streakeagle

My current setup doesn't look nearly as nice as what you have done. It looks great! I could only have dreamed of having something like that when I was his age. I am still amazed at how far the consumer grade tech has come. At that age, the best my father could do for me was get me into radio control airplanes and he worked quite a bit of overtime to provide that. My son has shown zero interest in my flight sims. I hope your son appreciates what he has, both an amazing home cockpit and a father that was able to make it happen.

How the F-4 performed versus the MiG-21 varied greatly with which variant of F-4 and MiG-21 you are discussing. The early F-4B/C vs MiG-21F-13 was a very different fight from later F-4E vs MiG-21MF. The performance of the F-4B/C vs the MiG-21F-13 is well documented by the declassified USAF evaluation of a captured MiG-21F-13. In the early fighting, the F-4 generally had a power advantage and down low, the F-4 held all the cards because the MiG-21F-13 wasn't optimized for low altitude performance. But up at 30,000 feet, the MiG-21F-13 was at advantage. In the middle, the performance was close enough, initial setup, tactics, and pilot skill were far more important than performance differences. As the MiG-21 evolved, it gained power and lost agility. By 1973, a MiG-21bis in the hands of a well trained pilot was a handful for an unslatted F-4. Power was comparable and the MiG-21 turned better. The slatted F-4E traded specific excess power (acceleration, climb, top speed) for much better agility. In a MiG-21bis vs a slatted F-4E, the MiG becomes the energy fighter by a small margin and no longer penalized at low altitude and the F-4 becomes the turn fighter by a small margin. But the higher the altitude, the more favorable the numbers get for the MiG-21. Again, setup, tactics, and pilot quality were far more important. Israel, always being greatly outnumbered found the F-4 lacking in dogfights in 1973. They very much wanted something that held all the aces. They got the F-15 and not too long after the F-16, which the combat record reveals were the aircraft they needed.

There are a lot more variants than the "SMT" missing if you want a "full" collection. List of Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 variants - Wikipedia The SMT is a minor footnote in all of that history. SF2's stock install has quite the collection and with free user addons, I doubt any other sim will ever cover so many MiG-21 variants so well, despite any errors and/or omissions.

When you see all the confusion about MiG-21 designations including Third Wire games, you have to remember, prior to the fall of the Soviet Union, MiGs were classified visually into their NATO designations: i.e. Fishbed C, D, E, J, L, N etc. Letters were assigned as new visual differences appeared. So a Russian variant and its export might get the same letter because they looked the same even though they may have significant internal differences. Likewise, two variants that were very similar but had some major visual change would have different letters. What little that was reported on actual Soviet designations was confusing in the West. After information became available, documents continue to mix up old NATO guesses for Soviet designations versus actual designations. Add to that the fact that the MiG factory had their own production series numbers for variants independent of the Soviet government's official MiG designation. As someone who grew up with the NATO designations, a MiG-21F and MiG-21F-13 were indistinguishable: both were publicly known as MiG-21F Fishbed C to me and in fact, I didn't know about the original production variant until maybe the late 80s/early 90s. Among the Third Wire designations, the one reflecting the most confusion from my perspective is the MiG-21PFV. There was no MiG-21PFV. The Vietnamese flew the same export variants of the PF series flown by other clients. Russian sources don't note any special version with a "V" for Vietnam or some customization used by Vietnam. The extra letters usually annotate some sort of weapon, sensor, or propulsion upgrade.

Use the Target software to make the throttle and stick appear as one device. For some old games, even that doesn't work, but for most it does. Also, set the resulting virtual device as the preferred device under windows game controller settings.

The biggest problem the Ye-8 solves is how to get a useful radar into the nose of the MiG-21 with a minimum of design changes. Of course, the MiG-23 solved it by adding F-4 style side intakes. I have the big Yefim Gordon MiG-21 book (that sells for $700 on eBay!) and it has a nice section on the Ye-8. I also have the matching MiG-23 book, which provides great details into how the MiG designs progressed in the 1960s and early 1970s.

It was an amazing prototype, well ahead of its time. But the swing wing was the popular new toy with all of the air forces, so development and production went to the MiG-23. It is a shame the Ye-8 never entered production. I suspect it could have been superior to both the MiG-21bis and MiG-23MF as a hybrid of both: MiG-21 agility, MiG-23 radar. The canard probably provided high AoA benefits similar to a LERX. It would just need a high thrust/weight turbofan to make it competitive with the F-16. Though it clearly would retain the major MiG-21 flaw: short range.

I don't know of any such list. If you wanted to represent the most jet aircraft possible one a single grip, it would be the B-8. That is the grip in most F-4 variants, the F-15A/B and early F-15C/D. It is the grip in most USAF fighters from the P-80 until the F-15A It is also in the UH-1 Huey and a slight variant with a 2nd red button on the right side is in the AH-1 Cobra. But the B-8 is a rare case. Most aircraft have unique grips. These days, it is very rare for types to share controls since the HOTAS principle has to be tailored to ever newer technology with different control requirements not to mention the desire to sell new parts rather than let a customer buying a new plane be able to scavenge parts from earlier aircraft.

The efforts of modders are bringing DCS World closer to being able to replace SF2 as the best simulation of the Vietnam air war. The free A-4E Skyhawk mod I posted about earlier has continued to improve. It now has an accurate external flight model, supports basic radio operation, and can perform mid-air refueling as well as having 100% compatibility with carrier operations. Some of the other mods are not as ambitious and rely on old tricks like borrowing Flaming Cliffs functionality, but still look quite impressive. Right now, anyone can download the free A-4E and join the Vietnam server for some great missions. If you own the modules you can also fly the F-5E, UH-1, C-101 (standing in for A-37 Dragonfly), P-51D, and P-47D (both props standing in for the A-1 Skyraider). Previously the MiG-21, MiG-19, and MiG-15 were available, but the host decided to get rid of the PvP option as he much prefers a co-op environment. Take a look at what is currently possible:

In the absence of my preferred ride, the F-4, I have been mainly flying the F-86, MiG-15, F-5, MiG-19, and MiG-21. I also have some time in the F-14B, F-15C, F/A-18C, MiG-29, Su-27, and Su-33. But the arrival of the F-14A has provided a great stand-in for the F-4: its power to weight is comparable to the F-4, it can be carrier based, it has two seats, its intended mission was fleet air defense, and it can carry 4xAIM-7 + 4xAIM-9. While its performance is still a bit better than the F-4 (around 20% better), its relatively low power to weight gives it performance is about halfway between the F-4 and the other teen fighters. So if you don't use the AIM-54, the F-14A provides the closest experience to an F-4 in DCS World. Of course the swing wing and overall better aerodynamic design is what makes the F-14 a better aircraft than the F-4 with much superior high AoA behavior and low speed agility, so it isn't a perfect fit. The next closest DCS aircraft are the F-15 and F-5, neither of which are two-seat or carrier based. I would still prefer to fly the F-15 over the F-14, but despite finally getting a great flight model, the lack of full systems fidelity and a clickable cockpit limits how much I can enjoy flying it. The F-5 has performance that is very close to the MiG-21 (which means it is very close to an F-4) and its avionics/cockpit are very similar to an F-4. But it doesn't have AIM-7s and the F-4s strength in dogfighting was normally power-to-weight rather than agility, whereas the F-5 is more underpowered so it leverages its flaps to be more agile in the horizontal than its opponents. So the F-5 is not very good for simulating F-4 operation and air-to-air tactics. The F-14B is easily the most capable dogfighter in the game if you can handle not having fly-by-wire to keep you from getting into trouble, which is quite far from an F-4. It was the arrival of the F-14A that has finally given me something to enjoy until DCS gets a high-fidelity F-4. So, I have been almost exclusively flying the F-14A for about 3 or 4 weeks. I love carrier operations with the Supercarrier module. I have finally mastered air-to-air refueling. I got some online multiplayer guns only dogfighting in last weekend and found I really enjoyed struggling with the lower power to weight and poor roll rate, but still be able to get the win. I am having so much fun flying it, that I suspect it will remain my primary ride until something new comes along... like the F-8J Crusader, F4U-1D Corsair, or MiG-23MLA. Until some third party steps up to deliver an F-4, the F-14A is probably going to keep my attention for quite a long time.

At the time, it had the best looking aircraft models and textures, especially if you downloaded the free user mods (much like the SFP1/WoX series). The terrain never impressed me. What I enjoyed was the Jane's production quality: the music, menus, voice overs, etc. I didn't play it very much though, because I discovered Aces High not too long after buying Jane's WW2 Fighters. I still have all of my old games. But it has been a long time since I installed Jane's WW2 Fighters.

I can't get a better frame rate. It is locked at vsync 60 Hz. It is of little consequence. My sole purpose for running the SFP1/WoX series is to host multiplayer if anyone is interested. The instability primarily occurs at mission exit, which doesn't hurt multiplayer hosting in any way. But so far, I haven't had anybody take me up on trying multiplayer.

I have all the SFP1/WoX sims. Whichever one is common to the people interested is obviously the one to use. If everyone has WoE, then that is fine. Once we agree on a sim, we all need clean, unmodded installs, and to try to meet each other using Radmin VPN. I just tried RAdmin... it is very similar if not easier than Hamachi used to be, now it is just a matter of how well it works with the SFP1/WoX series.

USAF can be made to run. There is some workaround patch you have to download. It won't ever work perfectly and you have to get in the ini files to make it work with modern display resolutions/aspect ratios. But you can play missions. I haven't messed with Jane's F/A-18 in a long time. But I am almost certain someone at SimHQ will know how to run it.

In the time since my last effort, Evolve has become part of player.me as of 2018 and lost the VPN functionality. I really wished SFP1/WoX worked perfectly with Hyperlobby as it otherwise works great and hasn't changed in years. It appears that the current equivalent to Hamachi is: Radmin VPN | Download Free VPN (radmin-vpn.com) If anyone is interested in multiplayer, we will need to download, install, and configure this.

Is anyone interested in trying out multiplayer with SFP1/WoX? The last time I did this, a lot of people had just switched to Windows 10 and the SFP1/WoX series ran horrible on it. To top things off, the old Microsoft DirectPlay multiplayer interface used by SFP1/WoX did not work well if at all on Windows 10. Now, many years later, I can get Wings Over Vietnam with the final 2008b patch to run on Windows 10 at Vsync speeds (60 Hz in my case) with maxed out graphics quality on my nVidia control panel and in-game settings. I can also host multiplayer locally. The enb series makes the graphics a lot more stable, but I still have problems with the game frequently crashing to desktop when I end a flight. Though it sometimes lets me get to the menu several times in a row before it starts crashing again. If anyone wants to try this we need two things: 1. An identical stock install of a game patched to the 2008b level or in the case of Wings Over Israel, optionally patched even later by the expansion pack. I personally prefer starting with WoV. It always drew the most players. If everyone involved has WoV and WoE, it is even better to use a merged WoV/WoE install for the expanded stock plane set. But if anyone wants to try this out, I am willing to host whatever install it takes to get people flying. Once you have it working with a stock install, you can experiment with adding mods. But you have to be very careful. The anti-cheat file checker is very temperamental. It has been known to reject totally stock installs for no particular reason and can have an even harder time matching up modded installs. The key is everyone having exactly the same install to avoid file checker problems. 2. A free VPN service to trick the game into seeing a LAN that it can easily handle versus trying to set port forwarding, firewalls, and anti-virus to allow internet communication. Hamachi used to be the go-to tool, but last time around, I discovered Evolve was a much better replacement. Evolve provides a VPN and effectively replaces Hyperlobby as a way of meeting up to start games. Optionally, we could open a Discord channel for meeting or even use Hyperlobby, but you still need a VPN package like Evolve to get reliable connections. Hyperlobby is the optional third thing. Hyperlobby natively supports SFP1 and WoV. The problem is that it is hard to get servers set up to work correctly and for clients to join on Hyperlobby. Internet service providers, routers, firewalls, antivirus, etc. all conspire to block the very basic interface provided by DirectPlay. But traditionally, I start my server on Hyperlobby to attract players then tell them how to connect using a VPN host like Hamachi or Evolve. I think Hyperlobby is largely obsolete. This forum is clearly the place to meet players and once you meet here, you can agree on whatever platform is most acceptable for general communication/starting game sessions.

No matter what compatibility settings I try, I still get random success/failure exiting the flight.

It may only be coincidental, but after changing on ini option in the enb series ini, I am able to quit without crashing: AllowAntialias=1 I always use antialiasing, so when I was poking around the ini looking for something that might help out with the CTDs, I saw this one and toggled it from 0 to 1.

It has been quite a few years and things have changed. SFP1/WoX 2008b patch runs on Windows 10 with a little help and I have successfully used multiplayer on my home LAN between a pair of Windows 10 PCs. If anyone is interested, I am willing to try hosting a dogfight server and if that works ok, then I will host some co-op missions if anyone wants to try that. This is a capability that SF2 lost. It has a lot of limitations compared to multiplayer in other combat flight sims. But if you enjoy flying SFP1/WoX era aircraft and would like to try flying with other people, it can work and when it does, it can be a whole lot of fun.

I think VorpX patched away the compatibiity. It worked well for me quite some time, now I can't use VorpX with SF2 not matter what I do. I tried going back to an old video driver that used to work, but it seems VorpX is the problem. I have tried with my Rift S and my Reverb G2 with nothing but crashes to desktop when I try to fly. I can navigate the menus, I just can't get to the flying part any more.

So, I have demonstrated Wov 2008b multiplayer on my home LAN using two Windows 10 PCs. I was able to host on one PC and join with another. But, I still crash to desktop more often than not when exiting the game. The next step is to see if I can host/join over the internet.

I supported SFP1/WoX multiplayer as much as I could, including leaving a server host up 24/7 for quite some time over the years. At its most popular, there were a handful of regulars and a few more intermittent players. Most people that tried it were turned off by the multiplayer mission limitations: everyone for themselves dogfight or a very simple co-op / PvP mission that starts in the air with a very sterile environment to keep the CPU and internet traffic to a minimum while trying to keep players synced. A lot of people were also turned off by the difficulties caused by using Microsoft's simple DirectPlay interface, which didn't mix too well with routers and firewalls. The only way to make it easy for people to join and reliable enough to be fun was to use a free VPN host, like Hamachi (now long gone). I used to host on Hyperlobby, but advertise how to use Hamachi. The VPN not only made connecting easier and more reliable, but helped the anti-cheat file checker system work more correctly. Sometimes, even with a clean install, the file checker wouldn't let someone join and there was no way to disable it. You can have a maximum of 16 players, with the co-op having a maximum of 8 players per side. You can't script missions, you can't start on the ground, and you can't have aircraft carriers. Adding mods also causes problems, because anyone who wants to join has to have the same mods. The solution was to provide a complete mod package. But even with that, every time a new person comes and tries to join, they have to figure out where to download the mod and how to install it correctly. My solution after trying to deal with all of that was pretty simple: the host server should be a clean install of the most popular version of the game. Typically I hosted either Wings Over Vietnam or Wings Over Europe, as those were the most popular games. I would have preferred hosting a merged WOV/WOE install, but most people didn't have a merged install. Despite all of the limitations, I loved flying all those great airplanes in a player vs player environment. One night, 12 people were briefly flying on my server at the same time. That was a big deal for a server that was lucky to have 3 or 4 people on at the same time on an given night.

I just played around with this last night. I had two WoV installs: 1. 080306 patch level and YAP2 installed. 2. 2008b patch level. The first one was unstable. The second one worked so well, I suspect I can get multiplayer working since Windows 10 does support DirectPlay at this point and I have that option enabled in my optional Windows Features. I was able to start a multiplayer session and fly around. I just need to install it on a 2nd PC so I can verify that the session can be seen and used by another Windows 10 PC.

Don't bring SFP1/WoX series up to 2008 standard and the negative fuel flow is still allowed. The last time I checked, the base downloads started at the long time stable standard (083006 patch level I believe?). But to get that one feature you give up on a whole bunch of improvements that came with the release of Wings Over Israel (which brought the 2008 patch level). To get the final, patched to the max version of the SFP1/WoX, you have to use Wings Over Israel and buy the Wings Over Israel Expansion Pack. That one install, WoI w/XP1, is just one step below SF2, including support for early SF2 3d models (external and cockpits) while retaining the original basic SFP1 multiplayer support.

Electrical connections are not the only concern. You need seeker cooling on more advanced variants and the coolant is carried/plumbed through the pylon. This alone made Naval AIM-9 variants more difficult to adapt to other aircraft. But as the Israelis used Naval AIM-9s on their USAF F-4Es, clearly the modification isn't that difficult.