IronMike

There is not really a list per se, but if you check the coremods/.../f14/liveries folder in your main DCS install, they are all there and you can see which ones are in by default.

In general this actually is not the right thread for this discussion. And - @BubiHUN - I get it, you are frustrated, I recently locked a thread of yours about your gripes with the aim54, and we may not see eye to eye on the matter - which is completely fine, and it is also fine that you try to vent your frustration further. But in the end it is still your opinion and facts are not being presented to you to put you down, but to balance out your impression. Now all that is fine, but what is not fine, is to sour the game for others who just want to start out, have a clean slate and fresh set of mind, ready to experience it for themselves and make themselves their own picture. In case you think you are hurting us with that - you are not. In case you are telling them something, which is not fully public and known through forums and else - you are not. In case you think you are saving a guy from a horrible waste of money or something - you are not. You are only setting a negative mood for someone who was looking forward to something new, asking for help, and potentially talking him out of - I will still proudly say - one of the greatest experiences in simming to date. Just because you do not enjoy it, because you struggle with the aim54 or cannot get past its remaining issues and think that an FM that is within 3-5% accuracy (more than required even by professional sims and additionally one of the most accurate feels), is "broken", it does not mean that others agree and do not enjoy it and share your frustration. Nothing's worse imho than trying to take away the joy from folks who enjoy what you do not. So, if you feel like going on a vendetta against us, feel free to do what you please in the whole wide internet, but please also understand that this kind of behavior is not really welcome here. Not because you may chase away a potential customer in such an explicit manner (which I would honestly have to ask myself why we should tolerate even that), but because you are trying to take away their anticipation and potential fun with a great module and setting a bias for them, out of your own disgruntled mood. That's really not ok. And I hope we can simply leave it at that and I wish you a Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays. Please keep this thread on topic, everyone. Thank you.

Unfortunately something broke in ground vehicle logic, which breaks Training Day. You can download a fix here, please: As a small headsup, this also likely means that we will have to publish Reforger II after the holidays, my apologies.

Thanks for finding that. It seems the last patch broke something with vehicle pathfinding, they now start driving circles when driving through an outpost - which is unfortunately bad news also for the Reforger Part II campaign, heh. I fixed Training Day, and you can download it here, I got rid of the outpost and built a custom checkpoint, and I had to adjust the vehicle speeds, slopes seem to affect them less now, etc. Simply download the attached mission and drop into your main install Eagle Dynamics\DCS World (Openbeta)\Mods\aircraft\F14\Missions\Quickstart folder and replace the existing mission. My apologies for the inconvenience. EDIT: NOTE: This version requires the WW2 Asset pack. Find a version without the requirements a few comments below please. Thank you. F-14A_IA_Caucasus_Training Day.miz

There is no difference, except that you need to bind the purchased key from our store to your DCS account, which is a simple copy, paste and click affair, the link will be provided to you by email after purchase from our store, as well as the key. The split between us and ED is always the same, only that purchases from our store go to us first, and purchases on the DCS E-shop go to ED first. In the end, either purchase supports both us and ED of course. Please note: like purchases from the e-shop, purchases from our store are not compatible with steam. Thank you for considering our products and we wish you Happy Holidays and a Happy New Year!

Yes, exactly as @Naquaii says. The intricate guidance of these missiles is currently not fully modelled in DCS in this exact manner and capacity unfortunately, hence we need to work around it like this. Harpoon and 802 are different in many ways.

USS America (CV 66); Scene Camera Operator: PH3 Pruitt. Dear all, we would like to thank you all for a great 2022, for your neverending support and feedback, for great moments shared, for all the lows and highs a year can bring, for your joy with our modules, for your thoughtfulness, for your investment into helping us improve, and above all for your caring about us and our products. We hope 2022 has been kind to you and your loved ones, we hope it brought you happiness and success and that you stayed healthy throughout. We wish you as much for 2023, that you may prosper and have a year filled with lightness, laughter and love. As a small thank you, we thought it was time to do a small competition again, and what better occasion can there be than Holiday Season? The USS Forrestal's crew needs your help! They are not at home for Christmas this year, and would kindly like you to help them get a more festive feeling! Submit a Screenshot preferably including the USS Forrestal with a "winter-like" or "Christmas-like" theme. Be creative, use your imagination, use mods if you like. Can you get the deck to look ready for Christmas and New Year? Or will you solve the problem and lift the crew's spirits with a festive fly-by? Or will you fotograph a reindeer cow under a Christmas pine tree, with the Forrestal seen in the far distance, from the slope of a snowy mountain? The Forrestal's crew appreciates all your ideas to help them find that loving feeling, whether you decorate the deck for them or capture an image that sets the mood in the ready room - it is up to you. Winner gets: 1. Place: A lifetime supply of free Heatblur DCS modules, past, present and future. You get two copies of each module we release as long as you (and us and DCS) live, including existing and future modules, by Heatblur Simulations for DCS. 2. Place: Two copies of the upcoming DCS: F-4 Phantom by Heatblur Simulations (or two existing modules by Heatblur Simulations of your choice). 3. Place: One copy of your choice between the DCS: Viggen, DCS: Tomcat and DCS: Phantom by Heatblur Simulations. Everybody else: a place in our hearts and a warm thank you from the Forrestal's crew. Winners will be announced after January 6th, 2023. EDIT: Winners will be announced after January 11th, 2023 (due to the extended deadline). ---------------------------------- Rules: 1. Submit 1 screenshot per person. Multiple accounts are not allowed. Allowed are also self-made drawings or paintings "à la mode DCS". You can use photoshop for screenshots in a creative way, but please stay as close to DCS as possible - for example we prefer to see you capture lighting and effects in game rather than adding them afterwards, etc. - unless it is a "creative expansion" (like painting in a christmas tree, etc). No need to overthink it, feel free and be creative. 2. Competition dead line for submissions: January 3rd 2023, 0100Zulu. EDIT: DEADLINE EXTENDED TILL JAN 8th, 2400Zulu. You can edit your submissions until that time. Posts submitted or edited past that time, will not be eligible for participation. Feel free to add a few words to your submission, from thoughts to quotes to poetic lines... Whatever you want to share with us and your fellow community. Whatever you think will help get the Forrestal's crew in the mood. This is completely optional. ----------------------------------- We're looking very much forward to your entries! GOOD LUCK! We wish you all Happy Holidays and a Happy New Year 2023! The Heatblur Team Disclaimer: We reserve ourselves the right to exclude from the competition without explanation, verdicts are final and cannot be challenged. Winners will be chosen only from screenshots submitted to this thread by members of the Heatblur Team. Prizes will be distributed in the form of (a) digital key(s), when or once available. Keys need to be bound to an existing DCS account via this coupon link - click here . Winners can gift their keys to a third party. Modules won in this competition are not steam compatible and need the DCS standalone version to be used (and cannot be transfered) - you can register here. No cash disbursement and/or any replacement of the prizes is possible. Any recourse to courts of law is excluded.

Unfortunately this is currently not possible otherwise in DCS.

Sorry guys, we will upload the paintkit shortly. Thank you for your kind patience.

This sounds like you were still in TWSA.

Oh dear, it seems the mission fixes did not get included. Our apologies. Please download and replace existing ones with these two missions. F-14B_Campaign_Mission5.miz F-14B_Campaign_Mission5_SC.miz

No. Why would it be? The drag and lift the flaps add is known by the FM and was there since release. What we added is the ability to jam them (aka to bend or break the torques that drive the flaps). Performance has nothing to do with it. It would be quite a bad FM, if you would have to adjust engine performance to deal with a drag that was induced by flight surfaces. Rather you would want to make sure that the drag and lift they add is set correctly. Which it is.

Correct. This wasn't done following new data, instead it was needed to overhaul the limitations of a much older code.

No one asks you to. Not a single customer owes us a single bug report. But it should be known at the same time, that simply saying "it doesn't work", does not allow us to follow up much. In this case it is a bit different, the (factual) issues are known to us (as are the more non-factual complaints and opinions), but the fact remains. That said, this thread is full of hyperbole, which does not help make a case, if I may add ever so kindly. This is where factual bug reports that leave out emotions, help your cause simply better, because they add data that helps speed up the process of fixing. The more data we have, the easier we (and ED) can pinpoint the issue and adjust what needs adjusting. Reading hyperbole or absolute statements such as "is utterly useless" does not allow for much more than acknowledging your opinion, which by all means you are entitled to have and which is by all means appreciated a priori. Of course it also invites diverse or controverse opinion as well, which everyone else is allowed to have as much as yourself, including us, btw. Hence, if you put it like that, I disagree. The phoenix is anything but useless. How would I know? Because I use it myself. And if you look closely, the experience with the phoenix is as diverse as are the users on this forum, and the difference between those who make it work and those who do not, is that the former do not open threads about it being so brilliant for them. They make a post or two, about how more or less successful they were with it (online or against XY), or post a tacview here and there, but then don't linger much, because they do not face a constantly re-occurring problem for themselves, like not getting the missile to work. This is not a remark on skill btw, just on the matter of the fact that some make it work more, and some struggle with it more. And the latter do have our full understanding. It is an older missile to employ while still "amraam enough" to trick folks into thinking it should offer the same reliability and ease of use (by truly forgetting about it once fired), both from the side of the employing platform (AWG-9) as well as on its own. But this is not true. The AWG-9's TWS was the first ever, and came with its own set of issues. For example target weighting. We use the algorithm used by the AWG-9. And it has its limits. It comes to no surprise that PDSTT was a preferred employment method IRL, but in DCS players of course do not want to drop the comfort or advantage or if you will, "leveling ability" of TWS when flying against opponents like F-15s, F-16s and F-18s which come equipped with a much more modern and reliable TWS, more modern amraams, etc. Understandable to then think: But what good is the phoenix and TWS to me, if I have to fire it like a sparrow against a slammer weilding Viper??? And this is where making the phoenix work is more complicated than making an aim120 work, it involves more pre-launch decision making and more post-launch caretaking. (But if one person can make it work against Vipers (forgot who recently posted about that), so can we all, at least theoretically. And reports like that do not stand alone, just that they are more quiet, as mentioned.) This is one side that feeds into folks having issues, and many explanations in this thread and the main thread point exactly to that. The other side are of course its remaining issues as well: they add to that complexity and make it even harder and sometimes you can do everything right and it still won't work. That is true for all missiles in DCS to some degree btw. Missiles in a sim will never be perfect, heck, they are not even perfect IRL. Just recently a new post came up about the phoenix turning 180 with an overpitched shot. Guess what, if you overpitch or "manually loft" a missile that much IRL, it could potentially encounter something eerily similar. That said, in DCS this is still a bug, because it was not coded with intention to go 180 when you crassly overloft. But you know the saying, when life sometimes simulates fiction... And it does not change the fact, that even without a single bug being present anymore, you still should not overloft it. Which just goes to show: dealing with missile issues in principle is a thing of flying fighter jets. That certain bugs are more frustrating than others is also understandable: the automatic pitch up after being notched is a thorn in our eyes just as it is in yours. The general lofting logic otoh is far less off than most make it out to be. It is supposed to go high steep fast. And we tested it: a more shallow loft results in less terminal velocity. Which goes to show: not everything being "felt" or tossed around, is always substantiated. Hence: factual bug reports help more than opinions and feelings, as much as we appreciate any kind of feedback. Just that some is actionable and some isn't really, as much as we'd want it to be. Lastly, about issues not in our hands: I am not sure who you talked to at Heatblur (it wasn't me, I've seen you sent me a PM but I hadn't had the time to reply to it yet, and hopefully my reply will answer most of it here), and who you talked to at ED. But both ED and us have a firm and commonly shared understanding that we want to improve what we can, each from their side, which @NineLine pointed out aptly above. We work together and neither of us is interested in shifting blame. But we share different responsibilities, and some things fall upon us to work on, and some fall onto ED to work on, simple as that. AI, guidance, etc - that is in ED's hands. Which does not mean that we simply go "here, fix it please." We make our case concerning these issues, trying to produce actionable data that shows where one fix would help another, where things work not as they should, or need fixing etc. Likewise ED engages with us in this dialogue and common effort the same way. We help each other, out of a common interest to improve what must and can be improved. And some things are quick and easier to fix, and ED has always been very forthcoming in helping us with numerous issues that let us improve guidance, loft, fixing various bugs with the missile, from patch to patch, ever since we adjusted the overperformance of the phoenix. But other things cannot be changed over night, like having a new AI, or some parts of guidance logic, which result in some weird outcomes like the pitch up after the notch. We first need to understand what it is wrong or causing it, to be able to fix it. When we say we are working on it, we also mean that. And as soon as we understand the cause of an issue, either on our or ED's side, it will get fixed, as always. But we keep turning in circles here on our forums about issues that are known and, in the end, are still not in our hands and affect not only the phoenix in DCS, which also means: ED is not only responsible to help us, but to help numerous 3rd parties, keep a base game progressing, keeping modules maintained, etc. The phoenix is one issue out of many. Let me conclude with: we do hear you. We heard you the first time in the guided phoenix discussions and every subsequent time, too. We agree with some, but not with everything, and in both cases thank you for your feedback. You really don't need to open extra threads about these issues (especially since that is what the guided discussion thread is for), because we are fully aware of all the remaining issues and we have been committed to them from the moment we encountered them. But at the same time a lot of the complaining stems from wrongly set expectations as well, and as someone who flies the Tomcat daily, I know that it is far from unplayable, or to circle back to the phoenix: far from useless. The issues that remain anger me as much as they do you. But they pester me far less, because within the entire complexity of employing the phoenix with maximum aid by pilot and RIO to make a successful kill shot, or defensive shot, these issues are not the primary concern. And once you develop a certain discipline for the phoenix, you may find, like me, and many other, less loud voices, that these issues factor into the balance between success and failure far less, than one would think if taking the hyperbole, the boiling emotions and the frustration shared among some too literally - if you'll pardon me for saying it a bit more directly. Either way, I can assure you: we are as interested in fixing the remaining issues as you are. Even so I would caution everyone to not think that these fixes will turn the phoenix into the magical trick for all treats that some apparently would like it to be. But most importantly: hyperbole and exaggerations will not get us there. And I cannot stress this enough: the phoenix did not get nerfed. We don't nerf stuff. It is a notion as misguided as the accusations we received before that we intentionally overpowered the missile "to sell more modules." We adjusted its overperformance to be much more realistic following newly gained insights. That is something everyone should finally get to terms with. We do not care how good or bad a missile is, or what it means for PvP etc. And while we hope that you are successful with it and have fun with it, above all we care about it being accurate. PS: I am closing the thread, because we already have a guided discussion thread for the phoenix. Please keep discussing there. Opening more threads about your gripes with the phoenix will not help speed up the process at all. Factual reports will. Thank you! https://forum.dcs.world/topic/308085-dcs-f-14-development-update-aim-54-phoenix-improvements-overhaul-guided-discussion/

The wheelchocks are a small bug that unfortunately did not receive the last minute fix anymore that we uploaded, as we hoped. It will be fixed in the patch.

The Tomcat's wake turbulence and burble are part of its FM and thus cannot be turned off. They however have no impact on your performance. It is also generally best advised to have wake turbulence off when flying the Tomcat, because it else doubles with ED's. We're currently waiting for an ability to disable ED's wake turbulence on our side permanently, as is the case with the burble already.

Thank you we will take a look.

Thank you!

Thank you!

Thank you, we will take a look! EDIT: This is caused by the tires rotating before spawn or having rotated after landing. We uploaded a last minute fix for it, but it seems it unfortunately did not make it into the patch anymore. It will be in the next patch, our apologies.

As explained above. One way this was mitigated, was by powering up the jet, aligning the INS, storing it, and powering it down again to have it ready before actual flight. This is available ofc with the stored heading alignment.

Correct, aerodyn cover for the TCS, and eventually - maybe - have the entire TCS pod removable. The fuel pylons will not become removable, as it would include reworking large parts of the fuselage entirely (which is out of scope time and ressource wise). Whether or not that may change in the more distant future, ofc remains to be seen, but it should neither be expected, nor do we want to promise anything. Until then, the best answer thus is simply no, unfortunately. Thank you all for your kind understanding.

Apologies, I was a bit late today with the feedback threads.

To clarify, I am not sure if there will be a hotfix patch, the campaign, if released next week, will be released as separate download first, not necessarily in a patch, or unlikely.

From our testing this *should* not be the case, and could very well be "feelings", hehe. We primarily "shaped off" the overperformance, especially at high altitudes.