RAZBAM MiG-19P

dcs

#361

You say that as if it is a choice we are making, but here is not a lot of room in this market.

According to my admittedly brief, shaky memory, the following are current products in the Flight Sim category: DCS, IL-2 (Battle of Stalingrad series), Combat Air Patrol 2, VR VTOL, X-Plane, P3D? Any others I am missing? Arguably DCS and IL-2 are the top of the pile combat wise with X-Plane and P3D covering the civilian side (mostly). Only DCS and IL-2 seem to be maintaining their positions in the combat flight sim market. It is not a market that is forgiving nor does it give a great return on investment. I am happy we have something because we could very easily have nothing.


#362

If there was one species of plant and one species of animal left on the planet, then I would say that is an apt comparison.

Yet unlike flight sims, there are uncounted variations of both plants and animals around thriving. If one kind of predator fails, you don’t have unchecked proliferation of ungulates or other herd animals until the planet is covered with them. Another predator steps in to take its place.

Then there are the two words meant to instill hope and wonder that now engender only laughter: Fighter Ops.


#363

Actually, I would think that the “serious” competition to DCS is TACPACK. From what I have seen and been able to glean, VRS is trying to move into low-end mil sims for DOD (and other?) customers.

Think about this. The way it works right now on a carrier, a planning team works up a strike. Everybody gets assignments. The following day they brief the strike to all the participants, man up and fly the mission.

But what if you could add a step in there where the planning team–or maybe all the participants–can sit at a few PCs and hook up a MP P3D session running TACPACK. The intel guys add in the threats and the target. The aircrew involved fly the mission (start in the air somewhere, don’t need to practice boat stuff). It would show the aircrew what they can expect to see. It might reveal hidden flaws. They might to rework the timing, etc. In a couple of run throughs, you could probably add refinements and get some practice in.


#364

Veering off topic, but it’ll be a hard sell for the DOD unless it’s integrated into a big simulator. Can’t speak for the other branches, but the Army’s TRADOC are a bunch of knuckleheads who can’t really adapt to modern computing when it comes to training.


#365

Let’s Not Forget How We Were Able to Get A Extremely Detailed A-10C


#366

Air Guard. Were it the active Air Force, it would’ve been a huge mega building proposal with a complete cockpit switchology, etc. :wink:

Army National Guard wanted something similar about a decade ago but big Army TRADOC went with a huge, ridiculous setup that took a pair of semi tractor trailers to haul around.


#367

That’s an interesting concept Hanger200. My only reservation is that the VRS Superbug flight model is pretty broken right now. @boomerang10 pointed it out when I was first getting into it. Primarily, the engines are too laggy to fly a proper approach. If you engage AT to can hear it hunting like mad. Also, the flight model feels like it is fighting you all of the time, compared to the DCS Hornet, which feels like it is there to help. Hoping these things can be fixed. With DCS, the platform publisher also builds the aircraft, which is not the same with VRS and LocMart.


#368

Yep, sure, mising :slight_smile:

… IL2 COD, War Thunder, Flying Circus, Wings Over Flanders Fields, Wings Over The Reich, Aerofly FS, FlyInside FS, …


#369

As you say and interesting concept. As of today it is purely Vaporware. :slightly_smiling_face:

I hadn’t noticed the flight model engine issues with VRS Superbug…because I haven’t flown it that much; not nearly proficient. However, even with the flight model being way off in approach and landing, that would be OK since the focus would be from the join-up to egress - start/end the “practice” in the air.

Frankly, I am not sure what VRS is/has been going for. On one hand the seem to want to move from the entertainment market to a “serious” military market. On the other, they seem stuck in the entertainment market–i.e. they continue to force a re-spawn if you are shot down /crash…that seems pretty arcade-like. I emailed them about it…seeing if they could add an option to go with the standard FSX start over. They said no. :unamused:

I’m pretty much sold on DCS, although the folks at [email protected] have developed some nice stuff. Plus MILVIZ’s F-4E is a heck of a lot of fun. Combine the F-4E with [email protected]’s circa 1968 SE Asia package (I did the Haiphong Harbor/airfields and Cam Rahn Bay “wet” stuff working with a guy who does outstanding period airfields who did the airbase), and you have a theater that DCS doesn’t have and may not for quite a while. There is also a good Cuba Campaign. So when I get tired of the Balkans/PG…:sunglasses:


#370

#371

#372

Great tutorial.

I wish there was a throttle out there with a rotating handle to better simulate the Mig-19 and 21 throttle to change engagement range. With the Mig-21, single engine, I use the Saitek X-52. It has a slider on the throttle grip near where your thumb rests that does a decent enough job. But with the 2 engine Mig-19…hmmmm…what to do? :thinking:


#373

What do you fly with? I use the slider on the WT throttle. It gets me there although I wish it was as you say on the grip.
BTW, Baltic Dragon is killing it with the tutorials. They really do rock.


#374

Like you, I will use the slider next to the throttle. I normally use it for Zoom inside the cockpit - allows you to quickly zoom to read a gauge/MFD without taking your hands from the controls. I switched the Mig-21 to the X-52 from the WH because of the more-realistic slider on the throttle grip. Still would want a more correct grip that does the job. Does TM monitor this forum? :slightly_smiling_face:


#375

I wish they would. I thinks I got a couple of X-52s somewhere… what a great stick it was…


#376

#377


#378

#379

No MiG today, back to gulag!


#380