PFM for MIG21bis

EFM is nice.

PFM+ASM is much nicer.

OK that said.

I am having landing issues with large crosswinds. Smoke stack smoke 60 degrees from vertical as guide of m/s cross.

The aircraft literally flies sideways, with full rudder deflection. The visibility of runway threshhold is seriously compromised. If this is real , OK, don't change it. Then Fishbed is really tough to land in high cross. In my case, full rudder deflection with bank into cross, to keep velocity vector aligned with runway. The aircraft is still pushed sideways.

More then once, though I did not crash and burn, I bent up the leading main gear. Hard to get the timing of rudder just right, due to visibility issues of a screen.

You have no idea of what EFM actually means, do you? :)

You might want to check this topic:

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=148304

I found easier to land with 1.5.1

With strong sidewinds I had to touch down at high speed 330 and 20 degree yawn or more!

The parachute is also challenging. You will never forget to disengage when speed drop below 100kmh and winds!

Inviato dal mio G7-L01 utilizzando Tapatalk

Forgot to mention that turbulence and external load effects the roll much more than before, but with almost 50hours as 21 happy driver I'm a rookie.

I feel more sensible in banking the iron bird, sometimes thought in turn off ailerons hydro boosters.... Doesn't work :)

OK here is my understanding

SFM->EFM->AFM->PFM

Stnd Systems Modeling -> Advanced Systems Modeling.

OK here is my understanding

 

SFM->EFM->AFM->PFM

 

Stnd Systems Modeling -> Advanced Systems Modeling.

I suspected so, but your understanding is a bit flawed. EFM is an abbreviation for external flight model. External only means that it is made by a third party, so any flight model made by Leatherneck studios will be labelled as EFM. The term EFM tells nothing about the complexity of the flight model. It can be equivalent to AFM, but it can also be PFM. The thing is, that third parties are not allowed to label their flight models as AFM or PFM. Only ED's internally developed flight models use those labels.

The scale you made should therefore look like this:

SFM->AFM->PFM

???EFM???

EFM doesn't have a place on the scale.

nope, PFM and EFM is the same level, but PFM is only ED EFM is 3rd Party

AFM is the Su25 and su27 and f15c flight model yay but systems nay

And since you can click every button in the 21 and have a awesome flight model, its EFM ;)

edit: too damn late

OK here is my understanding

 

SFM->EFM->AFM->PFM

 

Stnd Systems Modeling -> Advanced Systems Modeling.

Actually: SFM------->AFM------->EFM/PFM

EFM uses the same underlying physics as the PFM, but the term EFM indicates a flight model developed outside of ED. It gets confusing since the EFM can be built closer to AFM standards depending upon what is built into it, but the underlying physics model for the EFM is more advanced than the AFM in the Su-25, for example. Overall, when you see EFM you can feel pretty confident that you are getting PFM quality work.

ED has several criteria for calling something a PFM (SMEs with direct experience with the airframe and detailed control/response data (IIRC)). So I wouldn't judge an EFM that isn't called a "PFM".

-Nick

I remember that Mig21 was marketed as featuring the professional flight model last year since the pre-purchase. But then the change happened in the structure and I guess LNS had to change the term simply to EFM, since they are 3rd party after all. Fancy words that EFM, as it can be of varying fidelity between modules/developers really, but also it can be as advanced as PFM (or perhaps even more so, depending solely on the developer and data availability - that's why I like older birds though, less guesswork, more facts). Btw to this day I trust LNS's Mig21 EFM with my life! :)

And since you can click every button in the 21 and have a awesome flight model, its EFM ;)

That is systems modeling (ASM), not flight model.

I know but all EFMs include this soooo.... ;)

As I understand it, all modules not made by Ed have EFM, regardless of their complexity or quality. Also, if I'm not mistaken, Mig -21 has a flight model that is equivalent to ED's PFM.

n

AFM is the Su25 and su27 and f15c flight model yay but systems nay

The F-15C has a PFM.

Su-27 too.

Yet the A-10A, which should have the same characteristics as the A-10C, does not.

OK thank you.

Crosswind landing in MIG-21bis, in DCS is still a bitch and a half.

SU-25T is easiest to fly and land in DCS;

MIG-21 is hardest

A-10C is easy

F-15 is more difficult to land then A-10C but nowhere near as hard as MIG-21

Both KA-50 and UH-1H as relatively straighforward to learn and fly in DCS. Provided noone is shooting at you.

Read some literature on the MiG-21bis, or read/listen to what pilots have to say about it. A lot of the comments you stumble upon, you will recognize from the simulation if you have enough experience with it. The MiG-21bis is indeed a very dangerous plane to land, in real life, and in DCS. Throughout history, there have been an insane amount of accidents surrounding this aircraft, killing hundreds of pilots and sadly, also many civilians.

Speaking of landing, is it me or did some of the recent updates made MiG-21 much easier to land? It seems to me that it bounces up after touchdown less than it used to, and the gear don't seem as fragile as before.