Jump to content

Suggestion for a chargeable MiG21bis II upgrade


Rosebud47

Recommended Posts

3 часа назад, Gladius сказал:

I would also be willing to pay for an update. Would welcome it as an increase in value if a GCI AI would komnen.
In any case, an overhaul is desirable.

It gets better, the PVO MiGs had the Lazur ground control system that functioned somewhat similar to the TAF system on our Mirage. Not sure how that would work though, but most likely it would require a GCI AI that actually understands what's going on. That in turn might have something to do with the dynamic campaign AI that's hopefully in the works at ED, and having enjoyed the other F-16 sim, I have my expectations :rolleyes:

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, WarbossPetross said:

It gets better, the PVO MiGs had the Lazur ground control system that functioned somewhat similar to the TAF system on our Mirage. Not sure how that would work though, but most likely it would require a GCI AI that actually understands what's going on. That in turn might have something to do with the dynamic campaign AI that's hopefully in the works at ED, and having enjoyed the other F-16 sim, I have my expectations :rolleyes:

Just for the sake of clarity, our MiG is not the PVO version. Ours is sometimes referenced (GDR, Bulgaria) as MiG-21bis-SAU for the SAU or Sistema Avtomaticheskovo Upravleniya (Automatic Control system.) and the other bis is the MiG-21bis-Lazur for the Lazur GCI.

The NATO codenames for each are Fishbed-N for the SAU and Polyot ILS equipped tactical fighters and Fishbed-L for the Lazur equipped interceptors.


Having the Lazur 21bis could be a lot of fun. Hopefully, that campaign AI does model GCI.


Edited by MiG21bisFishbedL
  • Thanks 1

Reformers hate him! This one weird trick found by a bush pilot will make gunfighter obsessed old farts angry at your multi-role carrier deck line up!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

33 minutes ago, MiG21bisFishbedL said:


@Hiromachi Ever consider the possibility of updating the bis with the Lazur variant? Being able to play with the Lazur would be pretty cool.

Decision is not for me to make but yes. It was contemplated.

Personally I'm not a fan of it. Like entire mechanics on board is a couple lights and indicators, while you would have to say good bye to SAU and RSBN. Lasur would require a significant Ai programming to have competent GCI system. I have manuals both for ARL-SM Lasur system (airborne part) and Vozdukh-1M (ground part), plus a few polish traning programms for GCIs on how to vector fighters to the targets, how to maneuver them (GCI has to know flying characteristics of the 21 to asses maximum turns at given altitudes and interception courses). 

It's certainly useful against bombers in reality where you maintain radio silence and thus delay any chance of detection of the interceptors. But for DCS SAU and RSBN are a lot more significant. And Im simply a fan of more autonomous aircraft. 

However if we ever were to make another variant of the 21 than pretty much anything from PF to 21bis Lasur has ... Lasur 🙂 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1

AMD Ryzen 5900X @ 4.95 Ghz / Asus Crosshair VII X470 / 32 GB DDR4 3600 Mhz Cl16 / Radeon 6800XT / Samsung 960 EVO M.2 SSD / Creative SoundBlaster AE-9 / HP Reverb G2 / VIRPIL T-50CM /
Thrustmaster TPR Pendular Rudder Pedals / Audio Technica ATH-MSR7

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd say, if a paid update for the current module was on the table (as opposed to a completely new module that would be an early generation -21), then having the Lazur variant bundled in would certainly help sell it. Ideally, the one that we have would be changed to reflect the aircraft's actual capabilities, but that would mean losing the Grom (not that it's terribly useful, but some people might miss it). I'd be fine with just fixing the ASP sight and the overhauled cockpit. Alternatively, you could consider the MiG-21M, which had a very similar cockpit to the Bis, and had the RP-21M, which could guide the Grom.

ED is planning the MiG-29, so GCI AI could come eventually. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Dragon1-1 said:

MiG-21M

MF, not M. M had different cockpit layout, older ASP type, etc. Panels are in fact very different in terms of shape:

_DSC9581.JPG

  • Like 1

AMD Ryzen 5900X @ 4.95 Ghz / Asus Crosshair VII X470 / 32 GB DDR4 3600 Mhz Cl16 / Radeon 6800XT / Samsung 960 EVO M.2 SSD / Creative SoundBlaster AE-9 / HP Reverb G2 / VIRPIL T-50CM /
Thrustmaster TPR Pendular Rudder Pedals / Audio Technica ATH-MSR7

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The MF also had the RP-22 radar, which, like the one we have on Bis, is not Grom-compatible. Kh-66 was introduced on the PFM, which had RP-21 radar. That said, it seems the picture I had was mislabeled, and actually showed the MF. 
57004_1148289252.jpg

It might be that no Grom-compatible MiG has a cockpit lie the Bis, seeing as RP-21 used that huge centrally-mounted unit that the rest of the cockpit was built around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Hiromachi said:

 

Decision is not for me to make but yes. It was contemplated.

Personally I'm not a fan of it. Like entire mechanics on board is a couple lights and indicators, while you would have to say good bye to SAU and RSBN. Lasur would require a significant Ai programming to have competent GCI system. I have manuals both for ARL-SM Lasur system (airborne part) and Vozdukh-1M (ground part), plus a few polish traning programms for GCIs on how to vector fighters to the targets, how to maneuver them (GCI has to know flying characteristics of the 21 to asses maximum turns at given altitudes and interception courses). 

It's certainly useful against bombers in reality where you maintain radio silence and thus delay any chance of detection of the interceptors. But for DCS SAU and RSBN are a lot more significant. And Im simply a fan of more autonomous aircraft. 

However if we ever were to make another variant of the 21 than pretty much anything from PF to 21bis Lasur has ... Lasur 🙂 

Certainly the tactical fighter version was the better choice to go with in the DCS eco-system. Thanks for the response.

Reformers hate him! This one weird trick found by a bush pilot will make gunfighter obsessed old farts angry at your multi-role carrier deck line up!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

The MF also had the RP-22 radar

The MF did not have RP-22. Both documents (manuals) and real life footage confirm that. Picture that you have shown even confirms that. Look at radar control panel. Its from RP-21.

RP-22 radar modes panel (called Block 19) looks like in DCS and I have one at home:

_DSC9558.JPG

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

AMD Ryzen 5900X @ 4.95 Ghz / Asus Crosshair VII X470 / 32 GB DDR4 3600 Mhz Cl16 / Radeon 6800XT / Samsung 960 EVO M.2 SSD / Creative SoundBlaster AE-9 / HP Reverb G2 / VIRPIL T-50CM /
Thrustmaster TPR Pendular Rudder Pedals / Audio Technica ATH-MSR7

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know it's different, but I thought it was an earlier variant of the RP-22. However, it does make sense, RP-22 was still kinda new at the time. In that case, the MF should do just fine for a Grom-capable MiG-21. It was an export version, so I don't know if it actually carried any, but RP-21 certainly could guide them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nah, Soviet Union had RP-22 in use since 1966 with MiG-21S. Soviets were just reluctant to export MiG-21 with that type of radar. If you look closely, MiG-21S has export equivalent in form of MiG-21M (with tiny differences) but instead of RP-22 radar it has RP-21, MiG-21SM has export equivalent in form of MiG-21MF and again without RP-22 radar. Its always the same pattern where Soviet Union provides to its allies and customers aircraft with lesser capabilities than those operated in VVS / PVO.

I have manual covering Groms operation and installation on 21MF specifically. So you are right that it should be able to guide it 🙂

  • Like 1

AMD Ryzen 5900X @ 4.95 Ghz / Asus Crosshair VII X470 / 32 GB DDR4 3600 Mhz Cl16 / Radeon 6800XT / Samsung 960 EVO M.2 SSD / Creative SoundBlaster AE-9 / HP Reverb G2 / VIRPIL T-50CM /
Thrustmaster TPR Pendular Rudder Pedals / Audio Technica ATH-MSR7

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will gladly pay for a cockpit update. In VR current cockpit looks weird and out of scale. It makes it hard to enjoy the module. For some reason default pilot position is on the back of the ejection seat and quite literally like your eyes are attached to it. Yeah, i can adjust it but it makes periscope above me useless, because again it's oriented around default position, so i can't check my six or drag chute. I just want my bis to look believable enough inside, just for this alone i'll pay again for an overhaul.

And if we can have another version, i'd take F-13 over any other

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd pay for a graphical upgrade and a recoding of existing systems, even without adding new ones.

Some current mig-21bis systems could be more realistic (the 21 is the first 3rd party module and this reflects the accuracy of some simulated systems, that today could be reprogrammed in a better way). And I'd like to have RSBN integrated with the one in dcs maps, such as in the l-39, and not a fictional one.

I'd gladly pay just for these things, no need to add new systems. With the f-4 phantom II coming we deserve a counterpart on par with it, and I think the mig-21bis should be that counterpart.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the sound of all options, honestly though i'd have the most interest in a modern upgrade package such as the Lancer R, Bison etc, or an older f13 to suit the f4 phantom though i suspect ME will just restrict the 21s loadout. A complete refresh of the current mig would be nice though it would have to meet the current standards, have far less issues and have an awesome flight model. 

 

As for prices, any varient should be full price and a refresh should be half price. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The bis is still one of my favorite birds in DCS (it pretty much forces you to either become a better pilot or die in a spectacular fireball). I'd love to see a cockpit refresh at some point, and I'd be happy to pay for it. I'd also be more than happy to pay full price for an F-13  (need to put those F-4's in their place 😉).

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

MiG-21 F-13 with its bubble canopy with only one frame with better visibility than later models and unique supersonic ejection system looks awesome!

It was the lightest and most maneuverable variant as well. Plus it has an internal gun.


Edited by bies
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am with @Hiromachi on this one: along a Bis overhaul (paid or not will be their call, I'll be happy either way), I would like to see a MiG-21PFM as an eventual additional MiG-21 module. It's a variant that was widely spread both in users and in periods it served and still has interesting systems modelled on it (RP-21M radar, Kh-66 missiles etc.) 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/13/2022 at 4:43 AM, WarbossPetross said:

It gets better, the PVO MiGs had the Lazur ground control system that functioned somewhat similar to the TAF system on our Mirage. Not sure how that would work though, but most likely it would require a GCI AI that actually understands what's going on. That in turn might have something to do with the dynamic campaign AI that's hopefully in the works at ED, and having enjoyed the other F-16 sim, I have my expectations :rolleyes:

The basic Lazur integration on the 21 is a little more sophisticated than TAF is - TAF is just feeding target info to your radar as a memory contact, which the radar displays the info of to cue you onto the target's position, speed, relative bearing, closure rate, altitude, and number. You do get an intercept course given on the scope but that's about the sum of TAF guidance - it's using the radar's own existing memory function with regular updates to tell you more or less where the target is and what it's doing, and calculate the bearing and rough speed you need for an intercept.

By contrast, the MiG-21's implementation of the Lazur datalink/command system will transmit direct commands to the pilot as well as the relative direction to point the aircraft in order to accomplish the intercept. It gives you relative instructions on which way to turn and how much and how much to climb and descend, command bearing to fly, command speed to reach and maintain, command altitude, it tells you when to engage or disengage the afterburner, when to turn on the radar, what range to search for the target, when to fire, when to break off. You're there purely to manage the throttle and stick and pull the trigger, then land. In the case of more sophisticated integration found in the PVO's dedicated interceptors, it even directly interfaces with the aircraft's autopilot and sensors and so you are literally just there to manage the throttle and pull the trigger. Intercept geometry for the assigned target would be worked out on the ground side by the Kaskad computer and then fed up through the datalink, so you aren't just being told where the target is and what it's doing - you are given the specific inputs you need to make to place yourself in a perfect weapon employment envelope. It's the direct Soviet equivalent of the SAGE system in the US.

As it stands now, IIRC you can use LotATC integration to manually manage/assign TAF targets. How Vozdukh's far more complex functionality would work with that is anyone's guess, along with whether it'll ever receive more "official" intergration with DCS itself, like the ability to assign targets to players from the F10 map using tac comm roles or such.

On 2/13/2022 at 5:47 AM, Dragon1-1 said:

I'd say, if a paid update for the current module was on the table (as opposed to a completely new module that would be an early generation -21), then having the Lazur variant bundled in would certainly help sell it. Ideally, the one that we have would be changed to reflect the aircraft's actual capabilities, but that would mean losing the Grom (not that it's terribly useful, but some people might miss it). I'd be fine with just fixing the ASP sight and the overhauled cockpit. Alternatively, you could consider the MiG-21M, which had a very similar cockpit to the Bis, and had the RP-21M, which could guide the Grom.

ED is planning the MiG-29, so GCI AI could come eventually. 

To do Lazur you'd already need to remodel the entire left hand side and main instrument panel of 21bis, and from memory part of the right panel too, or else just use supercarrier FLOLS- style onscreen overlays (which I'd prefer to avoid personally). At that point the only work you're saving over an earlier 21 variant is not having to extensively remodel the exterior - although you would have to partly alter it to reflect differences in avionics fittings - and not having to redo the flight model or the engine.


Edited by rossmum
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am 13.2.2022 um 12:19 schrieb Zar 1-1:

I will gladly pay for a cockpit update. In VR current cockpit looks weird and out of scale. It makes it hard to enjoy the module. For some reason default pilot position is on the back of the ejection seat and quite literally like your eyes are attached to it. Yeah, i can adjust it but it makes periscope above me useless, because again it's oriented around default position, so i can't check my six or drag chute. I just want my bis to look believable enough inside, just for this alone i'll pay again for an overhaul.

And if we can have another version, i'd take F-13 over any other

Thats true! The Bis looks really bad in VR 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/2/2022 at 2:37 PM, Rosebud47 said:

a chargable upgrade ( all the missing phases in the update process ) for the MiG would be accepted by the community.

People are literally asking to give someone their hard-earned money these days. 

I'd rather a refund option on DCS service. We live in capitalism, so let's let it do its thing on regulating the product quality properly. 

They are not vulching... they are STRAFING!!! :smartass::thumbup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

vor 3 Stunden schrieb Черный Дракул:

People are literally asking to give someone their hard-earned money these days. 

I'd rather a refund option on DCS service. We live in capitalism, so let's let it do its thing on regulating the product quality properly. 

Political-social-systems don´t do anything. Economic laws don´t do anything. People do. People decide. Always.

I decided for myself, that it is fairplay to pay royalty to Magnitude for an overhaul quality upgrade for the MiG21bis. And I will pay more if they would include a variant like the MiG21 - F13 to this upgrade. 

  • Like 11
  • Thanks 1

F-14b Tomcat   /   AV-8B Harrier   /   F-16C Viper  /   KA-50 Black Shark   /   Mi-24 Hind   /   MiG-21bis   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Rosebud47 said:

Political-social-systems don´t do anything. Economic laws don´t do anything. People do. People decide. Always.

I decided for myself, that it is fairplay to pay royalty to Magnitude for an overhaul quality upgrade for the MiG21bis. And I will pay more if they would include a variant like the MiG21 - F13 to this upgrade. 

While a refund system would be nice, this is the crux of the discussion.

What's on the the mind of people here are ideas to give a paid upgrade value and justification beyond the basic expectation of support. Would I pay for a MiG-21 visual overhaul? Probably, but I value the MiG-21. The only thing I'd value more would be an A-6. However, I *hope* I'm in the minority. A paid upgrade should be more than just a visual update. There should be something more to it; the addition of a new variant being the obvious solution to arrive at. 

For it to just be an aesthetic overhaul would just be the CEII meltdown all over again. There's clearly an expectation set by ED and other third parties that cosmetic updates are the expectation for buying a module license as part of its support. That's really the meat and potatoes of this topic.

Reformers hate him! This one weird trick found by a bush pilot will make gunfighter obsessed old farts angry at your multi-role carrier deck line up!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man, I´m meanwhile so much hyped for a renewed MiG21bis while reading through the thread. But we also have to accept, if Magnitude couldn´t agree because of a tight schedule with the pending projects or could agree earliest in 4 or 5 years to this. Anyhow, if Magnitude would accept to the proposals made in this thread, the MiG21 will become bombastic - that´s for sure.

Yesterday watched a nice video about the MiG21 generations:

 

If the idea of a variant would get real, I would vote for the early MiG21f-13. But also have in mind, that the F-13 would be the most work inside and outside to be done. Or a MiG21bis with after market additions ( in the end of the video he´s talking a bit about that ), which would mean less work and time to create a variant, as it could be based on the MiG21bis.

  • Like 2

F-14b Tomcat   /   AV-8B Harrier   /   F-16C Viper  /   KA-50 Black Shark   /   Mi-24 Hind   /   MiG-21bis   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...