Southernbear

Nvm...apparently I missed it when they said the Essex that will be modeled in game will actually have access to the late war catapults so this shouldn't be an issue, Just need to get the A-4E-C guys onto the case to get the functionality working.

Ok testing it, the A-4 can take off with several load outs (AIM-9 + AGM-46 Shrike OR 2 19xHVAR HE rocket pods ect) in 800 feet using a Wind sock to mark it on the Nimitz...as the smallest actual deck size for a Essex was 844 feet it means it can operate off it, question is, will it be able to be spawned on it?

I personally can't remember specification otherwise but my question is this. How is the Forestall going to work in DCS? You guys have said you wanted to work on Supercarrier functionality for her so does that mean we will get 2 versions, one with and without SC compatibility for people who don't have SC but own the F-14? Additionally, the Forestall is meant to come in as a "free" update to DCS but (likewise with the A-6 AI) do you still need to own the F-14 DLC in order to use the carrier and AI aircraft within the mission editor? If so, then is it going to operate like the Supercarrier currently does where if you don't own the F-14 your still able to play on missions which involve the Forestall but if you try to land on the carrier the wires just won't catch and you will be un-able to use it's services?

Check that you have the DLC installed of course Other then that if you mean creating a free flight via the mission editor make sure you make the Aircraft's skill level either Client or Player.

See thats part of the problem though and links back to my main question, :( you can't spawn fixed wing aircraft on the Tarawa (aside from the AV-8B of course) and it doesn't have any wires to even try to land on her...best I can do is measure out the 888 feet of the Essex deck on a runway and put a marker at the end of the deck Doolittle raid practice style and see if I can take off before then or not.

Well the A-4E-C in game with full fuel and at least AGM-45 Shrikes or AIM-9s on can do a WW2 esk take off from the Nimitz with runway to spare, (could be a funky FM but whatever) I'm pretty sure I could do it even if I end up falling off the deck at the end slightly

As some may know some assets particularly Naval assets have particular spawns set, for example you can't spawn an F-14 on the Tarawa or a Su 33 on the Nimitz. It is for this reason I ask if we will be able to spawn other fix wing aircraft on the Essex, primarily the Community A-4 Skyhawk and possibly the AV-8B I mostly would like to spawn the Skyhawk to give some shake up to Vietnam based missions, sure, its not the carrier after it's refit to become an attack carrier but it still has the length to launch A-4s and it would be better then using an entire Nimitz to launch just a squadron or 2 of Attack planes.

Can you at least confirm weather or not the F-14A is still on track to release some time this Summer? (Summer for the USA that is to clarify to my Australian brethren)

I was watching a video featuring Dave "Bio" Baranek, an F-14 RIO from the 1980s and during this he brought up a very important bit of information. As someone who has had limited time in the RIO pit but loves every second of it I must admit I rely on the read outs from my displays very heavily. My question is, apparently, the AWG-9 Radar only received the Elevation Scan Pattern limitation read out (Highlighted in Red in the picture) as a modification in the mid to late 80s. Before that as far as I can find the RIO would have to use geometry and the angle of the radar to work out what altitude he was scanning. TL : DR, If you were to just look at the TID in a Tomcat before the modification there is no way to know what altitude your scanning unless you do that math. If Heatblur wants to create this kind of experience deliberately for realism thats fine but its a very small detail that might have quite a large impact for Human RIO guys so I want to know what HB is planning in that regard to the F-14A in DCS

I'd say its the best dogfighter with caveats First and for most if your versing ANYTHING with High off bore sight missiles you can kiss your ass goodbye. R-73s can contribute to this but PRIMARILY its AIM-9Xs that have more or less (as much as its a Meme when talking about why 1960s Interceptors didn't always receive guns like the F-4) have made the dogfight obsolete if you/your opponent uses Track IR or VR and can aim using the HMS. And with the Eurofighter Typhoon coming with the possibility of IRIS-T Missiles with over the shoulder capability, this may only be exaggerated with time. If restrictions (mission Lore wise or otherwise) are placed so your enemies only use AIM-9M or M equivalents then you got a good argument. As some advice, the best turn rate for the F-14 is dropping the flaps and staying around Mach 0.55. If you do this and can keep your speed there you should out turn every modern jet in DCS in the horizontal. Currently due to how DCS works I've been told and experienced the fact as an avid F-14 pilot myself, that it seems G Loads tolerances for pilots aren't standardized in DCS among modules (this was also told to me by GrowlingSidewinder if you want a source of note). As a result you should also be able to out turn F-16Cs even though irl if flown correctly at it's slot of about 400knts to 450knts in Dogfight mode the Viper should be able to match or out turn the Tomcat. You still need to be carful as the F-18C and the F-16C can still be dangerous with how they can abuse the shit out of their AOA. But in terms of BLUEFOR Vs REDFOR she is a force to be reckoned with. Edit: Another thing I forgot to mention is Jester, even if your out turned by F-16s the combat awareness that Jester gives is amazing. I mean you've been essentially given one of those optical systems the A-10 has in the form of a person. To my knowledge its the only fighter that can detect an IR Missile launch without the pilot seeing the actual missile allowing you to focus more on maneuvers and Countermeasure deployment rather then watching for missiles

Tbf I've also heard of the AI cheating in situations so while I agree I think it does hold merit but a test against actual players should be used to confirm performance like that.

Its ok, seems to work if you turn on(off?) Manual Ejection for jester so we're all good!

It isn't exactly that much of a big bug because realistically when is this going to be an common issue but recently I went to see if the F-14 could land and take off from the Admiral Kuznetsov. Every time I landed whether it be the old 3D model or the Supercarrier Kuznetsov (2017) configuration once we came to a stop Jester would eject. I was in a US F-14B and the Carriers were part of US Aggressors but we were in the same coalition so to my knowledge I shouldn't have a problem like this. I'm sure its not a common issue people would see often and a fix doesn't need to come out ASAP but it would be nice if one does as it would lead to some interesting missions where perhaps Russia and the US have an agreement and rather then A2A Refueling F-14s can use the Kuznetsov to refuel just to shake up long missions.

Is the USS Essex going to behave like a normal carrier in DCS's mission editor or like a helicarrier or what?. Mostly because I'd love to use the A-4E-C on her and I'd like to know if you'll be able to spawn any fix wing aircraft on it?

As far as I'm aware, MSL Prep is only used for Fox 1 and Fox 3 missiles....gives power to the pylons and allows them to calabrate or whatever the heck they do...pretty sure you can just fire AIM-9s with SW Cool on so the seekers cool down...could be wrong tho....

Now I know the reason we can't have full fidelity modules of REDFOR planes is due to Russian laws that essentially state no one can recreate currently in service aircraft in a simulated environment like DCS. buuuuut, as we've seen, that doesn't say anything about Flaming Cliffs 3 (soon to be MAC) modules. This is how we have the Mig 29s, Su-27 and Su-33 in the first place! So my suggestion is over the next few years add a few new FC3/MAC modules to give REDFOR not only more choice but a slightly easier time for mission makers if they wish to make a balanced PVP environment (or at least to the best of their abilities without the current boring model of F-14s vs F-14s, or worse the F-14 being only REDFOR) So here are the planes I would like to see! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mig-31: I want to see the 31 for a few reasons... 1, because its still in service and the Mig 25 is not so there is HOPE that we could see a full fidelity Mig 25 at some point but not a Mig 31. For now I'll settle for the Mig 25RBT Mod that is coming soonTM 2, The R-33 missile, specifically the 1990s version, has a range of about 160km or ~85 nautical miles, this would be a good pure breed REDFOR counter/match to the F-14 with the draw back being the merge as loaded for combat the Mig 31 weighs almost as much as 2 F-4s and is G limited to only 5gs (and 3Gs supersonic and loaded) so just...don't merge...plus the silver lining is it just means more interesting team tactics where people would have to protect the Mig 31s from merging F-15s, 16s, 18s while they can deal with other BVR threats and F-14s 3. Mach 3 memes plus I've always loved the Mig 25/31 looks ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mig 29K: This one is an interesting one. She was first drawn up in the 1980s but because of the Su-27K (Su-33) was put into the filing cabinet till the Indians needed a carrier jet fighter in 2004...once a few were built and given to the Indians, Russia then decided to update the plane and use it to replace the Su-33 (so yes they are going from a Naval Su-27 to a Naval Mig 29) I don't care if they chose the older Indian versions (hey just means more representation of countries) or the Russian 2010 ones but it would be cool to see a modern Mig that is also a fix for carrier nerds. tbh I'd be happy with the Current Mig 29S we have being Copy and pasted only this time with a tail hook but thats just me... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mig 27(?) I know the Mig 27 isn't in service and thus could come as a full module but since RAZBAM is making a Mig 23 unless they want to throw in 2 for the price of 1 like Heatblur I don't see the Mig 27 coming as a full module any time soon...buuuut hopefully with the Mig 23 coming it will be easy to have a HD module to work from to give us a Mig 27 in FC3/MAC fidelity or even full fidelity if RAZBAM or someone else wants to keep going with it. Think of it like a A-10A vs A-10C situation! only this time ones a fighter and ones a CAS plane!

This is a bit of a 2 parter. Primary I want the damn parking spaces on aircraft carriers numbered in the mission editor and the ability to chose where each plane spawns like on land airbases so WE DON'T have issues with people spawning inside each other on the deck and it also means I know where I can put static objects on deck without interrupting spawns. I was hoping it would come with Super carrier, it did not. The second more minor thing (that others have raised before) is I hope ED will reconsider and update the in game standard Stennis to it's correct dimensions. I'm sure many of you are already aware of NineLine's comments on the matter on reddit but the Developer philosophy of "Its not our fault, its yours" doesn't sit too well with most gaming communities. Yes Nineline, I know I could wait for my F-14 buddy to take off first so I don't kill myself because the carrier is too small...but for a Sim that prides itself on realism I don't think correct Aircraft carrier dimensions should be left behind an extra pay wall after already spending triple A game prices (F-14 or F-18 ) on said Sim...

Way I see it, Balance is for the Mission makers to decide, not the Developers.

Welp.

As an Australian these BS Hemisphere seasonal based things are annoying...So by summer I assume they mean from June-August...coz for us Summer is Christmas so it took me a bit to actually realize its coming a lot sooner then I thought... Same with the Hind release. Makers of the Hind said it should drop in Fall so I was expecting word any day last month till I remember that would mean September to November...and makes much more sense why I had not heard a pep out of the project.

Cool, thanks I've known about these pictures but never was able to find them due to everything taken down

Ok doing more research and by research I mean snooping around on 10 year+ old Pilot forums I found some interesting info... Apparently someone asked Dan "Turk" Pentecost about the subject, one of the pilots that flew CAP for Operation Frequent Wind and he had some interesting things to say. According to him the normal payloads that were carried were 2 sidewinders and 2 Sparrows...however apparently occasionally they did actually carry the AIM-54A despite it not being fully cleared for standard USN service...but they were issued to the boats in 1974 so it could have happened. According to him if/when Phoenixes were taken, 2 AIM-54's, 2 Sparrows and 2 Winders wouldn't be unrealistic. Main Phoenix rails were definitely kept on even without having the Phoenix packed during later ops. So just two winders and sparrows with blank Phoenix rails would be an option as well. Later on they more often carried just four winders on the side pylons.

Mind me asking what the key bind is called for the AB detent? I didn't know it had one...I searched for one but I guess I didn't use the correct name. Although at the same time the F-14 is superior to other planes as I also don't exactly need it as I not only have the EIG to tell us the RPM in percentage which makes it super easy to read AND the Nozzle position dial that also helps. BUT we also have the audible 'Clicking' sound when you move the throttle past the AB cut off. Its so good

I'm not aware of everything Heatblur has posted on the subject so I thought I'd post this to raise awareness and just ask what HB's thoughts going forward were when it comes to some of the weapons the F-14A might have access to. To my knowledge we have yet to have Sparrows earlier then the AIM-7F for any module as of current and for people wanting to use the F-14A for Operation Frequent Wind 1973-74 esk early deployment missions having access to such weapons would be a welcome addition The 2 main weapons I'm talking about is the AIM-7E and early AIM-9s. The Tomcat brought with it an upgrade to the AIM-7 Sparrow being the E-4 Missile with a range of about 44km or about 23.5nmi As for the AIM-9s its a little harder to figure out. Operation Frequent Wind and particularly, the Tomcat's role in it to my knowledge wasn't documented very in depth particularly because the F-14 didn't see any combat during the evacuation from Vietnam and as such (for the most part unless more info can be uncovered) we simply have this one picture to go off. Due to the time frame and Military branch its most likely a AIM-9H attached due to the shape of the canards. But at the same time due to the nature of Operation Frequent Wind it quite possibly could be a AIM-9J or J-1 (AIM-9N) given to the Navy to give the F-14's the best chance of survival if they were to get into combat and because the AIM-9H is old at this point in time (it first saw service in 1965). -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It is my personal opinion that ED should have created a few of the more important Missile variants more realistically and in a high fidelity fashion so that both AI could use them and then ED or 3rd party Devs could take the missile that best fits the one they want and make changes accordingly such as the AIM-9D, G or H or the AIM-7E given how prevalent AIM-7E models were during the 1960s and through Vietnam but given ED's current status and situation I feel that ship has sailed for now.

Look, I don't have Photoshop and wouldn't be any good even if I did...But I'm BEGGING someone to do a VF-1 or VF-2 Camo for the F-14A! They're so cool and would be really handy if you wanted to do a Vietnam Mission in 1973-74 with F-14As!!!