Jump to content

Full fidelity MiG 29A by ED?


CrazyGman

Recommended Posts

 

Realistically, the SU-27 wasn't really even available during most of the 80's in any real numbers, which for die hard flanker fans is a disappointment.

Not quite. Sure they came out bit latter than 29s, but once first ones were put in active service in 1985, the rearmament went pretty fast. By year 1990 there was around 467 aircrafts in service, including two regiments in Poland. Production was stopped soon after in 1992 with around 600 Su-27S,P and UB variant with around 180 aircrafts built.

 

I think that REDFOR 80s are represented well in DCS. We already have all the neccesary types, Even though some of them are AI only like Su-17, MiG-27 etc. I quess thats work for 3rd party developer, because Iam doubtfull that ED would want to do those. If there Is any side that need units from 80s, then Its Blue one.

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not quite. Sure they came out bit latter than 29s, but once first ones were put in active service in 1985, the rearmament went pretty fast. By year 1990 there was around 467 aircrafts in service, including two regiments in Poland. Production was stopped soon after in 1992 with around 600 Su-27S,P and UB variant with around 180 aircrafts built.

 

I think that REDFOR 80s are represented well in DCS. We already have all the necessary types, Even though some of them are AI only like Su-17, MiG-27 etc. I quess thats work for 3rd party developer, because I am doubtful that ED would want to do those. If there Is any side that need units from 80s, then Its Blue one.

 

I mean, yes there were some in service before the end of the cold war in 89. But not exactly in huge numbers either relative to mig29's 23's etc, and 85-89 covers like 3-4 years at best depending on if they entered service in early or late 85. And yeah the main issue in doing the 80's for DCS is actually "blue". We have a decent amount of red FC3 modules, though a decent striker like the su-17 would be nice. But really the main missing blue modules are F4E, Early F16A/F18A. You can kinda pretend the vastly more capable 2000's era 18/16 can stand in, but they vastly more capable than they should be, even if you nerf them in ways (DL) you currently cannot they would still be aerodynamically better than the A models, not to mention the vastly better radars/RWR/ECM etc.

  • Like 3

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
On 11.11.2020 at 12:35 AM, Harlikwin said:

Early F16A/F18A. You can kinda pretend the vastly more capable 2000's era 18/16 can stand in, but they vastly more capable than they should be, even if you nerf them in ways (DL) you currently cannot they would still be aerodynamically better than the A models, not to mention the vastly better radars/RWR/ECM etc.

 

Exactly that, Datalink, HMCS with all additional SA it gives etc. all are unfair advantage, but with one exception:

Cold War F-16 were better when it comes to kinematic performance, especially maneuverability, than our block 50. The most produced C was block 30 fighter variant, it already had GE engine being half ton lighter than our SEAD block 50CJ and according to real pilots block 30 was simply better for BFM. It had even greater P/W ratio and significantly lower wing loading than heavier block 50.

 

And lightweight F-16A were even more nimble. 

"Back in the day the Blk 30 (both big and small mouth) and Blk 40 were known as "Lead Nose Vipers" when flying against Blk 15s in similar configuration dogfighting. And yes I know they could haul more iron and had better avionics but once they hit the merge the Blk 15 had a distinct advantage."

 

-----------

 

Anyway MiG-29 9.12 is going to be the best module possible as it'll direct attention to the last period of military aviation where air combat was something more than tossing AMRAAMs/AMRAAMskis to some blip on the radar, run and RTB not seeing any enemy.

 

 

 

 


Edited by bies
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/5/2020 at 12:22 PM, Northstar98 said:

Given that comparable REDFOR aircraft are basically a non-starter at this point (not sure about Deka), and the best we'll probably be able to hope for are mid-80s initial production variants of the Su-27, -33 and MiG-29 (even if I would love the MiG-29M even if it was essentially a prototype aircraft (it wouldn't be the first in DCS), though I'd take any variant apart from the god awful looking SMT), I think the best option by far would be to develop older BLUFOR aircraft

Basically my exact thoughts for many years, and yet here we are with lots of 2000s+ bluefor with more coming, and the 2010s JF-17 which is... uuuhh, greenfor? greyfor?

It is obvious ED is going for the things that wil sell the most, as potential newcomers to sim, as well majority of long time customers buy "the most advanced popular poster-child possible". 70s-80, with some up to mid 90s at most, are the periods that make the most sense for DCS: a form of balanced and historical orders of battle would be possible, reasonable multiplayer servers could be made for people who want that, historical campaigns would be a thing for those who want that etc. And frankly, the aircraft are just interesting! They are still highly capable for their time, but they do a lot less handholding.

 

Anyway, it is not entirely doom and gloom for the idea of DCS: Cold War. We have 4 variants of Mirage F.1 coming, as well as MiG-23MLA, Mi-24P, F-8J, A-7E. Razbam has Mirage III, Sea Harrier, and EE Lightning planned/under works as well. We already have the Viggen, Mirage 2000C, most Russian FC3 aircraft, F-14A, UH-1H, Mi-8MTV2 etc. Now if ED would come back to their senses and continue developing that F-4E Block 58 as soon as plausible, that would be most excellent! 😛 But seeing how much they have to work on, it feels like it won't be plausible in near term.

 

As for the MiG-29A, the actual subject of this thread... as I have made obvious, I like 80s aircraft a lot. I also like Russian aircraft A LOT. Getting more than a little tired of deluge of post 2000s blufor. Having said all these, MiG-29A does not excite me, not one bit... I don't see it adding all that much over the FC3 MiG-29A we already have. It already has a high quality flight model, and the stores it can use. Don't really see full fidelity adding all that much to it TBH. I'd be a lot more excited for a 70s-80s unique, new Soviet aircraft like a DCS: Su-17M3, MiG-27K, even a Su-15. Or, if possible post 2000s Fulcrum or Flanker versions, just to have some modern red birds too, but we all know that ain't happening anytime soon.


Edited by WinterH
  • Like 3

Modules:

MiG-21Bis, Fw-190D, Bf-109K, P-51D, F-86F, Ka-50, UH-1H, Mi-8MTV2, Hawk T1A, C-101, FC3, A-10C, CA, Mirage 2000C, Gazelle, L-39, MiG-15Bis, F-5E, AJS 37 Viggen, Yak-52, Christen Eagle II, MiG-19, I-16, JF-17, F-14, F/A-18C, Fw-190A8, AV-8B/NA, Spitifre IX

 

Mods:

A-4E, MB-339, Edge 540

 

Utility modules:

Combined Arms, NS 430 GPS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, WinterH said:

and yet here we are with lots of 2000s+ redfor with more coming

What?!

🖥️ i3-10100F 3.6-4.3GHz, 16GB DDR4 2666, GTX970 4GB, SSD SATA3   🥽 Rift S   🕹️ T16000M HOTAS   ✈️ FC3, F-14A/B   🚢 Supercarrier    🌍 NTTR, PG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ooopsie, meant bluefor lol, fixed 😛

Modules:

MiG-21Bis, Fw-190D, Bf-109K, P-51D, F-86F, Ka-50, UH-1H, Mi-8MTV2, Hawk T1A, C-101, FC3, A-10C, CA, Mirage 2000C, Gazelle, L-39, MiG-15Bis, F-5E, AJS 37 Viggen, Yak-52, Christen Eagle II, MiG-19, I-16, JF-17, F-14, F/A-18C, Fw-190A8, AV-8B/NA, Spitifre IX

 

Mods:

A-4E, MB-339, Edge 540

 

Utility modules:

Combined Arms, NS 430 GPS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, WinterH said:

Ooopsie, meant bluefor lol, fixed 😛

You are right we lack real redfor 70-80s model fighters.   I mean we have the Mig-23 "soon"... And the 21 Bison..  but we keep getting more 1990s or later bluefor fighters.

 

F-16 blk50.

F/A-18C lot 20.

F-15E (coming soon)

A-10C II.

AV8B (NA).

F-14B.

 

High fidelity redfor post 1990 modules.

 

JF-17/FC-1.  

 

Pre-1990 bluefor high fidelity modules.

F-14A.

F-15E.

F-86F.

Mirage 2000C.

AJS-37.

 

Pre-1990 redfor.

Mig-21.

Mig-15.

Mig-23(soon)

 

Noticing an issue.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/2/2021 at 11:09 AM, bies said:

 

Exactly that, Datalink, HMCS with all additional SA it gives etc. all are unfair advantage, but with one exception:

Cold War F-16 were better when it comes to kinematic performance, especially maneuverability, than our block 50. The most produced C was block 30 fighter variant, it already had GE engine being half ton lighter than our SEAD block 50CJ and according to real pilots block 30 was simply better for BFM. It had even greater P/W ratio and significantly lower wing loading than heavier block 50.

 

And lightweight F-16A were even more nimble. 

"Back in the day the Blk 30 (both big and small mouth) and Blk 40 were known as "Lead Nose Vipers" when flying against Blk 15s in similar configuration dogfighting. And yes I know they could haul more iron and had better avionics but once they hit the merge the Blk 15 had a distinct advantage."

 

-----------

 

Anyway MiG-29 9.12 is going to be the best module possible as it'll direct attention to the last period of military aviation where air combat was something more than tossing AMRAAMs/AMRAAMskis to some blip on the radar, run and RTB not seeing any enemy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah agreed on all that. Sadly it seems that Fox3 tennis is the name of the game for a great many people, and its doubly ironic given ED's stance that dogfighting is more fun (yes it is), and then their ham handed nerfs of fox3 missiles, of which now you have a few western ones "un-nerfed", while the rest of the missiles in the game largely remain with "basic, nerfed" modeling.

 

  • Like 4

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/2/2021 at 11:40 AM, WinterH said:

Basically my exact thoughts for many years, and yet here we are with lots of 2000s+ bluefor with more coming, and the 2010s JF-17 which is... uuuhh, greenfor? greyfor?

It is obvious ED is going for the things that wil sell the most, as potential newcomers to sim, as well majority of long time customers buy "the most advanced popular poster-child possible". 70s-80, with some up to mid 90s at most, are the periods that make the most sense for DCS: a form of balanced and historical orders of battle would be possible, reasonable multiplayer servers could be made for people who want that, historical campaigns would be a thing for those who want that etc. And frankly, the aircraft are just interesting! They are still highly capable for their time, but they do a lot less handholding.

 

Anyway, it is not entirely doom and gloom for the idea of DCS: Cold War. We have 4 variants of Mirage F.1 coming, as well as MiG-23MLA, Mi-24P, F-8J, A-7E. Razbam has Mirage III, Sea Harrier, and EE Lightning planned/under works as well. We already have the Viggen, Mirage 2000C, most Russian FC3 aircraft, F-14A, UH-1H, Mi-8MTV2 etc. Now if ED would come back to their senses and continue developing that F-4E Block 58 as soon as plausible, that would be most excellent! 😛 But seeing how much they have to work on, it feels like it won't be plausible in near term.

 

As for the MiG-29A, the actual subject of this thread... as I have made obvious, I like 80s aircraft a lot. I also like Russian aircraft A LOT. Getting more than a little tired of deluge of post 2000s blufor. Having said all these, MiG-29A does not excite me, not one bit... I don't see it adding all that much over the FC3 MiG-29A we already have. It already has a high quality flight model, and the stores it can use. Don't really see full fidelity adding all that much to it TBH. I'd be a lot more excited for a 70s-80s unique, new Soviet aircraft like a DCS: Su-17M3, MiG-27K, even a Su-15. Or, if possible post 2000s Fulcrum or Flanker versions, just to have some modern red birds too, but we all know that ain't happening anytime soon.

 

 

Actually what it will/should add for the mi29A is frustrating radar control, magically self jamming radar, and a shitty man-machine interface (I guess you can still bind stuff if you're "that" guy). What I do hope they add is some sort of semi competent GCI component for Lazur so you can actually fight the mig how it was supposed to be used (double true for the 23). Or better yet an actual TAKT implementation (doubt that). Most of the cold war russian jets suffer vs the western jets because they were never meant to be flown/used like western jets. And DCS does 0 modeling of how they were actually meant to be used (I.e. instead of a fancy radar on the jet, your fancy radar was on the ground, 10 of them in fact, networked and a guy putting you in the best position possible to kill the enemy). 

As for cold war doom-n-gloom. TBH its not great at the moment balance wise at least. For FF you only got F5's and F86 vs Mig 15/19/21, which TBH not too bad, but many "veterans" are bored with the older airframes. If you throw in the F14A (the one thats not out yet with the crap rwr) it will hilariously unbalance things further pretty much at any point unless someone limits phoenix use. (IMO, viggy with ternav is just a bit too modern but most people don't care, I even asked if it could be "disabled") To be fair we have some stuff on the horizon, but as anyone who has flown DCS for any length of time knows, deadlines are almost never met, and if they are, then usually the product is pretty broken from the get go. But I am excited about the Mirage F1 and Mig23, though if anything I expect them at the end of the year if at all this year, the other modules mentioned, not till 2022-3 at the earliest. 

 

As for the F4. Its mind boggling to me that no one is rabidly pursuing this (especially HB). It literally is the most iconic jet fighter of the cold war, EVERYONE flew them. And really HB is well positioned to do it, since they can re-cycle jester since its the same paradigm. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

On 2/3/2021 at 11:23 AM, Hodo said:

You are right we lack real redfor 70-80s model fighters.   I mean we have the Mig-23 "soon"... And the 21 Bison..  but we keep getting more 1990s or later bluefor fighters.

 

F-16 blk50.

F/A-18C lot 20.

F-15E (coming soon)

A-10C II.

AV8B (NA).

F-14B.

 

High fidelity redfor post 1990 modules.

 

JF-17/FC-1.  

 

Pre-1990 bluefor high fidelity modules.

F-14A. (The early one we don't have yet)

F-15E.  (I mean barely, and we will get a 2005 version so no)

F-86F.

Mirage 2000C. (early 2000's version with NV and other mods)

AJS-37. (mid 90's version with ternav and bk90s)

 

Pre-1990 redfor.

Mig-21.

Mig-15.

Mig-23(soon)

 

Noticing an issue.

 

 

 

 

 

Who in gods name is doing a mig21 bison? (this is the modern indian one) or do you just mean bis?

As you can see by my bolded comments its even worse for "cold war blue", though we will get a cold war Mirage F1 hopefully soon. As well as several other models in a few years.

 

  • Like 1

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 часа назад, Harlikwin сказал:

 

Actually what it will/should add for the mi29A is frustrating radar control,

Questionable

3 часа назад, Harlikwin сказал:

magically self jamming radar

Nope, 9.12 has no jammer

3 часа назад, Harlikwin сказал:

, and a shitty man-machine interface (I guess you can still bind stuff if you're "that" guy).

Well, it depends. As for me, F-15 ergonomics is way worse

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/8/2021 at 3:17 AM, Harlikwin said:

As for the F4. Its mind boggling to me that no one is rabidly pursuing this (especially HB).

 

IIRC few 3rd parties were interested, but ED reserved F-4 for themselves, they will probably plan to make it after Apache. Or maybe something change and they will make it free for some 3rd party.

 

And I'm excited for 1980s MiG-29 9.12 and all cold war modules incoming far more than some next AMRAAM truck.

 

Yes MiG-29 9.12 had somewhat inferior human-machine interface but that's it's flavor.

MiG-29 cockpit wasn't design with pure ergonomic in mind but rather as a compromise accenting easy conversion from previous types: MiG-21, MiG-23, MiG-25. This was a factor since Soviet aviation was huge, about 10 times more numerous than Russian air force. That's why even Su-27 having FBW still required constant manual trim - it increased workload but pilots wanted it to be similar to previous types.

 

If someone is familiar with MiG-21 cockpit he's going to have easy time with MiG-23 and MiG-29.

(And MiG-25 if someone decide to make it some day)


Edited by bies
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Harlikwin said:

 

Actually what it will/should add for the mi29A is frustrating radar control, magically self jamming radar, and a shitty man-machine interface (I guess you can still bind stuff if you're "that" guy). What I do hope they add is some sort of semi competent GCI component....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Who in gods name is doing a mig21 bison? (this is the modern indian one) or do you just mean bis?

As you can see by my bolded comments its even worse for "cold war blue", though we will get a cold war Mirage F1 hopefully soon. As well as several other models in a few years.

 

Yes true... Granted I have played online with a semi-compitent GCI. Or to be more honest a very good GCI.  And they had my Mirage anywhere it was needed.  I can only imagine how well it would have worked with a MiG of Su.  

 

The Bison sorry my auto-correct on my phone does that when I type fast and don't catch it.   But I do like the name Bison for the 21... It just works because it is almost everything but a Bison.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, TotenDead said:

 

Nope, 9.12 has no jammer

 

 

In a multi ship situation mig29 radars would jam each other at times. 

14 hours ago, bies said:

 

IIRC few 3rd parties were interested, but ED reserved F-4 for themselves, they will probably plan to make it after Apache. Or maybe something change and they will make it free for some 3rd party.

 

And I'm excited for 1980s MiG-29 9.12 and all cold war modules incoming far more than some next AMRAAM truck.

 

Yes MiG-29 9.12 had somewhat inferior human-machine interface but that's it's flavor.

MiG-29 cockpit wasn't design with pure ergonomic in mind but rather as a compromise accenting easy conversion from previous types: MiG-21, MiG-23, MiG-25. This was a factor since Soviet aviation was huge, many times more numerous than Russian air force. That's why even Su-27 having FBW still required constant manual trim - it increased workload but pilots wanted it to be similar to previous types.

 

If someone is familiar with MiG-21 cockpit he's going to have easy time with MiG-23 and MiG-29.

(And MiG-25 if someone decide to make it some day)

 

 

Yeah I get the soviet philosophy of how the designed the planes, to make transition easy. What I'm mainly alluding to is the rather crappy human interface for radar controls relative to the west. It makes perfect sense in the context of how the 29 was to be used. GCI tells you set radar at range X and alt Y and you should happily see him. But compared to say what you do with a viper where you can easily scan around it sucks. And without that critical GCI component its gonna make the mig less effective in DCS (Yes I know it works like that now in the regular modules, the difference being you have to map it, and IRL its a big knob and switches on the front panel, which is significantly less handy)

 

But yes, I'm happy for even an old 80's mig. I just want the rest of the ecosystem to be there too. 

  • Like 3

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Hodo said:

Yes true... Granted I have played online with a semi-compitent GCI. Or to be more honest a very good GCI.  And they had my Mirage anywhere it was needed.  I can only imagine how well it would have worked with a MiG of Su.  

 

 

 

It works fine if you have a decent human doing it in MP, one of my favorite ways to fight in MP actually. But most of the time any human GCI is rare luxury when I can play. Also why I'm pushing ED to improve GCI/AWACS systems past the crappy system of today. "Comrade! Steer 234 for 200km, angels 15, we really know its a tanker, and so do you, but jokes on you cuz there is a bandit 3 miles off your 6 we didn't tell you about"

 

  • Like 3

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Harlikwin said:

 "Comrade! Steer 234 for 200km, angels 15, we really know its a tanker, and so do you, but jokes on you cuz there is a bandit 3 miles off your 6 we didn't tell you about"

 

Can relate. 

 

My favorite one is: me cruising at 8k agl above flat terain. 

AWACS: *silence* *silence* *silence* MERGED. 

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will make a double post since I ran out of time during my break. 

 

To the people who are saying that full fidelity MiG-29A would not bring anything to the table: From my point of view I think you are completely missing the point of playing aircraft sims. To me, flying aircraft in sims is more than just a combat experience. It's as much about flying the aircraft with all its quirks and oddities as it is about manouvering in BVR or VFR combat. And this is where FC3 is sorely lacking. It's good enough for combat (spefically A2A combat), but when it comes to everything else, including ground attack to some degree, but also navigation, control of secondary systems, setup and planning, it falls short by milesand it really makes for a much less interesting experience. 

  • Like 14
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Zweistein000 said:

I will make a double post since I ran out of time during my break. 

 

To the people who are saying that full fidelity MiG-29A would not bring anything to the table: From my point of view I think you are completely missing the point of playing aircraft sims. To me, flying aircraft in sims is more than just a combat experience. It's as much about flying the aircraft with all its quirks and oddities as it is about manouvering in BVR or VFR combat. And this is where FC3 is sorely lacking. It's good enough for combat (spefically A2A combat), but when it comes to everything else, including ground attack to some degree, but also navigation, control of secondary systems, setup and planning, it falls short by milesand it really makes for a much less interesting experience. 

Also, people forget that all those details add up and influence the combat quite a bit. It's just enough to remove the F10 map view and you already have a different experience. Not to mention things like IFF, setting up correct switches, engine management etc.

  • Like 3

Cmptohocah=CMPTOHOCAH 😉

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Zweistein000 said:

I will make a double post since I ran out of time during my break. 

 

To the people who are saying that full fidelity MiG-29A would not bring anything to the table: From my point of view I think you are completely missing the point of playing aircraft sims. To me, flying aircraft in sims is more than just a combat experience. It's as much about flying the aircraft with all its quirks and oddities as it is about manouvering in BVR or VFR combat. And this is where FC3 is sorely lacking. It's good enough for combat (spefically A2A combat), but when it comes to everything else, including ground attack to some degree, but also navigation, control of secondary systems, setup and planning, it falls short by milesand it really makes for a much less interesting experience. 

 

Yeah I totally agree, I'm the guy who wants the crappy nav system, and the primitive (By todays standards) radar etc. I'm mainly just pointing out that without a cohesive bluefor planeset for it fight its gonna suck a fair bit online, even on "nerfed" 80's servers where folks think just because you take away the ammram the 2005 era viper is anything like the '83 version. But then again, I've been using the 29A as "trainer" for the upcoming mig23. 

9 hours ago, Cmptohocah said:

Also, people forget that all those details add up and influence the combat quite a bit. It's just enough to remove the F10 map view and you already have a different experience. Not to mention things like IFF, setting up correct switches, engine management etc.

 

Yeah, my fav is people not understanding a climb-out profile, or just using burner 100% of the time. And then always asking how is it possible that I have fuel and hour into a sortie.

  • Like 5

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Harlikwin said:

 

Yeah I totally agree, I'm the guy who wants the crappy nav system, and the primitive (By todays standards) radar etc. I'm mainly just pointing out that without a cohesive bluefor planeset for it fight its gonna suck a fair bit online, even on "nerfed" 80's servers where folks think just because you take away the ammram the 2005 era viper is anything like the '83 version. But then again, I've been using the 29A as "trainer" for the upcoming mig23. 

 

Yeah, my fav is people not understanding a climb-out profile, or just using burner 100% of the time. And then always asking how is it possible that I have fuel and hour into a sortie.

Fuel managwment in MiG is possibly the most importan skill to have. Especally for MiG-29. Knowing how to manage fuel even in a dogfigt can mean the difference between 1h endurance or falling ourlt of the sky in 15 min. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Zweistein000 said:

Fuel managwment in MiG is possibly the most importan skill to have. Especally for MiG-29. Knowing how to manage fuel even in a dogfigt can mean the difference between 1h endurance or falling ourlt of the sky in 15 min. 

Fuel management is important true. I can tell you though that DCS: MiG-29 is a good glider too. I ran out of fuel and had enough speed to land safely, fortunately, there is so many places you can land at in DCS...

Intel Core i7-10700K - ROG Strix Z490-H Gaming - 64GB Vengance LPX - RTX 3080 Eagle OC - non-VR - single player - open beta

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Zweistein000 said:

Fuel managwment in MiG is possibly the most importan skill to have. Especally for MiG-29. Knowing how to manage fuel even in a dogfigt can mean the difference between 1h endurance or falling ourlt of the sky in 15 min. 

Yep my typical flight in the 29 is take off with afterburner then throttle back to full mil power till I hit 500km/h then start a climb at 40m/s roughly and take my time to 9km alt and then throttle back to 80-85% and cruise forever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Hodo said:

Yep my typical flight in the 29 is take off with afterburner then throttle back to full mil power till I hit 500km/h then start a climb at 40m/s roughly and take my time to 9km alt and then throttle back to 80-85% and cruise forever.

Don't know if it's relevant or not: official 29 manual recommends 900km/h TAS for the  climb.

  • Like 2

Cmptohocah=CMPTOHOCAH 😉

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/3/2021 at 7:23 PM, Hodo said:

You are right we lack real redfor 70-80s model fighters.   I mean we have the Mig-23 "soon"... And the 21 Bison..  but we keep getting more 1990s or later bluefor fighters.

 

F-16 blk50.

F/A-18C lot 20.

F-15E (coming soon)

A-10C II.

AV8B (NA).

F-14B.

AJS-37.

 

High fidelity redfor post 1990 modules.

 

JF-17/FC-1.  

 

Pre-1990 bluefor high fidelity modules.

F-14A.

F-15E.

F-86F.

Mirage 2000C.

 

 

Pre-1990 redfor.

Mig-21.

Mig-15.

Mig-23(soon)

 

Noticing an issue.

 

 

 

 

Corrected it for you.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Jonne said:

Corrected it for you.

The 15E is technically post 90.  While it entered service in 1989 it didn't see action or until 1991.  

 

But I will let it go because we don't even have that yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was also thinking about that one, but the Viggen we have is very well a post 1990 variant without the possibility of restricting it to an AJ37 through the mission editor.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • BIGNEWY locked and unlocked this topic
  • BIGNEWY locked and unlocked this topic
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...