MiG-15bis

[JendaJND]

8 minutes ago, Avimimus said:

A quick question: Are the Sabres in the accounts you are using as a reference ones with the F-86E elevator or the 6-3 wing?
 

- I've been able to reliably get the Mig-15Bis to lock into a roll with the only way to pull out being the use of the airbrakes. I've interpreted this behaviour as being the wing flexing. It only happens at higher air densities though.

Since "day one" this tactic was used as all had boosted elevators and simply could produce more Gs at hiigher speeds, not transonic that 86E elevator solved or 6-3 wing. 
All sabres could do that by combination of easier control and Gsuit. 

Are you using the airbrake mod? Because i just came out of flight where i could easily roll above critical mach number and use elevator to exit dive. 
The airbrake mod is the problem. The dive recovery without it is correct even though that roll might not be as harsh as one would excpect but atleast its present and should apply even with airbrake mod being used, just that airbrake is more effective.  But now? It doesnt happen if you use airbrake mod. 

Edited June 28 by JendaJND

[Avimimus]

FYI - I was operating without the airbrake mod.

 

[JendaJND]

12 minutes ago, Avimimus said:

FYI - I was operating without the airbrake mod.

 

Yeah, and even though the roll tendency is super lenient (reports say they had to use rudder to counter it properly, which we dont exactly have to do), its completely gone with the mod, i can max out mach meter in dive and i will be able to roll on both sides, yes its really really slow but the point is, it should drop wing aswell and i shouldnt be able to counter it with ailerons only, let alone push through it. 

Edited June 28 by JendaJND

[Avimimus]

38 minutes ago, JendaJND said:

Yeah, and even though the roll tendency is super lenient (reports say they had to use rudder to counter it properly, which we dont exactly have to do), its completely gone with the mod, i can max out mach meter in dive and i will be able to roll on both sides, yes its really really slow but the point is, it should drop wing aswell and i shouldnt be able to counter it with ailerons only, let alone push through it. 

I've had situations where I cannot roll the airplane back towards having the wings level until I've reduced the mach number using the dive brakes. I lost aileron effectiveness except for an ability to further increase the roll (which would have led to diving into the ground). There was no recovery possible without a reduction in speed.

[JendaJND]

2 hours ago, Avimimus said:

I've had situations where I cannot roll the airplane back towards having the wings level until I've reduced the mach number using the dive brakes. I lost aileron effectiveness except for an ability to further increase the roll (which would have led to diving into the ground). There was no recovery possible without a reduction in speed.

First one is without airbrake mod, second is with airbrake mod. 
Already in first one i was unable to induce wing drop or roll reversal ABOVE critical mach speed. While pulling out of dive fine without airbrakes. Atleast the roll is significantly reduced to the point it barely moves, still should have encountered wing drop that would force me into using airbrakes to slow down and only then apply elevator to exit dive. 
Second one is with mod installed and it outright allows me to roll both sides at speeds where airframe should automatically forcibly roll to one side and ailerons should NOT be enough to stop it, let alone overpover it. 
But its not even present, it just flies straight. 
Current iteration of 15bis acts more like mig-17 at high speeds and migh be even better given US tests of 17s having issues with using elevator due to stick forces WAY before critical mach speed. 
Iam not sure if you are ignoring the fact that mig-15 at around mach 0.9 should AUTOMATICALLY FORCIBLY start rolling to one side to the point it cant be countered via ailerons and rudder has to be applied. If you pull in this state on stick, you will induce even higher forced roll that will essentially kill you if not high enough. 
Point A) and B), probably the main major flaws of MiG-15 and fixed only in MiG-17 design, are missing as of now or are not prominent enough to be even noticed or affecting its combat capabilities. 

 

Edited June 28 by JendaJND

[Avimimus]

You can get a real time display of the Mach of the aircraft by reconfiguring the HUD. It should automatically correct for altitude and air pressure - so it'll give us a relatively accurate real time reading of when you enter the part of the envelop where the problems should develop. So, I would suggest customising the HUD to include a mach indicator and then rerunning the experiment.

[Mr_Tayto]

On 6/25/2026 at 9:21 PM, JaMz said:

On 6/25/2026 at 8:37 PM, JG14_Jagr said:

I setup my controls and I have Rudder and Toe brakes on my CH Rudder setup.  They show up in game and the inputs show up normally.  However in the first exam just trying to take off in the Mig 15 my plane immediately rotates 90' to the left with no effect from the toe brakes at all.  Played with it for an hour so far and it happens every time.  I can't see and conflicts or stuck Axis'.  Any thoughts?

Toe brakes wont have any effect...look for the other brake option, I cant remeber what it is called, You press it whilst using the rudder whixh in turn activates the brakes, then once you start roling you can use the rudder to steer as normal...hth

You legend - I've literally just put this in the main discussion forum, I did not realise this either. Same problems as Jagr too!

[JendaJND]

6 minutes ago, Avimimus said:

You can get a real time display of the Mach of the aircraft by reconfiguring the HUD. It should automatically correct for altitude and air pressure - so it'll give us a relatively accurate real time reading of when you enter the part of the envelop where the problems should develop. So, I would suggest customising the HUD to include a mach indicator and then rerunning the experiment.

So the cockpit mach meter is incorrect? As ive been using cockpit one.
Afaik it should be corrected and show actual mach number. Ive been at 0.95 in both cases till pull up.

[Gavrick]

Lets begin with this:

"It was not immediately that designers and test pilots managed to find the correct explanation for what was happening (wing drop), and considerable time was required for comprehensive research and the search for effective countermeasures against the wing drop.

The wing drop was eliminated mainly by increasing the wing stiffness — thicker upper skin and leading‑edge skin had to be installed, and stiffeners (festoons) were added above and below the skin between the main spar and rib No. 10. In addition, adjustment "knives" (trim tabs) were installed on the trailing edge of the wing to balance the aircraft about its longitudinal axis. This wing entered serial production in October 1950. Later, under the direction of V.P. Yatsenko, a new wing with increased stiffness was developed, and in 1951, after successful tests, it was put into serial production under the designation "SY".

Subsequently, on the later‑production MiG‑15bis, in addition to bending the "knives" (tab adjustments), a further adjustment for manufacturing asymmetry of the wings — which also affected rolling tendency — was introduced. In the attachment points of the wing consoles to the fuselage, adjustable supports — eccentric bushings — appeared, which allowed changing the incidence angles of the consoles and thereby compensating for the wing drop."

[JendaJND]

34 minutes ago, Gavrick said:

Lets begin with this:

"It was not immediately that designers and test pilots managed to find the correct explanation for what was happening (wing drop), and considerable time was required for comprehensive research and the search for effective countermeasures against the wing drop.

The wing drop was eliminated mainly by increasing the wing stiffness — thicker upper skin and leading‑edge skin had to be installed, and stiffeners (festoons) were added above and below the skin between the main spar and rib No. 10. In addition, adjustment "knives" (trim tabs) were installed on the trailing edge of the wing to balance the aircraft about its longitudinal axis. This wing entered serial production in October 1950. Later, under the direction of V.P. Yatsenko, a new wing with increased stiffness was developed, and in 1951, after successful tests, it was put into serial production under the designation "SY".

Subsequently, on the later‑production MiG‑15bis, in addition to bending the "knives" (tab adjustments), a further adjustment for manufacturing asymmetry of the wings — which also affected rolling tendency — was introduced. In the attachment points of the wing consoles to the fuselage, adjustable supports — eccentric bushings — appeared, which allowed changing the incidence angles of the consoles and thereby compensating for the wing drop."

Every mig15 US tested, suffered from this issue. Including the one captured in 53 from operation moolah, AKA the BEST korean war piece example there could be.. Hell, it was one of the main things they discovered, how trash it was above 0.86-0.9 mach. 
Also the manual i used, is from 1953. So they had these issues in 53 aswell evidently. 
So it wasnt exactly fixed to say. Especially when 17 is know to fix this high speed issue. 
If that issue was fixed with 1950/51 wing then this probably wouldnt be in 15bis manual from 3 years later. 
Iam aware of wing changes from 15 to 15bis mainly and they DID NOT fix that issue, if anything they made it bearable at altitude and counterable by aileron and rudder deflection. But it for sure did not fix it fully. 
Can we have actual war accurate mig-15bis and not some soviet fantasy late production without subpar quality control that barely touched if even that frontlines of korean war? 
Gsuit is already more than enough considering it appeared at the end of war and we have 86A from 1950... 
Also packaging that better wing with airbrake why... why is it not solo modification. 

Edited June 28 by JendaJND

[Avimimus]

1 hour ago, JendaJND said:

Every mig15 US tested, suffered from this issue. Including the one captured in 53 from operation moolah, AKA the BEST korean war piece example there could be.. 

You do know that a lot of the Migs in 1953 were Mig-15 (not Mig-15Bis)? As the war went on the average of age of the Migs in service went up!

Now that doesn't answer what modifications 'Red 2057' had (which was a Mig-15Bis of some sort). With a bit of research we might be able to figure out what series production it was. However, they did manage to get it up to Mach 0.98 in tests.

1 hour ago, JendaJND said:

Iam aware of wing changes from 15 to 15bis mainly and they DID NOT fix that issue, if anything they made it bearable at altitude and counterable by aileron and rudder deflection. But it for sure did not fix it fully. 

Unless I'm experiencing a completely different issue - I've found it 'bearable at altitude' and 'counterable by aileron and rudder deflection' only at altitude. At lower altitudes the aircraft, as simulated, seems to be as bad or worse than what you want.

Unless I'm experiencing something completely different?

FWIW - the phenomena I'm experiencing is that the airplane gets locked into a slow roll - I can arrest that roll, but I can't reverse it. I can make it worse though by rolling into it. The only viable exits are pulling back on the stick (if onset has just begun), or use of dive-brakes to reduce speed... otherwise the aircraft is locked into a death spiral.

[JendaJND]

1 hour ago, Avimimus said:

You do know that a lot of the Migs in 1953 were Mig-15 (not Mig-15Bis)? As the war went on the average of age of the Migs in service went up!

Now that doesn't answer what modifications 'Red 2057' had (which was a Mig-15Bis of some sort). With a bit of research we might be able to figure out what series production it was. However, they did manage to get it up to Mach 0.98 in tests.

Unless I'm experiencing a completely different issue - I've found it 'bearable at altitude' and 'counterable by aileron and rudder deflection' only at altitude. At lower altitudes the aircraft, as simulated, seems to be as bad or worse than what you want.

Unless I'm experiencing something completely different?

FWIW - the phenomena I'm experiencing is that the airplane gets locked into a slow roll - I can arrest that roll, but I can't reverse it. I can make it worse though by rolling into it. The only viable exits are pulling back on the stick (if onset has just begun), or use of dive-brakes to reduce speed... otherwise the aircraft is locked into a death spiral.

There is literally no roll whatsoever. With or without modification. Its clear as day on the video. I ran in no roll that needs to be countered by aileron and rudder deflection in both cases. Both cases pushing above critical speed of mig-15bis of 0.92 mach. It just rolls worse without the airbrake mod. And the lower you are, the worse the effect due to forces and air thickness. So it should be most prominent at low altitudes. 

[Mr_Tayto]

How does one brake on landing, without toebrakes?s

[GrumpyGnome]

2 hours ago, Mr_Tayto said:

How does one brake on landing, without toebrakes?s

Throw the anchor out! Drop the tail hook!

Just kidding, Differential Brakes are used on Russian aircraft. A single brake handle located on the control column applies both left and right brakes if the rudder is centered.

If the Rudder is not centered, let's say the right rudder peddle is pressed, the left brake will be release and the plane will turn right.

Look in the key bindings under the systems for "Wheel Brakes: common, differential"

Hope this helps.  

[Avimimus]

8 hours ago, JendaJND said:

There is literally no roll whatsoever. With or without modification. Its clear as day on the video. I ran in no roll that needs to be countered by aileron and rudder deflection in both cases. Both cases pushing above critical speed of mig-15bis of 0.92 mach. It just rolls worse without the airbrake mod. And the lower you are, the worse the effect due to forces and air thickness. So it should be most prominent at low altitudes. 

Ah - I've done some more tests - and yes, you're flying with the 1952 modification and I was flying with the 1950 modifications... hence why our experiences were so different.

[EvilHanz]

21 hours ago, RC_Korban said:

Мне недостаточна яркость прицела, неужели так и было? Так же, я бы всё-таки учел то, что рычаг закрылок переводился бы в нейтраль. И рычаг шасси бы контрился, так было в жизни. Не думаю чтобы пилоты не контрили рычаг шасси.

По поводу взлёта, зажмите тормоза, выведите двигатель на полную, отпустите тормоза. Вначале придётся чуть подрулить.

Когда прицела недостаточно, я ставлю на него солнцезащитный фильтр. Не идеально, но работает.

[JendaJND]

2 hours ago, Avimimus said:

Ah - I've done some more tests - and yes, you're flying with the 1952 modification and I was flying with the 1950 modifications... hence why our experiences were so different.

The thing is, first flight is without the modification. If we are talking about the airbrake modification that also improves wing. And i couldn't produce this issue even with fully stock, no modifications mig-15. 

[Avimimus]

23 minutes ago, JendaJND said:

The thing is, first flight is without the modification. If we are talking about the airbrake modification that also improves wing. And i couldn't produce this issue even with fully stock, no modifications mig-15. 

I've must doubt that your speed readings are accurate in that case - I've found it easy to produce (even at Mach = 0.88 or above 7 km). I'm very busy at work, otherwise I'd post a track. It'll be a couple days before I can boot up the sim again.

[Mr_Tayto]

14 hours ago, GrumpyGnome said:

Look in the key bindings under the systems for "Wheel Brakes: common, differential"

 

Yeah, got that - it's set to my "AFCS disengage" paddle thingy on the stick, which, for some reason also operates the speed brakes even though they're not bound to that button!

Edited June 29 by Mr_Tayto

[Jeka]

Приветствую.
Нашел несколько багов по кабине (скриншоты сделаны при старте миссии с впп) :
1. Перепутана анимация положения флажка и ручки арретира авиагоризонта (прибор работает в то время, как флажок показывает, что он заарретирован, и ручка арретирования вытянута, при утапливании ручки прибор фиксируется в нейтральном положении).
Касается не только МиГ-15, но и других самолетов, где установлен этот же прибор.

Скрытый текст

2. Перепутано рабочее положение рукоятки отключения бустера элеронов и подпись "ЗАКР" вместо "ОТКР", стрелка при этом указывает верное направление отключения бустера.

Скрытый текст

3. Отсутствует анимация индикации включения отсчета полетного времени (белый/бело-красный/красный) на часах, из-за чего непонятно, включены они или нет (не критично, но раз уж дали возможность управлять🙃).

Скрытый текст

4. Радиовысотомер не показывает высоту, хотя включен (в некоторых кейсах его работа все же наблюдалась при старте в воздухе).

Скрытый текст

5. Указатель давления топлива застывает на максимальных значениях после запуска и не падает даже на больших высотах.

Скрытый текст

6. В настойках есть пункты для управления топливными кранами/насосами, однако нельзя выбрать и выключить помпу 2го бака, отчего лампа горит весь полет и насос работает насухую:

Скрытый текст

7. Не горят лампы зарядки пушек (возможно, это правильно для версии с НС-23, но с НР-23 должны гореть).

Скрытый текст

8. Странное нейтральное положение рычага выпуска и уборки шасси, при таком положении фиксатор не может быть выдвинут для предотвращения непроизвольного перемещения рычага в положение уборки. При этом фиксатор зачем-то выдвигается для подпирания рычага в положении уборки (возможно я чего-то не знаю, но по идее фиксатор все же должен предохранять от непреднамеренной уборки шасси)

Скрытый текст

9. Не горит лампа выключения генератора при оборотах ниже 4000 (возможно, игровая условность, что генератор всегда работает)

Скрытый текст

10. Лампа "Выпусти шасси" загорается уже на взлетном положении закрылков и не гаснет даже после выпуска шасси.

Скрытый текст

11. Не заметил кабрирующего момента при выпуске щитков воздушного тормоза, хотя вроде как должен наблюдаться, здесь скорее легкий пикирующий (проверял без ффб).
 

Edited June 29 by Jeka

[Gavrick]

1 час назад, Jeka сказал:

Приветствую.
Нашел несколько багов по кабине (скриншоты сделаны при старте миссии с впп) :

Доброго вечера!

Да, многое по делу, и уже известно. Спасибо!

Пара комментариев.

4. Радиовысотомер прогревается некоторое время после включения.

6. Пока что всё несколько "автоматизировано", прямого управления у игрока нет. Планы добавить управление вручную есть, технически для этого многое готово, но некоторые нюансы остались. Вероятно, такая возможность появится  через некоторое время после релиза.

11. Будет, ен такой заметный, как у Сейбра, но будет. Ближе к релизу.

 

[JendaJND]

10 hours ago, Avimimus said:

I've must doubt that your speed readings are accurate in that case - I've found it easy to produce (even at Mach = 0.88 or above 7 km). I'm very busy at work, otherwise I'd post a track. It'll be a couple days before I can boot up the sim again.

Well, here is even better video including snippets of the US report on captured BIS from Korean war. 
He encountered the roll effect ONLY at mach 0.97-98 instead of .91-93 and elevator is still perfectly functional. 
Current high speed FM of ingame mig goes directly against tests flown on actual war piece from korea and it wasnt any defective plane. It was pushed to its limits in tests. 
And all of this is well described. 

 

[eszyman]

Can anyone explain to me what is going on with the Flap Lever?  The MiG-15 seems to operate with a very strange Flap Retracted or Flap Released mechanic and the animation of the actual lever does not help me at all.  I would have expected the lever to go to "up" for a period of time before (animating) the return to neutral to unload the hydraulic pump.  What I see is the lever goes up and just stays there.  Do I need to hit flap release to neutral the control?  Maybe I do need to do this, but my experience is that when I do that, I see "Flap Release" on the techno chat, and the lever sometimes goes to neutral and sometimes goes all the way down.  
I could be observing this incorrectly.  Is there some sort of time mechanic at play here?
However flap down also confuses me!  Sometimes it seems it goes from Neutral to FULL flap instead of Flap 1.  Other times, it seems I have to hit flap down twice to get full extension.  The barber pole seems to be either in or out, I have not witnessed a half position, and in VR it's tricky to see it on landing, this must have been hell for a real pilot.
Is anyone else noticing this?  Maybe I need to pay better attention, not ruling that out, there are a lot of things going on at the same time so I could just be confused here...

I would expect to see "Flaps Up" - "Flaps Neutral" - "Flaps 1 (20°)" - "Flaps 2 (55°)" - Given the key mapping options, I would expect this to work as a momentary button for up, momentary for down, just like climbing a ladder, either up or down the listed progression.

EDIT:  Correction this was a key mapping issue with Joystick Gremlin.  It seems to have trouble with modifiers, such as RCtrl+F, or RShift+F so what was happening was my flap up key was working perfect, but then the flaps would be toggled when pressing flaps down (because it would not see the RShift or RCtrl), so it may have been giving me, flaps up, flaps 1, or flaps 2 depending on where in the cycle the game thought I was.  The game seems to be much better now for mapping and I tempted to get away from the gremlin, but once it's done there, there is zero chance of it changing, say with a future major update where I might have to rebind all my keys... Not that 1C has ever done that before! 😘  Glad I have it fixed!

Edited July 1 by eszyman

[JG14_Jagr]

The solution was to configure the other "Brake" button..  It's differential braking and something else.  Literally once I set my space bar to that control and I just tapped it a bit as I added power it all worked normally.  It was operator error but the Devs need to make that very clear when the game is released because it was very frustrating especially when the Mig15 was the default starting plane.

[LukeFF]

14 minutes ago, JG14_Jagr said:

the Devs need to make that very clear when the game is released because it was very frustrating especially when the Mig15 was the default starting plane.

All of the relevant commands for each plane are listed in the handbook. I know people just want to dive in and start flying without reading anything, but the team has gone to great lengths to list out the relevant commands for each plane.