DSplayer

I haven't seen when HB actually said that. Their moderately outdated Trello roadmap lists both an AI and flyable module A-6E planned.

I was hoping I would get BS2 access after buying BS3 as well even if BS2 is sorta outdated like how the Warthog was done.

The autopilot is not designed for flight above Mach 1.

It seems pretty intentional. The LAU-7 pylons for the AIM-9Ls were not authorized for USAF F-4Es. LAU-105s would be used if it was a USAF jet. LAU-7s were used however in place of AERO 3s by the USAF early in the F-4E’s service but they were omitted from the manual by 1990.

That one does seem like a sorta easy thing to fix (as in add in a prohibited weapon limitation) but I haven't looked in the lua in a while regarding bombs.

This seems to be making way for the addition of the new Super 530F which is replacing the Super 530D placeholder. Currently the weapons lua has removed all references to the S530D and replaced it with the S530F but the S530F hasn't been added yet. Because of that the pylons for that preset (which has the S530D) is now missing. Probably will be fixed with the F1EE comes out with the S530F.

If that was a hot start spawn, I would suggest rearming with a LANTIRN pod as soon as possible so you don't have to wait the entire 8 minutes for it to align (especially if your target is close by). If you rearm with a LANTIRN pod within 4 minutes from hot spawn, you don't have to align in the air.

I didn’t even know that the F-15E had those LAU-106 stations available for use when the CFTs weren’t mounted. Does that mean that in extreme circumstances that an F-15E could theoretically run around with 8 A/A missiles without CFTs?

What is the altitude of your aircraft, range, and aircraft of the enemy aircraft. Tacview would be helpful.

While the TID might indicate the correct active distance, the missile doesn't actually go active at those distances. It is more accurate to test from the target's perspective.

Just a little flyby:

It’s just the older API and not AIM-120 code. It’s the compromise in order to have it go active on its own.

Iirc it’s because they can’t specify more than 1 wing sweep position when you spawn in. So they can’t implement wing sweep spawn position just for a “takeoff from runway” spawn.

It’s because the missile doesn’t have its own LUA file yet. That Super 530F reference basically calls a nonexistent item in the game. It actually replaces the Super 530D which was the placeholder for the S530F.

Ngl this entire forum thread seems to be more of an opinionated piece intended to rile up people rather than actually sparking any reasonable discussion regarding Tomcat BFM. I’m honestly surprised it’s still here. Also, I still think the OP is this person: https://forum.dcs.world/profile/134719-citybfm/

Is this you? https://forum.dcs.world/profile/134719-citybfm/ You seem to have similar mannerisms, especially regarding F-14 BFM performance.

You unfortunately cannot do that. More of a limitation since I can't edit HB's code on how it interprets weapons.

From my current understanding, the Cx_pil for empty pylons are the Cx_pil of the full weapon pylons minus the Cx_pil of the weapons that have been fired divided by 4096. So for the AIM-120C double racks, the full Cx_pil with 2 AMRAAMs would be 0.000739765625 + (2) * 0.00061 = 0.00195976562. To make get the empty Cx_pil, you would get the Cx_pil for the AIM-120C (which is 2.5) multiply it by the amount the rack carries and then divide it by 4096 (because for some reason the weapon and payload Cx_pils are different in this way). So it would be 0.00195976562 - ((2.5*2)/4096) = 0.00073906249 for the Cx_pil of just the pylons.

Just doing math alone it does seem that the Cx_pil values seem a bit low when loaded with SD-10s and then basically become insignificant once the SD-10s are actually fired off. Cx_pil for the double racks of SD-10 is 0.00112629296 and then when the SD-10s are actually all fired off the pylon, the Cx_pil becomes 0.00014973046. Compare that to the AIM-120C double racks which has a Cx_pil of 0.00195976562 when loaded and the a Cx_pil of 0.00073906249 once the AMRAAMs are fired. Pretty significant that the double rack of AMRAAMs are basically double the Cx_pil value before the SD-10s are fired and then once all the missiles are fired from their associated pylons, the SD-10 double rack pylon still has basically 1/3 of the drag of the double rack AMRAAM pylons.

I might have or might've not done that already for my own personal purposes lmao.

IIRC the older RWR that the F-4E is going to give audio feedback as raw radar sounds. I also think the RWR handoff for the F-16 should also give raw radar sounds to a degree too but I'm not too sure.

Btw by older missile API, I'm talking about the API used by missiles like the R-27 and AIM-54. The newer API used by missiles like the AMRAAM seem to have a more self explanatory way of inputting drag (still a bit confusing since DCS uses its own naming for some drag values). In the ModelData section, there are the sections for Cx and Cy dependencies along with the characteristic square and model params values but I don't exactly know how these values are made. In the case for the Cx and Cy dependencies, I know that they relate to Cd0 and Cy0 respectively but when I try to compare the in-game values for the R-27 with the "R-27 Missile Family Aerodynamics Development Report", I'm slightly confused by some of the values used for Cd0/Cx (specifically Cx_k2 steepness, Cx_k3 bar Cx0 at supersonic, Cx_k4 steepness of the decline after the wave crisis, and coefficient of dumping of a polar).

It seems pretty implied that a new paint kit would be provided.

Yeah LOD seems to show the damage differently than the main model.

3-863/3-6001/160299 was the first F-14A delivered to Iran and prior to delivery it seems that it was fitted with a chinpod that either held the IRST. It does seem that the Iranian Tomcats once delivered didn't have a chinpod that could mount the IRST. At least on pg. 12 of Tom Cooper's Iranian F-14 Tomcat book it states that "unlike Navy F-14s, however, Iranian jets were never equipped with the AN/ALR-23 IRST (infra-red scanner/tracker) system mounted under the aircraft's radome, even if the first Tomcat built for Iran (BuNo 160299) was frequently shown carrying one. Maj Ali recalls: 'The Pentagon seriously tried to sell the ALR-23 to Iran, but the IIAF knew that the system had a very limited range, provided data of limited quality and frequently misidentified sources of IR emissions.' Instead, the IIAF, having seen the excellent results achieved with the ASX-1 TISEO electro-optical sensor fitted to its late-build F-4Es, opted to wait for the more capable Northrop AN/AXX-1 Television Camera Set (TCS) to enter service. However, by the time this system was declared operational in the early 1980s the revolution had seen the Shah deposed and the US turn its back on its former ally." If someone here had the F-14A (IR) Program Management Plan (as shown in this forum post on a modelling forum), it would be easier for us to tell definitively (much like if Iran had fuel tanks and associated pylons or not for their Tomcats).