DSplayer

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).

Yeah this is a known issue which will be fixed soon™ and is the reason why launching the AIM-54 when not straight and level is currently not advised in DCS.

Extremely low res image of an IRIAF F-14A's cockpit: Our front and back cockpits is basically going to look like this for the Block 135 Early and Block 95: Like what those above me have said, the cockpits aren't going to change much and only the placement of certain panels and gauges along with the deletion of the ALR-67's dedicated RWR display.

This is a super nitpicky and something that would be super low priority if it even was planned to be "fixed" but currently the Viggen in the mission editor loadouts preview's camera is centered around the rear portion of the aircraft while other aircraft are centered along the middle of the length of the aircraft. Viggen mission editor preview side profile: F-14 mission editor side profile:

Yeah it's pretty weird. The F-18 and AV-8B don't suffer from this happening but their implementations of wheel chocks seem to be a bit different since you can't move your jet if the wheel chocks are placed down on those jets.

Is this still the link to the paint kit or is that one now outdated with this new patch?

Seems like the show pilot body toggle doesn't work like its supposed to now much like what the RIO seat was in the last patch.

Bug: When the elevons (both left and right elevons) are damaged, the non-damaged model remains while the damaged model is generated. Can I reproduce it 100%: Yes How to reproduce/description: Step 1: Damage the elevon (tail strike is my preferred method). Result: The damaged elevon has both the damaged and non-damaged visual model. DCS Version: Open Beta 2.8.0.33006 Mods: None. Images:

Not exactly required tho. The French when they were in the last years of operating their last bridle aircraft, the Super Étendard, just slung bridles off the deck after launch since their carrier no longer had a catcher.

I was re-watching some a F-14 mock dogfight video and I noticed the DLZ indicator on the HUD being a lot more fluid and realistic regarding maximum and minimum range than the one we have in DCS. Currently even if you have a rate of closure of +200 knots with an AIM-9M against a cold target, you will still get a max range queue of ~6.5 nm. If you compare it to what's seen in the video, you can see that the DLZ moves a lot more and is less optimistic for both SWs and SPs. Also it appears that the Sparrow launch zone/target range doesn't drop down to a lower range scale (i.e. from 20 to 10) even when the target's range is within 10 nm in the video. DLZTest.trk

It definitely triggers the pure textures IC now. It used to not.

Hmm what I'm seeing here is the tracks basically be off the visible display area and then being dropped/centroid not considering them in the weighting to keep the scan volume centered there. That was something I used to use to my benefit since it would prevent TWS creating a centroid in between on a target that was 80 nm or so out and the target you actually wanted to shoot at which was like 40 nm out and you didn't want TWS to just drop your intended target. From what I'm guessing, your third case didn't reacquire because you didn't have a SP/PH selected like in the first two cases but I have two hypotheses which use that as a springboard. One hypothesis is that having a SP/PH selected might contribute to a longer track extrapolation time (which I don't remember really existing but things might've changed) which then would allow for the target aircraft to enter the visible display area and then the radar would slew back and create new tracks in the same airspace as that extrapolated track. Another hypothesis is that since you have SP/PH selected in the first two, once the targets reentered the visible display area, it immediately slewed over to the extrapolated track and started creating new tracks based and the WCS immediately assigned target priority to those tracks which made the radar slew over the first and second time. This didn't occur in the third case since there was no weapon selected and when there isn't a weapon selected, target priority isn't assigned. BTW, this is quite different than what happened in the first video you posted.

Sorry I was indicating the way I had entered STT since I usually entered STT from TWS. I’ve had problems in the past when launching without going into STT and it not allowing you to switch to FLOOD.

Still unable to provide a track for now since I’m away from my computer. Just asking for now if anyone is having this issue.

HB’s Twitter: