Few small things to improve the Fulcrum combat effectiveness and realism

[Tarres]

Yes, this is that I think.

 

About the "wingspan" in gun without lock, is the selector on the top of the WCS?

 

And it´s funny that that we have the 9-13 FM, cockpit and radar... and we don´t have a izd.9-13.

 

But the most important thing is to have a "manual next WP" from my point of view.

[N22YF]

About the "wingspan" in gun without lock, is the selector on the top of the WCS?

 

Yup! Here's a MiG-29G which is labeled in English:

 

 

But the most important thing is to have a "manual next WP" from my point of view.

In my opinion, even more important than that is to have some indication of which waypoint is currently selected!

[Seaeagle]

Yes, this is that I think.

 

About the "wingspan" in gun without lock, is the selector on the top of the WCS?

 

I believe the symbology comes on in CAC modes, when the gun trigger is activated - the stick has two triggers(one for missiles and another for the gun) and are set up so that when one is pulled down(activated), the other moves up to deactivated position.

 

And it´s funny that that we have the 9-13 FM, cockpit and radar... and we don´t have a izd.9-13.

 

Well we have the 9-13S(MiG-29S) FM, cockpit(+ external model) and radar. The 9-13 is practically the same aircraft except for the radar(same as in the 9-12).

 

So you are right that introducing the 9-13 to the sim would be very easy, but I guess being so similar to the MiG-29S, it wouldn't be very attractive to most people......i.e. just a less capable MiG-29S without R-77s.

 

But the most important thing is to have a "manual next WP" from my point of view.

 

Yeah as a functional fix you mean?. IMO It would be better with a semi-modelled navigation panel(I don't think there is much hope for a fully modelled one unfortunately).

[Tarres]

Yes. Correct.

 

Maybe I am too old, but I will prefer a 80’s model.

Thanks to both.

[FoxAlfa]

Honestly my biggest issues are cue leaving the HUD, counter measures counter and PPS look-down range... but for sure others such a nav panel would be very nice to have.

[N22YF]

Honestly my biggest issues are cue leaving the HUD, counter measures counter and PPS look-down range... but for sure others such a nav panel would be very nice to have.

 

A working nav panel (something like what we already have on the Su-25) would be amazing! But even a current waypoint indication on the HUD (which Wags mentioned is coming years ago) would be significantly better than what we have now, which is nothing.

[Ironhand]

Just circling back to the earlier conversation about HPRF, MPRF, & AUTO. I’ve been wading through the Ukrainian trying to understand how it works. It seems that, when searching for the target, you select the appropriate setting on the Radar Mode switch based on whether the expected target is approaching, receding, or aspect unknown. This is OBZOR or search/scan.

 

The transition to SNP seems to occur when the target is marked either automatically or manually with the Guidance Mode switch set to either PPS or ZPS depending on aspect. I could be wrong about that but that’s where the SNP discussion kicks in (more or less). And SNP is, after all, following 1 (or 2) specified targets while observing and displaying up to 10 more.

 

The Guidance Mode switch setting seems to be a starting point for the radar. I’ve found no mention of Auto as a mode. But I get the impression that, based on range and other variables, pulse frequency is changed to fill in the missing data. I’m not clear if the change is enough to shift from HPRF to MPRF but the repetition frequencies are shifted. Again the discussion is always about HPRF and MPRF. So far there’s nothing that specifies AUTO.

Edited June 10, 2020 by Ironhand

[N22YF]

I’ve been wading through the Ukrainian trying to understand how it works..

Yeah it's hard enough to make sense of Russian technical documents, and now we've got Ukrainian! :hmm:

 

I’ve found no mention of Auto as a mode. But I get the impression that, based on range and other variables, pulse frequency is changed to fill in the missing data. I’m not clear if the change is enough to shift from HPRF to MPRF but the repetition frequencies are shifted. Again the discussion is always about HPRF and MPRF. So far there’s nothing that specifies AUTO.

 

At the bottom of page 6 (slide 61), in the list of the different settings of the RLS MODES (РЕЖИМЫ РЛС) dial, it says:

АВТ – автоматичне переключення ВЧП – СЧП

which translates to "AUTO - automatic switching HPRF - MPRF".

Regarding the variation of repetition frequencies within HPRF or MPRF, the table on slide 7 shows that HPRF uses 160-220 kHz and MPRF uses 16-30 kHz (BVR) or 21-28 kHz (WVR).

 

 

I noticed in the "automatic guidance" section it says (page 4 slide 40, rough translation):

The radiation mode (HPRF or MPRF) is determined by a one-time command "ППС" (HPRF) or "ЗПС" (MPRF) from the guidance point.

I'm thinking that this isn't referring to the СНП switch, though, since it doesn't actually mention the switch (unlike other discussions of controls). I'm thinking this is related to GCI operations? This is the only other mention I could find of ППС/ЗПС, though, aside from the РППК thing. (I think that must be a typo - if you do a Google search for "РППК" "МиГ-29", the only relevant result is that one sentence in this document.)

 

Then in the "manual guidance" section (page 4 slide 41, rough translation):

The mode of radiation of HPRF or MPRF is chosen manually by installation of the switch RLS MODES of the PUR-31 panel in position В (encounter) or Д (pursuit).

[Ironhand]

...

 

 

At the bottom of page 6 (slide 61), in the list of the different settings of the RLS MODES (РЕЖИМЫ РЛС) dial, it says:

 

which translates to "AUTO - automatic switching HPRF - MPRF"....

Yes, that's what I was referring to in my first paragraph.

 

 

I noticed in the "automatic guidance" section it says (page 4 slide 40, rough translation):

I'm thinking that this isn't referring to the СНП switch, though, since it doesn't actually mention the switch (unlike other discussions of controls). I'm thinking this is related to GCI operations? ...

I'm thinking "not GCI" because наведення is guidance in the sense of homing. Most of these manuals treat GCI as "control", not "guidance".

 

This is the only other mention I could find of ППС/ЗПС, though, aside from the РППК thing. (I think that must be a typo - if you do a Google search for "РППК" "МиГ-29", the only relevant result is that one sentence in this document.)

 

Then in the "manual guidance" section (page 4 slide 41, rough translation):

The mode of radiation of HPRF or MPRF is chosen manually by installation of the switch RLS MODES of the PUR-31 panel in position В (encounter) or Д (pursuit).

Yes, the presentation refers frequently to ВЧП and СЧП (HPRF and MPRF) rather than the hemisphere setting. Not surprising, I guess, since it's dealing with the radar's functioning. And your last reference is, I think, for setting the radar according to the anticipated target hemisphere during Search. Anyway, wading through this Ukrainian tome has given me a headache. :)

[FoxAlfa]

Smoke output seams to correspond to RPMs now... closing 10.

 

Probably connected to this fix from the patch:

MiG-29. The engine nozzle will open if the throttle is pulled back independently from the airspeed.

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3986611&postcount=1

Edited August 20, 2020 by FoxAlfa

[FoxAlfa]

12. Chaff and Flares should be able to be loaded in 20 packets instead of 30. True system is more complex, and works is different ways but forcing 30 or nothing is needlessly gimping the MiG-29

[TaxDollarsAtWork]

You've touched on radar detection ranges, but what about OLS-29/27 figures, do we have sources confirming the authenticity of the in game representation?

 

[Schmidtfire]

Im quite sure the OLS over performs. It has been discussed before. Symbology should also be different. IRL the designator box for OLS is taller than the radar designator box.

 

For me the biggest flaw is the HMS. It is presented far from reality (totally wrong in DCS) and it was such an important system of the MiG-29.

[FoxAlfa]

 

On 12/10/2020 at 1:42 AM, TaxDollarsAtWork said:

You've touched on radar detection ranges, but what about OLS-29/27 figures, do we have sources confirming the authenticity of the in game representation?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Well, the manual gives only ranges for the notching target in Mil power against certain backgrounds in format 'it should be detected in no less then range' so the worst-case scenario and that ranges are around 6-10 nm... how that translates into cold afterburning target, it is up to you judge but I do agree it is a bit overperforming...
but then again if R-27T can pick up a target at range effective, OLS can probably do it better.

Edited December 15, 2020 by FoxAlfa

[303_Kermit]

R27P /EP

Passive Radar (Fox2 ?)

R27 EA /EM
Fox 3 type R27

 

Cause all i see in the air is F16/F18 ... booooring....

[TotenDead]

12 hours ago, 303_Kermit said:

R27P /EP

Passive Radar (Fox2 ?)

 

According to Chizh, ED has no idea how it works

12 hours ago, 303_Kermit said:

R27 EA /EM
Fox 3 type R27

These missiles haven't ever been tested in the air

[BlackPixxel]

R-27EA have been testfired, according to someone here in the forums.

[303_Kermit]

On 12/16/2020 at 6:08 AM, TotenDead said:

 

According to Chizh, ED has no idea how it works

The idea is quite simple. Just like IR, radio waves are kind of electro-magnetic wave. It's just a different wave length. If you design a rocket homing on IR signature, you can design a rocket homing on radio(radar) wave signature. It's just different wave length. Idea is just the same as for fox 2 rockets. Only source of signature is different.

Edited December 18, 2020 by 303_Kermit

[GGTharos]

It's only that simple in concept, but in reality no one seems to like using these sort of passive weapons for anything but noisy jammers, despite declarations they make about using them vs. fighters or other things.   It might turn out that SARH/ARH are just far better at finding and discriminating their targets.

[FoxAlfa]

Radar range in lookdown fixed.

[Svend_Dellepude]

IMHO nothing is simple regarding electro magnetic waves. In theory maybe, but working with them in whatever environment is a different task all together.

[FoxAlfa]

New item:

 

АП (5) Mark should remain when jamming target is locked, currently it is there in search mode if there is active jamming but disappears when you lock the target.

It is important for it to remain since it gives clear indication if you can employ R-27Rs in HOJ mode.

 

[Skysurfer]

The only thing that is missing now is a slight radar range adjustment and better performance for the 29S. I see 10-15% being thrown around, which seems reasonable. Oh and improved cockpit instrument lighting and separate binding for flood lights would be cool too.

[XPACT]

Khmmmm, this was working before and now it doesn't maybe it's just me but I can't stand instruments not working like intended except when damaged or simply due to sensor inaccuracy/shock which happens IRL, I saw how jumpy that IAS needle is in the real MiG-29 on video

 

[IronChancellor]

On 7/22/2019 at 4:05 PM, FoxAlfa said:

1. CM counter. it just a two numbers to display you already have in the code. The display is '60' right behind the stick.

I can't even count how many times it got me killed not knowing the number of CM left.

I just noticed right now that this fixed. the display only counts in 20s, so it will show 60,40,20,0.