Jump to content

Sideburns

Members
  • Posts

    255
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Sideburns

  1. If the early radar guided missiles are modelled properly their p(k) will be pretty bad, so hopefully the effect won't be too great if people use the right tactics to counter. The earlier aim7 variants are still pretty flaky on the f14.
  2. Check out your own link to dcs.silver.ru, particularly the low speed section. Doesn't it seem odd to you, and contrary to the evidence in this thread and reviews by test pilots, that the MiG21 has an increase in sustained turn rate whereas other jets lose it in this low speed range? This is also in fairly accessible speed range and not some strange, rarely encountered edge case either. If a dogfight ends up in a grovelling 2c or 1c you could likely end up in these speed ranges. You people seem to pick weird flight models to die defending / get attached too. If you consider these extrapolations a bunch of squiggles, and don't consider flight manuals as reliable data then it is just as well you are not the one reviewing the data and making decisions on the flight model. There's been some good evidence presented here which afaik has been under review by the M3 team. Feelings don't come into it, at least not for putting the argument together for the MiG21's low speed FM to be reviewed. If you've got data to support the MiG21 having this exceptional low speed handling feel free to present it, or perhaps provide your own extrapolation of how you think the line should go? At the moment the evidence and reasonable extrapolations suggests the MiG21 is significantly overperforming at low speeds. @Hiromachiany update on the FM review, last official response on this issue was some time ago.
  3. I assume you mean how to use the Dora external tank? You might find Chuck's guide useful "Fuel Gauge Indication Selector Left: Vorn = Front Middle: No Tank Selected Right: Hinten = Rear Note: If an external drop tank is installed, selector should be set to “HINTEN” (Rear) since drop tanks feed into the rear tank." https://www.mudspike.com/wp-content/uploads/guides/DCS FW-190D-9 Guide.pdf
  4. PD search - Useful for absolute maximum long range searches, but trickier for SA and results not visible to pilot. RWS - Initial, potential for large search volume SA build, particularly in absence of AWACS. TWS - Detailed picture and aim54 deployment.
  5. Seconded, would be nice to see some teaser shots. I recall it was delayed due to the SC release about a year ago?
  6. Cool, I would not have guessed the MiG21Bis had this capability.
  7. Lots of good points so far. When you're defensive you're leading the dance so to speak. You still have a lot of control over what is going on. Change plane, change direction, change speed, create position and gun tracking problems for your foe. The Viper tends to be better above 10k ft, so high energy spiral climbs can work well as they do in the F15. But this can be tricky to do if missiles are involved. Also as before practice practice practice, first against AI (despite their simplified flight models) and once you're good there move onto one of the dogfight servers.
  8. Just doing some testing for a suspected bug and noticed a potential other bug related to this. It became apparent with radar off or standby and no input to the TDC range that the range indicator still operated as if the radar was on for a2g radar ranging. I'm guessing this is not correct behaviour? Or does the MiG21 do some radalt and depression angle to slant distance calculation? (though fairly sure the radalt was off as well in the testing I was doing).
  9. Do you have any sources for your RP22 doppler filter information? Interested as I find the "techniques" of radar fascinating as a physics grad, I found a few sources on the Rp22, mostly East German and Polish operations manuals with some low level details. Also, on RCS (figures from version 2.5)
  10. If you've got some evidence / information on the MiG21 radar I'd recommend adding it to the bug thread I'd also recommend reading some of the discussion there on the arguments for and against a range adjustment. I don't think anyone is suggesting the MiG21 shouldn't be able to shoot people in the face with the R3R, but the range seems too generous atm for that type and era of radar.
  11. Lets be clear here indeed: 1) Comment on the new pylon ordinance selection feature as well as the various Mig21 and Viggen bugs not being fixed to help keep people informed and aware of the current situation. 2) Respond on how it was funny when the SPS feature was introduced some MiG21 pilots using landing flaps with AB during slow speed dogfights were caught unaware of this change and suffered. 3) Cue you getting involved to try to initially claim this is impossible "Even pulling to within a hair's breadth of a stall in AB at sea level will leave you too fast for the flaps to come down far enough to trip the SPS microswitches"*. Implying I don't fly the MiG21 or know what I'm talking about etc. Continued discussion from you mistakenly thinking I'm making out the SPS landing flap situation is an advantage? Some Viggen flap use comparison based on a discussion I vaguely recall. Once more trying to accuse bias, except I've submitted and supported bugs for blue and red planes to fix both advantageous and disadvantageous situations, fly all sides etc. * The landing flaps are practically fully down at about 360-380kph. It is entirely possible for people to get into this speed range during a dogfight particularly in scissors / one circle or at the top of the energy egg. Whether or not they are an advantage is debatable and I would personally avoid flaps use during dogfighting in most jets, unless they are automatic. I think you're the one hung up on this. Try not to take every comment involving the MiG21 so personally and also reading posts twice would probably help to avoid misunderstandings. The reason I'm not on DCS/CW infrequently is because I have other hobbies and groups I fly with, I'd recommend you also try some hobbies outside of DCS.
  12. Ahh, don't let the MiG / RedFOR Mafia lead you astray. The AJ in AJ37 stands for Attack - Jakt - Strike fighter, the AJ37 has a secondary fighter role. Appreciate the server views the AJS37's role differently though as the server was primarily made on the MiG21 vs F5e battle. Some interesting comments from a Viggen pilot to consider: "In air-to-air combat the engine, RM8A, was more than likely to end up in engine stall if you even touched the throttle at some high AoA or altitudes. You could not pull more than 6 G and you had no audio warnings while at the same time the alpha meter and G meter were located ridiculously far away from each other in cockpit. You had to be aware of transonic speeds due to the steering system and so on... So, the AJS was less than a good airplane at air-to-air combat. But if you were one of the rare old dogs who had done nothing more than been flying the AJS viggen for some twenty years, you could use the lower weight of the aircraft to your benefit. The AJS actually accelerated better than the JA at most altitudes and a good pilot could outturn the JA37. The sensitive steering system also makes it my choice in low level flying, where the AJS really excelled. Still, it had no gun... In air-to-air I would pick the JA37 at any time." If you check out the turn rates for the MiG21, F5e and Viggen, well, the Viggen has some moves https://dcs.silver.ru/1,9,74,turnrate It might surprise you to know people do fight at stall speeds or below, and I observed a few that attempted deploying landings flaps (yes I was close enough to see that) with AB to suffer a surprise around the time of the SPS change. This is the difference between studying theory and doing practicals. Also no need to claim an advantage in this situation, aircraft naturally have them in real life and we must work with and against them. Unfortunately we arrive at situations in DCS were bugs or misinterpretations of the aircraft can result in an unrealistic advantage a'la the Viggen speed bug, MiG21 radar bugs etc. The bugs are well documented as you are aware having been involved in many of the discussions and even claiming erroneously that the MiG21 radar range was legitimate as it had "always been that way" and "it was due to the pulse doppler radar". Hopefully we will still be alive by the time both Viggen and MiG21 bugs are addressed.
  13. The negative drag issue has been improved but not gone yet, I think they only ever claimed it was an initial adjustment not a fix. Hopeful the big Oct update for Viggen will include proper fixes for the speed bug. As for the MiG21 the SPS fix was good, had suspected a few were dogfighting with landing flaps and AB and saw a few dropping out of the sky when it was fixed a few months ago. The non flaps/AB related, general FM low speed handling overperformance has been reported for over a year now. If M3 are fixing things in the background I would be grateful to know what these things are, latest OB updates have been fairly sparse for the MiG21.
  14. Been using a custom "CMDS_ALE47.lua" for F16 countermeasures since release, given the absence of a reasonable way of setting this in game provided by ED. Now I can't join servers due to having made legitimate value changes to this file and the IC check. Also bug hunting and submitting detailed bug reports used to be a lot easier when files weren't encrypted. Perhaps a rethink of anti-cheat approach? As mentioned by others before it feels like this will result in IC being disabled.
  15. Well HB appear to be on the Viggen and did adjust the drag situation recently, the MiG21 however I will concede doesn't appear to be getting much attention.
  16. Latest OB update today "Added a new feature into the payloads panel in the mission editor: Loadout per pylon restriction. The main goal for this feature is to give mission designers more tools to control their mission environment in multiplayer. It will allow the ability to restrict any weapon or other store for a specific pylon on the MP aircraft slot. Feature is WIP and we will adjust and add more functionality to it." Unfortunately doesn't appear to be a MiG21 low speed handling or Viggen speed bug fix yet though.
  17. https://web.archive.org/web/20151025180109/http://www.leatherneck-sim.com/f14 "The F-14 will ship with a completely new DCS Theatre, perfectly suited for the F-14 and Naval Operations of the era. This new theatre will be available separately as well, and will be a great addition to the current fleet of available DCS Modules." So they don't mention GIUK specifically but at the time, 2015, it was strongly rumoured that this was likely to be the North Atlantic, GIUK gap or North Sea area. I don't disagree the Baltics would be more appropriate for the Viggen, and could possibly have been the intentions of this very early theatre announcement. As before note that this theatre pledge was dropped shortly after the initial announcements and before pre-orders were taken, so I don't consider HB beholden to this pledge. I wonder if @Cobra847or a member of the team would be willing to shed light on what the plans were at the time, if not no worries And yes, I'm aware the GIUK and North Sea are separate areas strictly speaking, regardless the point being I would still love the challenge of carrier operations in these regions.
  18. I believe a GIUK map was mentioned very very early in the HB F14 plans, I think it would have worked quite well with the Viggen, F14 and also Sea Harrier modules intended. But to their credit HB did remove this prior to pre-orders (i.e. it was clear we were getting the carrier and F14 variants only) and a dominant part of the GIUK fighting, alongside defending the fleet and surface warfare, would be anti-submarine which of course is not currently well represented currently in DCS. Also suspect they came to the same conclusions w.r.t what the DCS engine could handle and that a GIUK was perhaps too much at the time. Despite this, would really like the challenge of the North Sea's weather and sea states. There are some crazy stories from Sharkey Ward's Sea Harrier book on getting the Sea Harrier operational in the North Sea and the adverse conditions they would fly in.
  19. Also the MiG21 low speed flight model atm for human players is quite generous and has been for some time. Anyway, tips for the F5 (apologies for overlap with existing tips but would like to emphasise them): Speed is life, try to stay above 350 knots and ideally above 400 knots. Turn gently, with the mild LERX like wing on the F5 and small engines it can bleed speed rapidly. I generally leave flaps on auto during turning for best turn performance, but bringing the flaps in can be useful to help regain speed quicker. The gun has a low rate of fire, so you need to practice getting a good track on the target If using missiles, learn to uncage and lead to make them more likely to hit. Gar8 / aim9b is pretty trash but the aim9p and p5 are quite usable.
  20. Yep, but as per the earlier comment you can recalibrate the base to remove this (using the Virpil software)
  21. Yep, thankfully I went straight to centreless cams with the heavier springs and love it.
  22. Have just switched to a Virpil Warbrd base, from a TM Warthog base, tt is a lot nicer to use mostly due to the smoother centre but also you can customise spring force and cams. The spare cams it comes with can remove the centre "dent" which is quite liberating for fine flying. They also have a B-grade store on ebay that can be a handy way of finding stock. Also, using the standard TM stick it is heavier than Virpil offerings so likely to make things off centre. But nothing a calibration can't fix. The TM stick does feel odd with the softer spring that are fitted as standard.
  23. No need to question Bonercat's skills, imply he is ignorant or he's only interested in airquake to try and make a point. I'm pretty sure he is aware of the RWR spike and radar range issues among other non fm bugs. Speaking of ignorant, you might want to check out this mature bug thread on low speed handling. It isn't just the wing rock. I would also recommend anyone liking your post to read the same. What is your opinion of this situation? Do you still endorse the flight model as "fine"? "So, at 0.347M time of the turn has to be 37.5 sec = 9,6°/sec. We have in DCS now 12,9 sec. As I said before - the reason of this fact is over performed G-load!"
  24. While the MiG21 is enjoyable, it is not without some significant and in some cases long standing bugs. I would recommend checking the bugs section for any of the module developers you are interested in, and also any self hosted bug trackers they have, to come to your own conclusion of if these are bugs you are content to live with.
×
×
  • Create New...