MiG-19P Farmer "B" Status

Haven't been flying often in DCS these days due to a lack of time. But when I flew a lot, HE warheads almost always outperformed HEAT or AP ones against armor unfortunately. While difficult compared to likes of S-8, I could get kills against lightly armoured targets like IFVs and self propelled artillery in MiG-21 and L-39. Also fun to haul a zillion S-5s in Su-25 every now and then but with availability of better options in Frogfoot that was a rarity.

Still, 32 rockets are somewhat better than what MiG-15 has to offer for killing stuff on the ground, even though I find its 37mm to be more reliable to kill ground targets with compared to S-5 in DCS.

One of the things that will make MiG-19 interesting is that, it will force us to make every shot count. Rockets or bombs? Not very-many. Guns? Fairly low ammo count. Missiles? Just a couple. This will add to the challenge in my opinion.

One of the things that will make MiG-19 interesting is that, it will force us to make every shot count. Rockets or bombs? Not very-many. Guns? Fairly low ammo count. Missiles? Just a couple. This will add to the challenge in my opinion.

Говорит правда! This man speaks truth. Glorious sniper pilot of Soviet union will skillfully pick off imperialist sky pirate unlike capitalist amateurs spraying their load all over sky praying to false God for hit. :pilotfly:

Btw, S-5 wasn't so weak like in DCS, S-5K anti-armour variant was able knock out T-55 like tank, was able pierce about 150 mm of steel, modernized S-5K1 about 170 mm of steel.

Can you give a source? I remember reading the S-5K state trial reports and it specifically stated that effectiveness against a BTR was decent at best, depending on angle.

Piercing 150mm of heat-treated rolled steel is an entirely different matter

Any chance we may see this beautiful bird tomorrow?

I'm hoping as well. :)

Can you give a source? I remember reading the S-5K state trial reports and it specifically stated that effectiveness against a BTR was decent at best, depending on angle.

 

Piercing 150mm of heat-treated rolled steel is an entirely different matter

An 88mm diameter Panzerschreck could go through more than 200mms of RHA, so it may not be implausible for a more modern HEAT warhead of 55mm diameter piercing 150mm at a perpendicular impact.

Can you give a source? I remember reading the S-5K state trial reports and it specifically stated that effectiveness against a BTR was decent at best, depending on angle.

 

 

 

Piercing 150mm of heat-treated rolled steel is an entirely different matter

This is typical data from many russian sources (books, arms catalouges etc), values are against RHA. Example here:

http://www.russianarms.ru/forum/index.php/topic,4571.0.html?PHPSESSID=1s0pkbvs1u17f0orn7cqucdr60

T-55 had armour mostly between 30-160 mm RHA, and thickest in turret front 200 mm, so was penetrable for those rockets. Of course one hit wasn't able destroy tank, but good aimed salvo didn't had this problem. Pakistan lost lot of chinese T-55 copies from those FFAR's, which had use on Indian Su-7's.

IIRC the S-5K can penetrate ~130mm of rolled homogeneous armour, but take anything I spout with a pinch of salt! I have no clue what variant of the S-5 the MiG-19 used however, part of the reason I fly aircraft in DCS is to learn more about them.

If it's launched down from the air I imagine a rocket or a a salvo could at least occasionally penetrate the thinner upper armour of most tanks of the time, if it hit that is.

Говорит правда! This man speaks truth. Glorious sniper pilot of Soviet union will skillfully pick off imperialist sky pirate unlike capitalist amateurs spraying their load all over sky praying to false God for hit. :pilotfly:

DA! DO NOT NEED YOUR AM OF RAM. IF RAM IS UP TOO EARLY IN AM IS TIRED AND NOT ACCURATE! DO NOT NEED LASER GUIDED BOMB. IF TARGET NEAR DANCE CLUB, MIGHT GET CONFUSED. HOWEVER, THAT MEAN KIDS WILL NOT BE REVVING CARS AND MAKING NOISE IN AM, MAYBE RAM GET SLEEP THEN?

FIGHTER. IS. FINE. DO NOT NEED YOUR PICK OF TINNY RAIL OR LIGHT NING POD!

Seriously, though, I await numerous "Oh what the hell!?" moments in which my crappy early AIM-9 clones don't connect.

Those 57mm were initially designed as air-to-air weapon.

The US Mk-4 Mighty Mouse was initially developed to shoot down Soviet bombers.

The use of aerial rockets to shoot down bombers was a German invention in WWII, that like many others came too late to make a dent in the US bomber raids. Still any B-17 hit by a rocket was a loss, unlike the many B-17s that came home after being chewed out by 20 mm guns. Of course the next step after the unguided free flying rocket was the guided one. That is why the prototype AIM-9 Sidewinder used the body of a FFAR (A Zuni rocket).

Seriously, though, I await numerous "Oh what the hell!?" moments in which my crappy early AIM-9 clones don't connect.

Normal... :thumbup:

Normal... :thumbup:

.....

Seriously, though, I await numerous "Oh what the hell!?" moments in which my crappy early AIM-9 clones don't connect.

Indeed, awaiting the "onslaught". ;)

Are IFF switches going to be implemented? Of course it cant be simulated for real, but we can read the switch position in a mission and simulate 1960 Gary Powers situation when two MiGs were shot down by friendly fire because they forgot to enter new IFF code in a hurry.

Are IFF switches going to be implemented? Of course it cant be simulated for real, but we can read the switch position in a mission and simulate 1960 Gary Powers situation when two MiGs were shot down by friendly fire because they forgot to enter new IFF code in a hurry.

I like your thinking but I am afraid you cannot do that the way you want it to work. Friend or foe recognition in DCS is faction based. You are either team blue or red. So, there is no way you can simulate that unless you would place a SAM site by a hostile faction. And to my knowledge there is nothing RAZBAM can do about the ED game logic...

Apparently there are some complaints about the radar rendition in the last WIP video. With some valid points to be honest.

So, at release, are there chances that the radar modeling will be more convincing ?

The use of aerial rockets to shoot down bombers was a German invention in WWII

A little tidbit, the first use of unguided rockets as air-to-air weapons was in the Soviet Union! The RS-82 was regularly used from Khalkin Gol up to early 1942, mainly by what quickly became low-performance aircraft in the I-16, I-15 and I-153 families. Salvos of rockets set to explode in the air were fired at enemy groups, but the effectiveness of this tactic was rather limited.

I like your thinking but I am afraid you cannot do that the way you want it to work. Friend or foe recognition in DCS is faction based. You are either team blue or red. So, there is no way you can simulate that unless you would place a SAM site by a hostile faction. And to my knowledge there is nothing RAZBAM can do about the ED game logic...

No need for anything fancy. Always can place an inactive hostile battery to simulate a friendly battery reacting to wrong IFF.

Indeed, awaiting the "onslaught". ;)

MiG-19P AAM employment.

Apparently there are some complaints about the radar rendition in the last WIP video. With some valid points to be honest.

So, at release, are there chances that the radar modeling will be more convincing ?

You just asked if a WiP product will undergo further revision......'

yeah. That's safe to assume. Btw Heatblur, the community's current darling apparently, had inaccurate HUD updates, the wrong cockpit, and lets not forget the untextured Chromecat.

Yes. Unreleased, or dare I say recently released products tend to be adjusted and/or updated as work is finalised.

Apparently there are some complaints about the radar rendition in the last WIP video. With some valid points to be honest.

So, at release, are there chances that the radar modeling will be more convincing ?

The only question is about the ground clutter rendition, which is at this time WiP and I do agree quite lacking.

We are improving that and it will be released with a better way to show ground clutter.

You just asked if a WiP product will undergo further revision......'

The way I asked that question is for people out there thinking the feature was considered complete for release.

Basically because of the imminent release time frame, people tend to think that everything showed now in the media is likely to be exactly how it will look in the final product, until the contrary is officially specified :

The only question is about the ground clutter rendition, which is at this time WiP and I do agree quite lacking.

 

We are improving that and it will be released with a better way to show ground clutter.

The way I asked that question is for people out there thinking the feature was considered complete for release.

Basically because of the imminent release time frame, people tend to think that everything showed now in the media is likely to be exactly how it will look in the final product, until the contrary is officially specified :

Looks like a misunderstanding between ED and Razbam or something. It was stated that the MiG wil be released this month as a final product(read no further improvement, what you see in the video is final). That scared many people me including.

The only question is about the ground clutter rendition, which is at this time WiP and I do agree quite lacking.

 

We are improving that and it will be released with a better way to show ground clutter.

And general continuous output of information on the screen instead of update with each new sweep. Best wishes guys, hope you'll succeed.

As a sidenote. Air-Air rockets scored a few victories over Vietnam. Vietnamese used UB-16 pods with S-5 rockets. When the R-3 was introduced some pilots were skeptical about it and still used the UB-16 pods.

Do we get S-5 rockets with different warheads? Or are they all HE?

I like your thinking but I am afraid you cannot do that the way you want it to work. Friend or foe recognition in DCS is faction based. You are either team blue or red. So, there is no way you can simulate that unless you would place a SAM site by a hostile faction. And to my knowledge there is nothing RAZBAM can do about the ED game logic...

Well technically they could do full-fledged IFF for MiG-19 v MiG-19 situations. However it would be limited to Razbam only - for anything else it would of course follow the default logic, unless speifically told to follow such hypothetical new code.