Egri_komrade

The AIM-7 is considered a medium range missle and has an effective range of about 12 miles. So it would make sense to use it in a distance too far for a sidewinder, but too short for a phoenix, because as you would've guessed from it's sheer size, the phoenix is NOT a dogfight missle. However when used correctly, the AIM-7 can perform really well in a close range engagement, but also don't expect a godly performace, because the sparrows were a bit unreliable at the same time. It is just a personal preference, but a lot of times I prefer flying with 6 AIM-7's than 6 phoenixes. In conclusion: It has a better performace within 12 miles, and pull more G's, but it's a semi-active radar homing missle, so keep you lock all the way till you hit your target.

Ah, thanks for the correction, I wasn't sure of the P, so that's why I included it.

This idea came to mind a few days ago. With the GR-135 Early in focused development supposedly, can we expect it to come with older versions of the navy sidewinder? According to the manual the F-14 could carry from the 9D to the 9M, so that makes it 9D, 9G, 9H, 9P, 9L and 9M if I'm not mistaken. Do that being said, can expect these fine missle to come with possibly the A Early?

I didn't encounter these, but half of the time when I flick a switch they make no noise, like every second use of a switch. Very annoying

TCS internal texture, that means the actual lens gets a seperate texture

Just like it says in the name this system requires a PTID, the B that we have has an older TID, the round one. For HB to implement this they'll need to create one of these, but it's highly unlikely that'll ever happen: BTW if you look closely, this config is actually not that far from what we have in game, has the old HUD, no MFD's at all, old DDD, only the PTID is present, so who knows....

On these pictures you can see the evolution of the F-14 cockpits, with the addition of the newer RWR, it was moved down next to the fuel gauge

+1 A very little info on the progress could help us sleep easy at night

It's in the FAQ, but the answer is yes, we'll get two more F-14 variants, those being the F-14A-135GR Early and the F-14A-95GR, the latter being the IRIAF variant. So the main difference in the A Early, is basically the RWR, which is much older that what we have at the moment, the AN/ALR-67. The Early has the AN/ALR-45 which can be tisplayed on the HSD (bottom display). And of course the Early can only equip older weapons, and of course will come with a lot of cool new liveries that fir that era. The IRIAF Tomcat will be an interesting one, because all of the removed features those came with. That being no TCS, no external fuel tanks, no LANTIRN, no TARPS, only older weaponry, only dumb air-to-ground munitions, and some other small differences, but still with the good ol' TF-30 engines. You can check out the public Heatblur roadmap here, has pretty much most of the stuff that you asked: https://trello.com/b/HsMiJggJ/heatblur-public-roadmap Also I want to bring to your attention the Home of the M.A.T.S. website, a website mostly dedicated to the F-14 and I mean in really big detail: http://www.anft.net/f-14/index.htm Hope I could answer most of your questions mate!

Hi devs and F-4 enthusiasts! Recently I became more and more interested in the F-4 family, and to put it mildly the announcment trailer really got me juming in my chair in joy! So here's a question that popped into my head: How differend is the F-4G Wild Weasel from other Phantom variants that were used in air-to-ground missions? Does it have any specialized avionics or systems to use the AGM-45 Shrike? And if it is substantially different enough, can we expect to see it as a different module?

You learn something new every day, thank you for qualifying the misinformation.

Hello forum, So I figured this would be the best place to post about this, since devs and people alike see these. I'll get straight to the point: Could we get the HGU-55 helmets in the next update for the appropriate F-14's? Now I know it is a very insignificant part of the actual gameplay that revolves around the mighty Tomcat, but for skinners and history addicts (such as myself) it could be a simple, but cool addition. I'm not familiar with aircraft simulator coding (and by the way really appreciate the work the devs have done), but I can imagine it being a simpler thing to achive, rather than for example new aircraft systems and functions. Thank you for any developer who potentially considered my proposal. Tomcats forever!

Keep in mind, the Vietnam war was still going when this thing was born, and that just amazes me. It is so incredible seeing the big cat still hunting.

I was wondering on this same topic myself, and can basically say the same thing as QuiGon. Heatblur and TrueGrit said that first they want to focus on delivering mainly the german type of Eurofighter, so I personally think they'll add the ASRAAM later on in it's development cycle, since it's british.

Evening, So this bug goes like this: I wanted to try out the JDAM's and LJDAM's for the first time, and after designating a line of BTR's that I set up as targets on a blank Persian Gulf map, 10 out of 10 bombs missed by a mile, and all of them were too short, like I designated the target in front of the actual vehicle. I'm using a freshly installed client of the newest open beta, and I downloaded the standalone DCS for the sole reason to try out the AV-8B on a trial license, so I haven't played more than 7 hours of the plane. I made a few pictures and attached a .trk file that hopefully shows the problem. I hope these will help in finding a solution to this bug This is what the DMT sees: But in reality this is the point it designated. You can clearly see that the designated point is well in front of the line of targets: bug.trk

I can also confirm this. The lighting master switch has nothing to do with this, and either bright or dim, none works. What I noticed however, if you turn up the console interior lighting to max at night, you can see that everything lights up, EXCEPT the assymetric thrust limiter panel. Now that panel is unique in the B, and the A does not have it, and if we think about it, that can be considered difference in cockpit instruments, like the new digital engine gauge, so maybe the new DEIG and the flood lights are connected? To me the DEIG is extremely bright white colored night or day, and that is also a light bug, that came with 2.7.7. I'm not a game developer, however, I think it would be worth checking out these two things.

Damn, I completely missed that part. Thank you and sorry for being dumb.

Hi there, So for around a week now, I've practising case I landings by the book, just to be formal and every time I land my F-18 or F-14, the deck crew doesn't go back from recovery to launch mode. Since I've been practicing, I had a LOT of waveoffs and managed to land anyway, I thought maybe it's the waveoff signal that keeps the deck crew from switching modes, but after some successful 3 wires the deck crew still doesn't want to go back to launch mode. So the scenario in which I've been testing and practising looks like this: This mission is just a simple scenario I put together under 2 minutes in the Mission Editor for myself. There is an F-18 and two F-14's set in client based on what I'd like to practise, and a CVN-73 set 13 miles from the planes. Both TACAN and ICLS are set to on. No other planes are present, and no static object like planes, additional deck crew or eqipment are plased on the deck, just a plain clean carrier. Also the COMM menu is completely empty, no options whatsoever to interract with the carrier, as soon as I land. Is there anything I missed, that causes the crew to not go into launch protocol? Also here are some pictures that could help: 1st picture is taken just seconds after I landed. 2nd picture is a minute after I parked on an elevator and the 3rd image is of my COMM menu after I parked, no options.