• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

The MiG-17

H

HenryW

Charter Member 2014
dd.jpg


ee.jpg


ff.jpg


2-26.jpg


3-26.jpg


4-26.jpg


5-23.jpg


aa-1.jpg


bb.jpg
 
Ferry_vO said:
Skywolf:
How are the framerates in FsX Henry?
I like their MiG-15, but since this is not a true FsX model and my system isn't exactly new..
Click to expand...

On my 2y old system it gives 20FR locked at 20FR over Giza (Egypt), see the pics:

FR2.jpg


FR20.jpg


fr21.jpg
 
This is a great model like their Mig-15 but the Mig-17 is set up for FSX SP2/Acceleration and works perfectly. The pros & cons are few. First off, the cockpit if quite active with controls and electrical systems you need to manage like a real plane to get some of the systems working such as the instruments and a couple of other systems. The right side panel switches turn on most of the instruments. The weapons work as well. You have the gun pack in the A, F, & PF models and there is a working radar & firing AA-1 missiles in the PFM version(Soviet PVO only). The gunsight reticle is excellent as well. The handling of the plane is good but like any of those early Migs it can be a handful in certain parts of the flight envelope. Also, keep a close eye on the EGT guage and keep the temp needle out of the red. Let it stay in the red for very long, you will lose the engine. For those who do lose the engine, there is a live bang seat to get you safely away from your burning jet.

The cons of this model, I have to say they are very few. Minor bugs mostly but the only major one that is still uncorrected is the cockpit head movement control by stick/g-force moments. In the FS9 & FSX version all your head movements based on stick inputs are opposite of what they should be. In the FSX version this is more or less canceled out by FSX's correct movement under manuevering/acceleration/decceleration forces. I wrote the author about this issue and he responded a week later saying there would be no update to fix it anytime soon. It is the only issue I really thing needs major fixing for the model. Otherwise, it is an outstanding Mig model. Check Spotlight Catalogue and Stratco Catalogue. Oh, like the previous Mig-15, to me the sound pack was a little weak sounding. I have spent a big of time around real Migs hearing & seeing them fly. The 15, 17F and 21 are fairly loud planes. There are plenty of options to update the sound of the model to something more aggresive.
 
deathfromafar said:
The cons of this model, I have to say they are very few. Minor bugs mostly but the only major one that is still uncorrected is the cockpit head movement control by stick/g-force moments. In the FS9 & FSX version all your head movements based on stick inputs are opposite of what they should be. In the FSX version this is more or less canceled out by FSX's correct movement under manuevering/acceleration/decceleration forces. I wrote the author about this issue and he responded a week later saying there would be no update to fix it anytime soon. It is the only issue I really thing needs major fixing for the model. Otherwise, it is an outstanding Mig model. Oh, like the previous Mig-15, to me the sound pack was a little weak sounding. I have spent a big of time around real Migs hearing & seeing them fly. The 15, 17F and 21 are fairly loud planes. There are plenty of options to update the sound of the model to something more aggresive.
Click to expand...

Why isn't not being a real FSX model in your cons? FSX has been out over two years now. Developers NEED to be making FSX native planes. No excuses. I refuse to spend a cent on or even download a freeware non-native plane.

Seems those few developers aren't making native planes because no one cares to ask or demands them to do so.

That has got to be the most irritating thing about FSX- the developers who won't build real models for it and the community (mostly reviewers) that doesn't care.
 
Service Pack 3 promises to eliminate the head-latency all together, fixing that problem.
Of course, in FS9, Active Camera does an even better job!
 
Kiwikat said:
Why isn't not being a real FSX model in your cons? FSX has been out over two years now. Developers NEED to be making FSX native planes. No excuses. I refuse to spend a cent on or even download a freeware non-native plane.

Seems those few developers aren't making native planes because no one cares to ask or demands them to do so.

That has got to be the most irritating thing about FSX- the developers who won't build real models for it and the community (mostly reviewers) that doesn't care.
Click to expand...

Well said. I loved the 2 migs in FS9 but really they are definately lacking the quality you would expect for FSX.
 
Kiwikat said:
Why isn't not being a real FSX model in your cons? FSX has been out over two years now. Developers NEED to be making FSX native planes. No excuses. I refuse to spend a cent on or even download a freeware non-native plane.

Seems those few developers aren't making native planes because no one cares to ask or demands them to do so.

That has got to be the most irritating thing about FSX- the developers who won't build real models for it and the community (mostly reviewers) that doesn't care.
Click to expand...

No need to make it a Con if it works fine. I think it is far better in FSX than it is in FS9 in many aspects. Given time I am sure this developer will do FSX native models. Alphasim has their new Jaguar coming in as FS9 only with the possibility of it being a high quality portover(like the A-3 & B-1B which work just fine) By comparison, the Bear Studios Mig-17 is packed with features that I've never seen on a single Alphasim model and at a lower cost. This model is just fine overall. The minor FSX "Eye Candy" cake frosting missing doesn't make this model worthless at all.
 
deathfromafar said:
I think it is far better in FSX than it is in FS9 in many aspects.
Click to expand...

Like? (I want specific examples from this plane, not generalizations of why FSX might be better than FS9 with other planes or in general)

Given time I am sure this developer will do FSX native models.
Click to expand...
How much more time do they deserve? Companies have been releasing true FSX models for 2 or so years now, almost since FSX's release. If they haven't made the move yet, somehow I doubt they ever will due to the developer's preferences or lack of knowledge on how to get it into FSX.

The minor FSX "Eye Candy" cake frosting missing doesn't make this model worthless at all.
Click to expand...
It isn't about eye candy or cake frosting at all, it is about getting good performance. The DA Cheyenne doesn't have bump mapping but it is a true FSX model. I still use it because it gives great FPS. If they only had the FS9 version available I wouldn't even bother buying it. Portovers have many problems with FSX too. Even with compatibility patches there still remain holes in VC's, parts of the plane can be missing, the cloud and autogen issue with props, rotors, and windows, and performance as previously mentioned. Not to mention they just look stupid, usually really shiny or plasticy looking.

I never said the model was worthless either... just worthless to me.
 
Mig-17PFU with working AI Radar with lockable targeting and firing AA-1 Missiles(demonstrated in the screens) Like I said, nothing wrong with this model other than what I stated. In fact, few other developers have done similar levels or features, none with this era of Mig. More to come according to the email BW sent me.
View attachment 79680

View attachment 79681

View attachment 79682

View attachment 79683

View attachment 79684

View attachment 79685

View attachment 79686

View attachment 79687

View attachment 79688
 
I still agree with Kiwikat on this. I guess they are better than no Migs in FSX until such time.
 
Can it fire missiles and what not in FS9 too? Does the FSX portover have any more functionality than the native FS9 one has?
 
Kiwikat said:
Can it fire missiles and what not in FS9 too? Does the FSX portover have any more functionality than the native FS9 one has?
Click to expand...

Yes it can fire the Missiles in FS9 but the functionality is the same(quite good for FS9), I had the model in FS9 before I owned FSX Gold. As I noted before, the improper head latency was something I felt as many others did that was glaring and should be fixed and now we know it will be. I have seen a couple of other things in the works and they are stunning.
In all fairness BW is not the only developer who has been slow to go full native FSX and is more or less a 1 man show(if I am correct on that as I understood it) but rest assured there will be true FSX native models coming about from them.
 
gajit said:
I still agree with Kiwikat on this. I guess they are better than no Migs in FSX until such time.
Click to expand...
Yea, and the Skysim Mirage needs some targets, er, I mean other aircraft to fly with. :whistle:

http://www.mirage4fs.com/iaf_m3cj.html

I've always really liked the look of the Mig-17PFU with the radar nose. Thanks for all the pics.
This one might bear a closer look (even closer if I can get it using my paypal account).
:ernae:
 
glennc said:
Am I seeing things or the attitude indicator isn't working?

Glenn
Click to expand...
I'm not sure. I just watched some videos of it on youtube and it (wing position indicator on the gauge)
either seems to not move as the aircraft changes pitch/rolls or it moves in the opposite direction of
the aircraft. I do recall that there was something about the HUD attitude indicator on Russian aircraft
where the horizon line didn't move but other parts did -- just the opposite of western design.
Maybe something similar applies here?
:ernae:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top