michaff

Thanks for your input, i`ll try out. I didn`t know the rectangle is still adjustable after locking on. I always canceld the lock on and try again. It seems to me you have to use a way different engage tactic using this guided weapons. Only one carefully prepared run pointing exactly on target so only few adjustable inputs are necessary. Then dropping the whole load and get out. At least maybe these weapons were initatly designed for attacking large structures like a bridge or something like as you mentioned and not for small moveable targets. I read about sorties against mountain caves in the russian - afghan war. but once again back to the binocular: for target-identification and navigational use, okay. But I still can`t imagine in real life a pilot during a attack run in one hand binocular, other one on stick placing the rectangle exact. But maybe in RL Su-25a never attacked such small targets using that weapon... again, thx for your input regards

Hi guys, I`m just preparing for the cold warrior campaign using some custom made missions. Today i flew some runs using guided missiles. But it seems quite impossible to me placing the rectangle exactly on target ( tank, bunker) when using the maximum firing range to stay as long as possible out of enemy fire. The missiles always hit in a circle about 20m in diameter around the target, but never exactly on it. Though there are no optical systems like Shkavl you have to rely on your own eyes - but as I said: at a distance of 7km a tank is a very very small dot and the moving increment of the rectangle is far not fine enough. By the way: if the tank doesn`t stand on a yellow summer field including sun shining at high noon it`s really difficult spotting it at all from above. I know, i could use the zoom-in mode, but this is kind not realistic to me. Using labels as well. How do you identify your targets at greater distances and handle the rectangle? Any hint is welcome. By the way: how do pilots in real life handle that problem? Can`t imagine they use binoculars...:huh: regards! michaff

Mig 23/27 or Su-17/22 please! Also the Su-34 would be finde...

my guess is that it depends wether you use the NPP-MK as RMI or in conjunction with RSBN wich end is top and tail. who has the mig 21 bis flight manual, please check at page 45, bullet points a) and c) a) aircraft present azimuth from the navigatinoal bearing, to be read off the tail, wich is thickened and provided with a circle of the relative bearing pointer against the moveable scale, the pointer tail is sometimes called "azimuth end" of the pointer c) navigational bearing relative bearing (or homing beacon relative bearing, when the pointer is connected to the radio compass), to be read off the tip (thin end) of the realtive bearing pointer, against the fixed scale. Cause RSBN provides like VOR azimuth information, the "azimuth end" with the circle directs to the RSBSN station - and so it could be "misunderstand" as top. guys who already pilot the Mig 21 bis could check this out easily; once homing on a NDB, then to an RSBN station - if i am right, the needle should behave different. the number markings beside the desired course needle are used for the pattern. They indicate, when you have to fence in for downwind, base leg, an final turn. After take off at a abaout 7km off the runway treshold you fence in 90° for crosswind leg. The desired course needle is set as the runway heading, the relative bearing needle ( the one with circle and thin end) is set to the airfiel station. When you are on crosswind course, you fence in for downwind in that moment the relative bearing needle touches the "2". That way you handle the base leg and final turn using the "3" and "4" respectivly. Pattern is performed at an altitude of about 600m and TAS of about 550km/h when I remember the manual right. http://aviationglossary.com/wp-content/uploads/Aircraft-landing-chart.jpg regards michaff

thx Arrow! That explains a lot. @Esac_mirmidon: Please dont get me wrong - me intention was not pointing out that you`re talking bullshit in your previous posts. After watching the Mig-21 video, my confusion grows, cause I share your argumentation about the end of the needles too! Maybe it depends on the working mode the NPP-MK is in which end is top and tail... regards

guess you meant that video: In this video the circle-shaped end of the needle behaves like the Su-25a - it points towards your destination. I found some time ago this detailed hand-out about russian navigation-systems: http://samdimdesign.free.fr/HTML/An24/docs24/An-24RV_v2.htm at about the half of the page the topic comes to the RSBN system. Some different work modes "azimuth from" and "azimuth to" are mentioned. Maybe that woould explain the opposite behaviour of the needles in the SU-24 videos postet by Esac_mirmidon. After all it`s a quit complex topic. There are different modes the NPP-MK can be used. Unfortunatly I dont get this complete as well... regards

hello guys, has anyone news concerning the top and tail of the NPP-MK needles? I love piloting the vanilla SU-25a and would also like to understand the proper function and use of this instrument. As known in the SU-25a the needles behave opposite as the should do concerning to the Mig-21 flight manual. Sorry for of-topic in the Mig-21 forum but i did a lot of research so far but it`s hard to find any information. So @ Esac_mirmidon thx for your research! :thumbup: an additional question i have touching this instrument: When flying the Su-25a the NPP-MK guides you to every waypoint you set. The steerpoints can be locatetd everywhere - in the middle of the ocean for example - no matter if there is a NDB or not. The NPP-MK leads you to this coordinates. Is the RSBN capable of doing this in real life as well or is this just a simplification for the SU-25a? When flying the Mig-21, is it possible to set such "virtual" waypoints as well? thanks and regards! michaff

yeah, i thought this direction too. Just made a test at low graphic settings - the Su-25 runs smoothly at well...but this is no fun at all. For me it takes a quite huge influence for no "visible" difference between the 25 and the 25T in DCS World. Anyway, guess its time for some new pc hardware:book:. thx for any input regards

my specs and settings are attached - i did some powerpoint engnineering for english titles. Note, that it makes no difference what is select at cockpit resolution. Wether in high or low resolution the gameplay lags using the Su-25. Gauges and cockpit look in Su-25 and Su-25T the same to me too in any cockpit resolution setting. What makes me wonder else is that in patch 1.2.7 the Su-25T gets a guite good looking cockpit - the gauges and warning lamps are detailed as fine as in the Su-25...so why does it lag?:joystick: regards

Hey guys, guess I posted yesterday in a wrong sub-forum - maybe anyone has an idea concernig my problem: I run DCS World 1.2.7 and the SU-25 FC add on. When flying the Su-25 the gameplay lags randomly. Especially during takeoff, landing and looking around in the cockpit. When changing to the Su-25T all is fine and runs smoothly at same graphic proberties. At FC2 both planes work fine too. Could that be a matter of the 6DOF-Cockpit? I use no head trackiung system. regards

Hey guys as written in the headline my gameplay lags randomly when flying the Su25 in DCS World. I purchased the single plane at the onlineshop. I created a testmission using the Editor. When using the Su25T all is fine and runs smoothly. After changing The plane to Su25 gameplay lags sometimes. Especially during takeoff, landing and looking around in the Cockpit.I made no changes to the graphic proberties or anything else. In FC2 the 25 flys without Problems. Could that be a matter of the 6DOF Cockpit? I dont use a headtracking System. Thanks for any input.