Mig-21bis weapons

Well then, that sucks.............

A third of the weapon's wont make it into the game.:cry:

Yeah I'm pretty bummed out about that as well. Especially the GUV's not making it in. Yeah it may be useless against a good portion of vehicles in DCS, but there are still some things it'll kill. I was especially looking forward to strapping a GUV gun pod onto my MiG and another buddy (or AI) with a GUV and dogfighting just using those. I also wanted to see their effect on helicopters. Squeeze trigger, spray helo with 7.62/12.7, laugh ass off. Just because it is useless in most situations does not mean we can't find ways of having a giggle with it.

With some of the weapons, like incinerator type weapons, Dolphin said at the moment they can't be added in. Hopefully down the road the ability to increase the MiG weapons occurs. And hopefully they will change their minds on some of the ones they left out. If it gets the MiG released quicker I'm all for them being left out at the moment, I just hope that they do eventually make it in.

I don´t see why the gun pod should be removed. It is already in the game so no beczl thing i guess. Also on convoys with trucks and light armor should be dead direct. It´s pretty effective on the Mi 8 so it should be even be better on an airplane :/ Also shame that h 66 wont be in. Looked forward to that :(

Yeah, I don't get it. Wasn't that gunpod exactly the same one as the one already in DCS, available on the Mi-8?

Bit more explanations:

The image you see in this thread contains weapons 3D models. That does not mean that the weapon was ever implemented properly. What you have seen in some videos were mostly external visual effects (GUV for example). That is still very far from proper implementation and integration of particular weapon into the simulated world.

Every weapon has it's aerodynamic, ballistic and energy features, some more complex than others. For rare weapons and for weapons that did not see wide usage it is almost impossible to find those data, making the implementation very time consuming with problematic results.

When I started testing all previously declared weapons, I found out that big part of it was incorrectly defined, some working wrong, and some not integrated /properly implemented/ at all. I wasted several days redefining and integrating all declared weapons; some of them were significantly improved, but I also found out that some can't be integrated at the moment. On the other side, some weapons (mostly bombs) are just a bit changed copies of original Eagle weapons - which is very well defined and integrated. I temporarily ruled out "low-quality implementation" weapons for different reasons.

I never said I'm not interested in implementing GUV and 66 for example; it was scheduled for more screening in next several days after we tune up smoke containers and perform some other tests concerning ASP operation in A-A mode.

I cant promise you anything at the moment, but we will dedicate more time to currently disabled weapons /as we planned/, and you can rest assure we will do our best to enable weapons that satisfy our requirements.

Bit more explanations:

 

The image you see in this thread contains weapons 3D models. That does not mean that the weapon was ever implemented properly. What you have seen in some videos were mostly external visual effects (GUV for example). That is still very far from proper implementation and integration of particular weapon into the simulated world.

 

Every weapon has it's aerodynamic, ballistic and energy features, some more complex than others. For rare weapons and for weapons that did not see wide usage it is almost impossible to find those data, making the implementation very time consuming with problematic results.

 

When I started testing all previously declared weapons, I found out that big part of it was incorrectly defined, some working wrong, and some not integrated /properly implemented/ at all. I wasted several days redefining and integrating all declared weapons; some of them were significantly improved, but I also found out that some can't be integrated at the moment. On the other side, some weapons (mostly bombs) are just a bit changed copies of original Eagle weapons - which is very well defined and integrated. I temporarily ruled out "low-quality implementation" weapons for different reasons.

 

I never said I'm not interested in implementing GUV and 66 for example; it was scheduled for more screening in next several days after we tune up smoke containers and perform some other tests concerning ASP operation in A-A mode.

 

I cant promise you anything at the moment, but we will dedicate more time to currently disabled weapons /as we planned/, and you can rest assure we will do our best to enable weapons that satisfy our requirements.

Now THAT was a nice response...

Thank you sir!

:thumbup:

Bit more explanations:

 

The image you see in this thread contains weapons 3D models. That does not mean that the weapon was ever implemented properly. What you have seen in some videos were mostly external visual effects (GUV for example). That is still very far from proper implementation and integration of particular weapon into the simulated world.

 

Every weapon has it's aerodynamic, ballistic and energy features, some more complex than others. For rare weapons and for weapons that did not see wide usage it is almost impossible to find those data, making the implementation very time consuming with problematic results.

 

When I started testing all previously declared weapons, I found out that big part of it was incorrectly defined, some working wrong, and some not integrated /properly implemented/ at all. I wasted several days redefining and integrating all declared weapons; some of them were significantly improved, but I also found out that some can't be integrated at the moment. On the other side, some weapons (mostly bombs) are just a bit changed copies of original Eagle weapons - which is very well defined and integrated. I temporarily ruled out "low-quality implementation" weapons for different reasons.

 

I never said I'm not interested in implementing GUV and 66 for example; it was scheduled for more screening in next several days after we tune up smoke containers and perform some other tests concerning ASP operation in A-A mode.

 

I cant promise you anything at the moment, but we will dedicate more time to currently disabled weapons /as we planned/, and you can rest assure we will do our best to enable weapons that satisfy our requirements.

Thanks :) At least you are concerning it is good enough for me. I only want the gun pod and h 66 :D

Just because morbid curiosity rules my life: Is the GUV-8700 not the same pod as is available on the Mi-8? If so can that implementation not be reused? I know it's another third party, but I guess I don't follow if they implemented the weapon in DCS and you can make use of it or if it is their implementation and theirs alone to use. Or maybe I'm crazy and they're not the same at all.

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/products/magnificent_eight/?PAGEN_2=5

• ГУВ-8700 (GUV-8700) universal gun pod equipped in the following configurations:
  
  • 9-A-800: single AP-30 30 mm automatic grenade launcher
    
  • 9-A-624/622: single YakB-12,7 12.7 mm four barrel machine gun and two GShG-7,62 7.62 mm four-barrel machine guns
    

I am certain that Leatherneck knows how to run its development, my humble opinion in this matter is that the team should be concentrated on implementing/testing/fine tuning the 21 and its basic avionic/weapon/other systems, so it could be released with its basic set of characteristic weapons as soon as possible and later implement the exotic ones. It is really a waste of effort and time trying to code some badly documented exotic bomb that cannot be properly integrated into DCS World while work on the flight model or radar is on hold.

Bit more explanations:

 

The image you see in this thread contains weapons 3D models. That does not mean that the weapon was ever implemented properly. What you have seen in some videos were mostly external visual effects (GUV for example). That is still very far from proper implementation and integration of particular weapon into the simulated world.

 

Every weapon has it's aerodynamic, ballistic and energy features, some more complex than others. For rare weapons and for weapons that did not see wide usage it is almost impossible to find those data, making the implementation very time consuming with problematic results.

 

When I started testing all previously declared weapons, I found out that big part of it was incorrectly defined, some working wrong, and some not integrated /properly implemented/ at all. I wasted several days redefining and integrating all declared weapons; some of them were significantly improved, but I also found out that some can't be integrated at the moment. On the other side, some weapons (mostly bombs) are just a bit changed copies of original Eagle weapons - which is very well defined and integrated. I temporarily ruled out "low-quality implementation" weapons for different reasons.

 

I never said I'm not interested in implementing GUV and 66 for example; it was scheduled for more screening in next several days after we tune up smoke containers and perform some other tests concerning ASP operation in A-A mode.

 

I cant promise you anything at the moment, but we will dedicate more time to currently disabled weapons /as we planned/, and you can rest assure we will do our best to enable weapons that satisfy our requirements.

That's more like it, lets hope it will (eventually) change to;

"This patch will enable all previously disabled weapons"

I am certain that Leatherneck knows how to run its development, my humble opinion in this matter is that the team should be concentrated on implementing/testing/fine tuning the 21 and its basic avionic/weapon/other systems, so it could be released with its basic set of characteristic weapons as soon as possible and later implement the exotic ones. It is really a waste of effort and time trying to code some badly documented exotic bomb that cannot be properly integrated into DCS World while work on the flight model or radar is on hold.

I don't think anyone insinuated they don't. People saw a picture with a lot of weapons in it and a smaller list of weapons available/to be available and were curious. Not that they have to explain themselves to us if they don't want, but people are anxious for the module and are probably on some level curious of why and why not those things will/won't be included.

Hmm, and how about FAB-100 on MERs? I'm just asking in case you missed it.

Bit more explanations:

 

The image you see in this thread contains weapons 3D models. That does not mean that the weapon was ever implemented properly. What you have seen in some videos were mostly external visual effects (GUV for example). That is still very far from proper implementation and integration of particular weapon into the simulated world.

 

Every weapon has it's aerodynamic, ballistic and energy features, some more complex than others. For rare weapons and for weapons that did not see wide usage it is almost impossible to find those data, making the implementation very time consuming with problematic results.

 

When I started testing all previously declared weapons, I found out that big part of it was incorrectly defined, some working wrong, and some not integrated /properly implemented/ at all. I wasted several days redefining and integrating all declared weapons; some of them were significantly improved, but I also found out that some can't be integrated at the moment. On the other side, some weapons (mostly bombs) are just a bit changed copies of original Eagle weapons - which is very well defined and integrated. I temporarily ruled out "low-quality implementation" weapons for different reasons.

 

I never said I'm not interested in implementing GUV and 66 for example; it was scheduled for more screening in next several days after we tune up smoke containers and perform some other tests concerning ASP operation in A-A mode.

 

I cant promise you anything at the moment, but we will dedicate more time to currently disabled weapons /as we planned/, and you can rest assure we will do our best to enable weapons that satisfy our requirements.

Thanks Dolphin! That clears things up considerably. If implementing a certain weapon holds up the MiG's development, then I completely understand if it is left out of the release version. If at a later date you decide that a disabled weapon can then be implemented and added to the MiG, that is great.

Just because morbid curiosity rules my life: Is the GUV-8700 not the same pod as is available on the Mi-8? If so can that implementation not be reused? I know it's another third party, but I guess I don't follow if they implemented the weapon in DCS and you can make use of it or if it is their implementation and theirs alone to use. Or maybe I'm crazy and they're not the same at all.

 

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/products/magnificent_eight/?PAGEN_2=5

 

• ГУВ-8700 (GUV-8700) universal gun pod equipped in the following configurations:
  
  • 9-A-800: single AP-30 30 mm automatic grenade launcher
    
  • 9-A-624/622: single YakB-12,7 12.7 mm four barrel machine gun and two GShG-7,62 7.62 mm four-barrel machine guns
    

   

They are the same system I believe, but if I had to guess what the issue is, I'd imagine it's that the drag is much more a factor with the MiG than a slow flying helicopter. The team would need to know how a big pod like that affects the MiG in flight, and without those numbers the flight model wouldn't be realistic. This is just a guess though.

They are the same system I believe, but if I had to guess what the issue is, I'd imagine it's that the drag is much more a factor with the MiG than a slow flying helicopter. The team would need to know how a big pod like that affects the MiG in flight, and without those numbers the flight model wouldn't be realistic. This is just a guess though.

That might make sense. :)

I was guessing, "we know a bunch of characteristics about the pod, so the game will make the aircraft behave properly when it is attached", based on the comment about the ones already existing in DCS World only needing a little touch up. But maybe it is more the case that the devs need to know the affects on the specific aircraft. Again, not really important/soul crushing to me if it is/isn't there. Just morbid curiosity.

Do we get napalm bombs or a recce pod .

Be nice if the recce pod could influence the fog or war some ..... the more recce runs blue does , the more it sees on the F10 map . Im aski a lot though .

Thank you, Dolphin!

I admit I'm also a bit sad since the gun pod and the KH-66 were weapons I was looking forward to very much.

But yeah, maybe when the Mig is released and you got time later... :)

OK, it's late, I'm still awake, just finished few things with Mike /Rudel/.

I have few minutes for update - not a fancy one /I have low-end PC, no fancy screens.../.

In latest set of weapons tests, Roland and I implemented 3 pods available for RU planes: GUV-7800 G, GUV-7800 M and UPK-23-250. Note that I have never saw 21Bis with any of these.

Most integrated weapon is UPK-23-250. Really impressive thing and closest to MiG-21Bis weapon system. I really recommend that one instead of 7800M. It has 2xGsh 23mm guns /which is the same gun 21 have/ and can pack serious punch. Besides, it fits the ASP natively. Pure Eagle weapon, no tweaks or "guessed" stuff. UPK will come with 21 for sure, well see about other things /more integration and tests needed... time?/.

I have no screens at the moment, sorry. Mike might fire few rounds for you if he has some time tomorrow.

As for the Kh-66, it's done also. You will have difficulties with this weapon, although it is a fun and a challenge to use it. Ill tell you just one thing that will create a lot of problems: asymmetric load after one missile is fired. Asymmetric load for heavy payload is not allowed on 21. However, once you get in the cockpit it will be your problem. At the moment it is ours. You'll have to discover other problems and realize why weapon development went the other way.

We only need to integrate new Kh control box although it could be used even without it.

(Note: screens here are 3 days old, that's all I have at the moment.)

Woohoo! Thanks Dolphin really great status update. I'll probably end up using the UPK-23-250 as you suggested when I'm mounting an extra gun for a ground attack. Thanks for those screenshots as well.:thumbup:

OK, it's late, I'm still awake, just finished few things with Mike /Rudel/.

I have few minutes for update - not a fancy one /I have low-end PC, no fancy screens.../.

 

In latest set of weapons tests, Roland and I implemented 3 pods available for RU planes: GUV-7800 G, GUV-7800 M and UPK-23-250. Note that I have never saw 21Bis with any of these.

 

Most integrated weapon is UPK-23-250. Really impressive thing and closest to MiG-21Bis weapon system. I really recommend that one instead of 7800M. It has 2xGsh 23mm guns /which is the same gun 21 have/ and can pack serious punch. Besides, it fits the ASP natively. Pure Eagle weapon, no tweaks or "guessed" stuff. UPK will come with 21 for sure, well see about other things /more integration and tests needed... time?/.

 

I have no screens at the moment, sorry. Mike might fire few rounds for you if he has some time tomorrow.

 

As for the Kh-66, it's done also. You will have difficulties with this weapon, although it is a fun and a challenge to use it. Ill tell you just one thing that will create a lot of problems: asymmetric load after one missile is fired. Asymmetric load for heavy payload is not allowed on 21. However, once you get in the cockpit it will be your problem. At the moment it is ours. You'll have to discover other problems and realize why weapon development went the other way.

 

We only need to integrate new Kh control box although it could be used even without it.

 

(Note: screens here are 3 days old, that's all I have at the moment.)

:beer: Great. lol How bad can it be ? Su-25T missing 500lb bomb ? :pilotfly:

(Note: screens here are 3 days old, that's all I have at the moment.)

Don't worry, it's still great, considering that the only other pictures are weeks, if not months old. This is looking really promising, way to go guys!

Wow nice :)

Thanks for the update, top work guys :thumbup:

Nice...thanks

Many thanks, Dolphin!

We're really happy with any updates, and what you've just shown us is much much better. :)

@Dolphin887: I know that you are probably right that it sounds more fun than it is, but I am still looking forward very much to that huge sense of accomplishment once I master this weapon. The screens look awesome as well!