near_blind

https://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=3487&context=utk_gradthes JDAMs came with the same update as the Sparrowhawk and required a previous update that upgraded the mission computer, the AWG-15, the avionics bus, and added an onboard GPS receiver.

I'm not sure there's a place where rolling up, criticizing someone's work, and then calling them a nazi isn't going to illicit a defensive response. Maybe certain WW2 sim forums?

Dunno. I look at an 80s Tomcat and I'm not thinking "damn, so fresh I'll bet you could smell Long Island". It looks kinda dirty and worn, but then again the cockpit has never really presented legibility issues for me.

None that I've heard. Y'all must have remarkably mild weather if you think that's what an aircraft looks like after sitting outside for years.

Kind of a double edged sword. The B was never intended to be anything but an interim step between the A and the D. The plan was for the entire fleet to be totally replaced with F-14Ds, be they newbuilt or older Tomcats remanufactured into the new standard. If the Communist Block had managed to stave off it's rapid decline in the late 80s and the tensions remained high, you might have seen some hypothetical with an all D, or partial D/B fleet equipped with AMRAAM and AIM-152. Then again maybe not. Noted asshole and enemy of the forum, Dick Cheney, hated the Cat As for when the F-14 is overmatched by the competition. For China, I dunno, we don't have a great representation of the PLA. How many PL-12s are you comfortable fighting? For Russia? REDFOR likes to complain DCS is unfair because there are no "contemporary competing aircraft". Sad fact of the matter is until about 2010, the Su-27S of 1980s Flanker we have in game was pretty much the best they had in serial production. After 2010 you start seeing fun things like upgraded 27s and 30s, and eventually the 35. Missile wise the Russians never bought into the R-77, really. It was all R-27s until the 77M and later R-77-1 appear in the mid to late 2010s.

There has been a certain void left by CSGO, now that you mention it. My bad. Your problem seems to be you're getting killed. May I be so bold as to suggest killing the other guys before that comes to pass? I've been told by reliable sources that spinning turning is a good trick. Just don't turn too hard. That'd be silly.

Or just, you know, git gud.

null I can not reproduce?

The tunes must blast

I don't believe I mentioned ICLS.

I don't see mention of another aircraft or actually _trying it_. I _do_ see incredulousness that it would work.

The supercarrier thinks you're a hornet with regards to LSO calls and the meatball. The ACLS code for the F-14 is internal to the F-14's code and handled by Heatblur.

They did not, at least not in AIMVAL/ACEVAL It also goes without saying they weren't actually firing missiles at the F-5s, so I'm not sure where we're getting the idea of outsourced guidance from.

The Booker T. Washington shuffle was to satisfy the VID requirement for an engagement. The lead aircraft would exit without firing, the trailing aircraft would engage from beyond visual range with the intent the Fox-1 would time out (i.e. hit) before the bandit closed to Fox 2 range. One aircraft guiding another aircraft's missile isn't really a thing, at least not until potentially very recently.

We actually had the BDA there for a hot minute in 2018. Unfortunately the DCS animation system wasn't set up to handle a boom that then dragged a hose, and it was replaced with the MPRS. It'd be nice to get it back eventually.

BSideSong1.ogg BSideSong2.ogg etc.

Let me guess, you tried to loft it manually.

I would reference Lunatic Fringe's comment. The last models of the Sparrow are smarter than you might expect.

That switch determines how the radar will support a Sparrow, shouldn't have any effect on lofting

Why would the RIO specifically have a mechanism to enable or disable loft?

The oversweep thing seems to be a bug with the wing sweep indicator, it shouldn't actually effect wing schedule at all.

Oh hey, this is still going. I guess I should have been more clear. This was reported and acknowledged by ED on the 13th. I don't know why the thread in the F-16 forum is still marked as "correct as is".

I'd recheck the time stamps?