 59fps, Trackir 5, VKB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fatshmouk Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 5 часов назад, HansPeter1981 сказал: As much as I am looking forward to this Module getting released this year, I Initially was quite excited to see it in the Forum header. But eventually it could cause some concerns here. Given the current times I would have chosen a different Livery for this banner, here in the Forum and also on the Webshop. I enjoyed the strict neutrality until now! Also given it will be released as a 80s module it should be advertised with an according Livery. yeah, it`s a 80s module but as i know(i might be wrong) Ukrainian air force are using MiG-29A so this livery is kinda accurate, but it couldn`t exist in 80`s so you might be right 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
draconus Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 6 hours ago, HansPeter1981 said: Also given it will be released as a 80s module it should be advertised with an according Livery. Livery is fine, especially in the current times. That it's an 80s aircraft doesn't mean it can't fly today or can't be placed as forum banner. It's not like they've shown some new variant. 3 Win10 i7-10700KF 32GB RTX3060 Rift S T16000M TWCS TFRP FC3 F-14A/B F-15E CA SC NTTR PG Syria Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon1-1 Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 Besides field mods, Ukrainian MiG-29s flying today aren't too different from the ones from the 80s, which is causing some problems on the battlefield (not unlike what DCS players always complain about, Russians have Fox 3s and they have only Fox 1s). At most, they have a commercial GPS unit stuck on top of the HUD repeater. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Team BIGNEWY Posted March 15 ED Team Share Posted March 15 Folks enjoy the forum for DCS please keep away from politics or we will have to moderate here and we do not want to do that. Discuss the MiG-29A in this thread Thank you 6 Forum rules - DCS Crashing? Try this first - Cleanup and Repair - Discord BIGNEWY#8703 - Youtube - Patch Status Windows 11, NVIDIA MSI RTX 3090, Intel® i9-10900K 3.70GHz, 5.30GHz Turbo, Corsair Hydro Series H150i Pro, 64GB DDR @3200, ASUS ROG Strix Z490-F Gaming, HP Reverb G2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lmp Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 I think it's a lovely livery and it gets me even more excited for this module . 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fatshmouk Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 7 часов назад, lmp сказал: I think it's a lovely livery and it gets me even more excited for this module . hell nah Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hammer1-1 Posted March 15 Share Posted March 15 Yeah. EWTTS. You know what it means, please dont take this from us...not here of all the places... 1 Intel 13900k @ 5.8ghz | 64gb GSkill Trident Z | MSI z790 Meg ACE| Zotac RTX4090 | Asus 1000w psu | Slaw RX Viper 2 pedals | VKB Gunfighter Mk3 MCE Ultimate + STECS/ Virpil MongoosT50+ MongoosT50CM |Virpil TCS+ AH64D grip + custom AH64D TEDAC | HP Reverb G2 | Windows 11 Pro | |Samsung Odyssey G9 | Next Level Racing Flight Seat Pro My wallpaper and skins Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius007 Posted March 16 Share Posted March 16 (edited) "At most, they have a commercial GPS unit stuck on top of the HUD repeater." I wouldnt mind commercial GPS on future FF Mig, but also current FC3 modules, but in 3d form inside cockpit, not flat overlays like we have now with NS-430 on FC3. Gazelle get tablet with GPS in one of latest updates, not bad idea for devs to follow IMO Edited March 16 by Ramius007 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon1-1 Posted March 16 Share Posted March 16 I think that an NS-430 unit should be doable. It's not the exact one they had, but in spirit of those modifications, particularly early Polish ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronin_Gaijin Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 Daily MiG-29 5 1 Авиабаза 1521, Мары - Центр боевого применения | Airbase 1521, Mary - Combat Operations Center Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackhawk NC Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 The Mig-29 is a beautiful plane but will it have an AWACS datalink? If it doesn't, it will be a very expensive version of an almost useless FC3 plane...... As a person who flies mainly REDFOR aircraft, I won't be buying it if it doesn't have an AWACS datalink......Just Saying..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northstar98 Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 It has a GCI data link, though it won't be present at early access. I assume that the AEW&C aircraft like the A-50 would feed information to the GCI network. The only hiccup here though is I thought that, at least in Soviet times, the A-50s were under the PVO? Whereas the MiG-29 is operated by the VVS. 1 Modules I own: F-14A/B, Mi-24P, AV-8B N/A, AJS 37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, F-16CM, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, Mi-8MTV2, UH-1H, Mirage 2000C, FC3, MiG-15bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), P-47D, P-51D, C-101, Yak-52, WWII Assets, CA, NS430, Hawk. Terrains I own: South Atlantic, Syria, The Channel, SoH/PG, Marianas. System: GIGABYTE B650 AORUS ELITE AX, AMD Ryzen 5 7600, Corsair Vengeance DDR5-5200 32 GB, Western Digital Black SN850X 1 TB (DCS dedicated) & 2 TB NVMe SSDs, Corsair RM850X 850 W, NZXT H7 Flow, MSI G274CV. Peripherals: VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro, MFG Crosswind V3 Graphite, Logitech Extreme 3D Pro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
okopanja Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 8 minutes ago, Blackhawk NC said: The Mig-29 is a beautiful plane but will it have an AWACS datalink? If it doesn't, it will be a very expensive version of an almost useless FC3 plane...... As a person who flies mainly REDFOR aircraft, I won't be buying it if it doesn't have an AWACS datalink......Just Saying..... The DL in Mig-29A will be the one received from ground station GCI. However, the GCI controller himself could have received the picture from nearby radar, but also others that were transmitted, and this capability also included integration with passive sensors and AWACS (even during 70s there was quiet a sophisticated background infrastructure). It was assumed that a single flight would attack the single target under direction of GCI officer. Not sure how far the ED will go, but there is also a Mig-23 module which has the same DL, so we can perhaps expects this to be implement at some point (maybe not initially). 1 minute ago, Northstar98 said: The only hiccup here though is I thought that, at least in Soviet times, the A-50s were under the PVO? Whereas the MiG-29 is operated by the VVS. When equipping the PVO (of territory) had a priority over the troop PVO. This means that they often shared the equipment, so some technical interoperability was there even if organizational interoperability can be questioned. In DCS there is a mixture of both. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VanekK30 Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 7 часов назад, Ronin_Gaijin сказал: Ежедневный МиГ-29 MiG-29UBM(9-53) 1 ВПГ "Стража России" ведёт набор лётчиков на самолёты Су-27 и МиГ-29! VAT "Guard of Russia" ВПГ "Стража России" ВПГ "Стража России" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lmp Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 2 hours ago, Blackhawk NC said: The Mig-29 is a beautiful plane but will it have an AWACS datalink? If it doesn't, it will be a very expensive version of an almost useless FC3 plane...... As a person who flies mainly REDFOR aircraft, I won't be buying it if it doesn't have an AWACS datalink......Just Saying..... The datalink present on our version of the MiG-29 allowed a ground based navigator to guide the interceptor onto a target or group of targets. We're not going to get an airspace picture in the same sense we do in the Viper or Hornet, only flight directions to a target. The TAF in the Mirage is perhaps the closest analogue we have right now. I've no idea if the system will be able to execute any complex intercept geometries, or if it'll simply point as at the target, and what control, if any, we'll get over the target selection, but I recommend to temper your expectations. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackhawk NC Posted March 22 Share Posted March 22 As I read more and more about this new full fidelity Mig-29, it is becoming less likely I will spend any money to purchase it. Seems like a probable waste of money. I might be wrong but nothing I have read so far leads me to believe it will be much better than the FC3 version and will probably be just as useless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AeriaGloria Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 3 hours ago, lmp said: The datalink present on our version of the MiG-29 allowed a ground based navigator to guide the interceptor onto a target or group of targets. We're not going to get an airspace picture in the same sense we do in the Viper or Hornet, only flight directions to a target. The TAF in the Mirage is perhaps the closest analogue we have right now. I've no idea if the system will be able to execute any complex intercept geometries, or if it'll simply point as at the target, and what control, if any, we'll get over the target selection, but I recommend to temper your expectations. The intercept route is proportional navigation for either a head on intercept or for stern conversion. You should get rough heading range and commanded altitude, then by following the targeting circle/ILS markers you will be guided on this proportional navigation intercept route, almost exactly the same path as if you had fired a missile 3 Black Shark Den Squadron Member: We are open to new recruits, click here to check us out or apply to join! https://blacksharkden.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ironhand Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 3 hours ago, Blackhawk NC said: As I read more and more about this new full fidelity Mig-29, it is becoming less likely I will spend any money to purchase it. Seems like a probable waste of money. I might be wrong but nothing I have read so far leads me to believe it will be much better than the FC3 version and will probably be just as useless. The primary difference will be in the systems modelling. We will not be getting a more modern version of this MiG. So, if you consider the FV3 version not worth flying, this one won't be either. 4 YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCU1...CR6IZ7crfdZxDg _____ Win 10 Pro x64, ASUS Z97 Pro MoBo, Intel i7-4790K, EVGA GTX 970 4GB, HyperX Savage 32GB, Samsung 850 EVO 250 GB SSD, 2x Seagate Hybrid Drive 2TB Raid 0. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dataduffy Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hermes7226 Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 2 часа назад, Dataduffy сказал: Good video! By the way, at first I thought it was DCS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronin_Gaijin Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 (edited) On 3/22/2024 at 9:18 PM, Northstar98 said: It has a GCI data link, though it won't be present at early access. I assume that the AEW&C aircraft like the A-50 would feed information to the GCI network. The only hiccup here though is I thought that, at least in Soviet times, the A-50s were under the PVO? Whereas the MiG-29 is operated by the VVS. There was interoperability between PVO and VVS. The MiG-29 is mentioned in a lot of PVO documentation. Belonging in different units of the armed forces does not mean that they did not work together. "MiG-29 fighters were designed as universal for use in the Air Force (BBC) and for the country's air defense (ΠΒΟ)." Edited March 23 by Ronin_Gaijin 1 Авиабаза 1521, Мары - Центр боевого применения | Airbase 1521, Mary - Combat Operations Center Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronin_Gaijin Posted March 23 Share Posted March 23 Daily MiG-29 6 Авиабаза 1521, Мары - Центр боевого применения | Airbase 1521, Mary - Combat Operations Center Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronin_Gaijin Posted March 27 Share Posted March 27 Daily MiG-29 4 Авиабаза 1521, Мары - Центр боевого применения | Airbase 1521, Mary - Combat Operations Center Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now