near_blind

Jester does that for you automatically

The RIO position has the ability to use both chaff and flares or any combination of the two. The pilot has the ability to use chaff OR flares depending on the position of that switch in the RIO pit. In my experience, if Jester detects a missile, and there is an RWR warning, he chaffs. If Jester detects a missile, and there is no RWR warning, he flares. Simple as.

Jester automatically uses TWS. By default he will start in RWS. Once the radar detects a target, he will switch to TWS Auto. Your cue will be the scan volume on the TID repeater will switch from 80 degrees wide to 40 degrees wide. TWS Auto will automatically adjust its scan volume/elevation to try and keep the greatest number of most important contacts within it's scan volume. The options to select specific targets in the BVR menu are for telling jester to STT lock specific contacts. Shoot order (or target sorting, if you will) in TWS is done every 2 seconds by the radar itself. Jester doesn't have a way to change the shoot order.

did you happen to use active pause?

That E Bracket? You'd put the flight path marker in the crotch of the ship, but otherwise...

Bingo. In our version of the Tomcat the LANTIRN can't interact with the jet. If you really want to loft, you would need to visually designate the target using the HUD, get jester to point the pod at the target, fly the CMPT TGT cues, and then have jester lase at the appropriate time. Essentially you're doing the attack twice at the same time. Not impossible, but a bit impractical with jester

The first operational deployment with the C, at least within PACFLT was with CVW-2 in 1987. That picture was probably taken as part of that. As for why the AIM-54A in those missions. When the module was introduced there were far fewer differences in how the AIM-54A and C seekers worked, the C basically being an A with better CCM, and the Mk60 motor was far more optimistically tuned. I believe the opinion at the time was the booster performance from the 60 motor outweighed any CCM advantages the C seeker offered, and was the missile of choice for the mission making team. Since then the Mk60 motor has been reigned in quite a bit, and significant differences between the A and C seekers have been added. The missions should probably use the C, but haven't been updated to dos o.

Is the diamond flashing?

Depends on the situation. Against a target that's running for its life on the deck? You probably want to wait until you're within five miles. Supersonic at medium altitude? You can shoot at 20 and the missile will have a reasonable chance of getting them if they don't react violently. Supersonic at 50 thousand feet I nailed an AI Flanker from 37 miles with an -7MH.

A friend on a different continent and I started running into this last year, and as far as we could determine it was caused by a combination of ED's wake turbulence and network lag. It only occurred when we were flying near, but not necessarily close to one another. Best we could guess is some sort of packet loss occurs, either the server or the client does some sort of extreme extrapolation of where the other aircraft should be, and that creates an extremely violent vortex in a place it shouldn't be. Pardon the language in both these clips, they weren't really made with public consumption in mind, but you can see in both cases the violent tumbles occur. https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxCYI-LbBCj7twkyOQ78-_f9afCz3EVeAv?si=zBFeggavVVViKEDB In the second one me aggressively approaching my buddy and decelerating causes _him_ to tumble as if I blew past him. https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxQ_jGwRX03Y0GobytxJLeXxTiv26TfQs8?si=Psvyv7jFUn_TE4f3 After six months of this I turned off the wake turbulence option on the server we use and we haven't seen this behavior since. It might be worth a try.

Do you have ED's wake turbulence on?

https://theaviationist.com/2013/11/06/f-14-damaged/amp/

The computer almost certainly has no idea whether or not a wing is missing. In the case of this happening the crew would almost certainly put the wings into emergency sweep and plant them forward.

I'll have to go back and check the marketing for where it promised the jet would have advantages over other Gen 4 jets with AIM-120s. Ideally one would fly it because they are interested in what an F-14 is like. If that's not the case and you want to chase the meta, may I be so bold as to suggest the lawn dart?

VF-74 operating in the Gulf of Sydra in 1986 VF-14 in 1990 VF-154 in 1987 VF-32 in 1990 VF-41 and 84 off Iran in 1980 (bonus Eagle Claw invasion stripes) As Sylfa said, until the introduction of the AIM-54C and the appearance of large numbers of Soviet/Pact medium range missiles in the mid/late 80s there's a dichotomy where AIM-54s are for bombers/missiles, and Sparrows are for fighters and everything else. You tend to find the 0x4x4, 0x4x2 or 0x5x3 loadouts on jets that are around hotspots where it's expected they might have to engage other fighters. Of the six pictures above, two were taken in the Gulf of Sydra during the Naval Action of '86 and El Dorado Canyon. One was taken during the preparations for Operation Eagle Claw. One was during a separate period of tensions with Iran during which two US F-14s fired Sparrows at an Iranian F-4 in response to it shooting a Sparrow at a US P-3, and the remaining two were likely during Desert Shield.