** DCS: AJS-37 WIP Pre-Release Manual Released! **

That would be strange AOA is always a matter of difference between the airflow and the wing. As such, it has very little to do with the horizon...?

Hi,

 

I think there is a mistake in page 99, in the description of the HUD elements:

 

 

Angle of attack is the difference between the flight path and the cross, perpendicular to the horizon, regardless the aircraft rolling angle, I marked the real angle of attack with red pen - A'

 

Regards!

That image is comes straight from the real manual for the aircraft, so I doubt it's wrong.

Two possible formatting issues on page 240:

Should it read(?):

4. If needed, ignite afterburner.

Check:

a. Zone indicator = desired a erburner zone.

b. Exhaust nozzle indicator = desired zone achieved.

c. Pressure ratio

d. Zone 2 < +15°C > 1.9 > +15°C > 1.8

e. Zone 3 = Maximum power

Should it read(?):

6. Rotate with the ight path vector when the time line reaches the markers.

a. Set flight path vector to:

1. The horizon line when not using the a er burner
   
2. To about the height of the outer pillars (about 3° above the horizon) when using the afterburner.
   

-Nick

Angle of attack is the difference between the flight path and the cross, perpendicular to the horizon, regardless the aircraft rolling angle, I marked the real angle of attack with red pen - A'

AoA is the angle between the chord of the wing and the relative airflow. Horizon has nothing to do with it.

Hi,

 

I think there is a mistake in page 99, in the description of the HUD elements:

 

 

Angle of attack is the difference between the flight path and the cross, perpendicular to the horizon, regardless the aircraft rolling angle, I marked the real angle of attack with red pen - A'

 

Regards!

I think your version and their version, as shown in the manual, is the same thing, if you look at the end points of the red lines.

AoA is always measured from the chord of the wing to the surrounding air. The manual is correct.

Consider a MiG-21 hauling back on the stick in a 70-degree bank while maintaining altitude. The nose is pointing 20 degrees off of the TVV, but is level with the horizon. The AoA in that case is clearly 20 degrees, not 0.

Yeah yeah, you were all right, I just had a brain fart :poster_oops:

Regards!

A general question: will everything that's described in the manual, be implemented ingame?

Since it is the game manual, I do suspect it will, or there will be a riot.

Well, the A-10C has a couple of items that are described but not modeled.

A general question: will everything that's described in the manual, be implemented ingame?

Any features in particular you are wondering about?

I assume that the switches or indicators labeled with the comment "No function" are not simulated in this module (like the IFF transponder indicator, p. 42) and everything else should be in the game.

Any features in particular you are wondering about?

I read the part about the autopilot, where in certain circumstances you can change course by moving the hat switch on the stick, if I read it right. That's when I thought: will all of this be implemented? Because if not: than the manual gives a lot of info, but maybe not necessarily about the AJS37 ingame.

I read the part about the autopilot, where in certain circumstances you can change course by moving the hat switch on the stick, if I read it right. That's when I thought: will all of this be implemented? Because if not: than the manual gives a lot of info, but maybe not necessarily about the AJS37 ingame.

I see no reason why a function like that would not be included. It doesn't seem like something that would be terribly hard to program compared to a lot of the other a lot more complicated functionality of the AJS 37. :P

If they take the time to put it in the manual it will definitely be simulated in DCS, they have no reason to include information that doesn't apply to the sim, that would be pointless work. :-)

I read the part about the autopilot, where in certain circumstances you can change course by moving the hat switch on the stick, if I read it right. That's when I thought: will all of this be implemented? Because if not: than the manual gives a lot of info, but maybe not necessarily about the AJS37 ingame.

Mirage has similar autopilot features as well and i use it god damn 24/7 :D, seriously its one of the

great mirage features: a capable autopilot.

So It better is implemented, but honestly I expect nothing else then that from LNS ! :D

Never underestimate DCS systems modeling.

I read the real F-5 manual and found the various functions of the engine fuel control fascinating. I remember thinking "too bad that's probably not modeled in game, you wouldn't even notice unless you knew what to look for..."

Sure enough when I got in game the gauges all interacted exactly as described in the manual. For instance, the engine nozzles will adjust themselves to maintain a specific EGT at full military power. If you look really closely you can see that's exactly what happens.

Little details like this never cease to amaze me.

The Viggen is still missing the RB-75T with the heavy warhead.

Page: 323 Third Paragraph

"Upon release, the missile will descend to 10 meters altitude and will fly towards straight ahead"

"fly towards straight ahead" don't feel right shouldn't it be "fly straight ahead" ?

The Viggen is still missing the RB-75T with the heavy warhead.

This may be it ^

Mirage has similar autopilot features as well and i use it god damn 24/7 :D, seriously its one of the

great mirage features: a capable autopilot.

 

So It better is implemented, but honestly I expect nothing else then that from LNS ! :D

I read the manual for a third time and if these autopilot controls are modeled, flying through mountains using the altitude autopilot and steering with trim-hat while navigating with the terrain avoidance radar-mode will be like a very dangerous mini-game! :lol:

Well, the manual is clear when it marks out items that

are not implemented on i.e. panels. It makes me assume that

otherwise described things are implemented. Or?

Well, the manual is clear when it marks out items that

are not implemented on i.e. panels. It makes me assume that

otherwise described things are implemented. Or?

Yes we should probably assume that all listed functions that aren't labeled with "No function", "Not modeled", or anything else implying that a feature isn't going to be simulated, will be functional in DCS as they either have shown image examples of what it will be like to see/do these things in the sim, or they've shown what it will look like or be like to perform these tasks.

So yes, I would expect these things to be in...this might be one of the most realistic modules in the sim once its cleared of bugs :joystick:

Im not sure =P.

 

Ive not seen anything pointing toward the RB 75T being Green.

 

As has already been Discussed Green was the Code For inert weapons in Swedish service i dont know if they would have a Live weapon colored green (Especially since there was a Green Inert Maverick already).

 

And the RB 75 was White (as its based on a AGM-65A).

 

Maby Goblin or someone else knows more but i just feel like it does not make a whole lot of sense for the RB 75T to be Green

(seeing as if i remember correctly it still uses the AGM-65A body of the RB 75 which is white etc).

 

Thought that missile on the Picture is a bit confusing on the Color Codes.

 

Since the Green indicates Inert but The Yellow Indicates it has a Live Explosive warhead so its confusing =P.

"Olive drab" green has never indicated inert as far as i know. An olive drab color is solely used for camouflage and what you should be looking at is the yellow band that identifies it as a live weapon, just like the pansarskott (AT4) being green and black with a coloured band that signifies it's status as a training weapon (blue) or a live weapon (yellow). Source: I did my repmånad just two months ago and stuff like this is apparently important to remember. :D

Im not sure =P.

 

Ive not seen anything pointing toward the RB 75T being Green.

 

As has already been Discussed Green was the Code For inert weapons in Swedish service i dont know if they would have a Live weapon colored green (Especially since there was a Green Inert Maverick already).

 

And the RB 75 was White (as its based on a AGM-65A).

 

Maby Goblin or someone else knows more but i just feel like it does not make a whole lot of sense for the RB 75T to be Green

(seeing as if i remember correctly it still uses the AGM-65A body of the RB 75 which is white etc).

 

Thought that missile on the Picture is a bit confusing on the Color Codes.

 

Since the Green indicates Inert but The Yellow Indicates it has a Live Explosive warhead so its confusing =P.

Good point. The colors are definitely conflicting with each other. :P

...Did you see the pic with the BK-90s tho? ^^

Reading the manual I guess it will take me a year or so tot fully understand this aircraft: really a study-sim for me :-)