DSplayer

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Is this still the link to the paint kit or is that one now outdated with this new patch?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

TWS STT

I’ve been having issues guiding AIM-7s when the target is outside the ASE circle on the HUD. I fire at the target once the steering cue or target is within the ASE but once the target is out of the ASE, the missiles sometimes just stops tracking. Has anyone else had this issue and is this intentional/normal or is this a problem with the Hornet’s Sparrow guidance. FYI, I am unable to provide a track at the moment since I’m away from my computer.

I was looking through old Tomcat footage and photographs and I noticed that our current B station sidewinder adapter fairing is a bit off compared to images of the real deal. As you can see in the images below, it appears that the IRL LAU-7 B station adapter sort of angles upwards and the front end of the fairing is slimmer than what we have in-game. Our current LAU-7 basically runs parallel to the multipurpose shoulder pylon while the real life one has a slight upward tilt (which causes it to be parallel to the A station LAU-7s). IRL Images: DCS Screenshot:

Btw all DCS aircraft have the same burnthrough range no matter the radar. It all depends on what type of aircraft is jamming. Like a fighter has a burn through of around 23 nm but a strategic bomber has a burn through of like 14 or so iirc. EDIT: FlyAndWire made a nice post about it that included data regarding burn through:

I accidentally stumbled upon this video while it was in my YT recommended page. It shows Naval Air Station Wildwood Aviation Museum's F-14B (non-upgrade model) with LAU-138s on the B stations, something that I've been trying to look for in historical fleet photos for months. Considering both pilots and the tactical manuals describe loadouts where the LAU-138 was mounted on the B stations, I think this at least a semi-valid loadout (excluding the missiles and most likely depending on squadron since some squadrons might've not bothered wiring the B stations for LAU-138 usage) even though its a museum aircraft. The only problem I see is that this example has the front section of the B station sidewinder adapter fairing missing on both sides. Also watching back on episode 8 of the Tomcast, they described a mix LAU-138 loadout (having chaff on one side and flare on the other) but I assume this an ALE-47 only thing and not a thing achievable on the simplicity of the LAU-138 integration with the ALE-39. Timestamped: Edit: I found another video (which is a lot worse in video quality) that might show an operational Tomcat with a LAU-138 rail on the 1B station. Notice how the object on the 1B region is as long as an AIM-9 (slightly forward of 1A's AIM-9 due to perspective) which fits the bill for the 138 since the rail is longer than the LAU-7 and roughly the length of an AIM-9, narrower than the AIM-9 that is 1A, and doesn't look like a Sparrow or a non-LAU-138 pylon. Edit 2: It appears to be from VF-2's last cruise in 2002-2003. Timestamped:

I said that 1 year ago... Things have changed.

After the implementation of the M206 flares on the Hornet, you're able to carry more flares than previously but at the cost of decreased flare effectiveness. This also isn't correct for certain time frame applications and I think some people would like to have the option to have the lower flare count for higher flare effectiveness. The ability to change what flare type you would like to use via the mission editor, mission time frame, and via the ground crew sounds like a good idea in my opinion.

I would like to see what you did to make this work out. Please upload the LUA somewhere.

It was a custom mod I had made a long while ago and never released publicly. Half of the mod no longer works due to the new DCS pure textures IC.

IIRC prior to 2.8 you could swing your Wingman camera (LAlt+F4) to be in front of your selected aircraft. Now you can't.

This is a nice little (not really little) document that details the AIM-9J's SEA Introduction and has hit rates for some of the missiles that the USAF had used along with some nice history and stats. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA486826.pdf It's good to note that the AIM-4 remained in the USAF inventory well into the 80s due to the USAF still operating the F-106 which basically necessitated the usage of the Falcons since they couldn't carry any other conventional IR or SARH missiles in their internal weapon bays. There are F-4E pictures where they're loaded with AIM-4s. In the perfect world of DCS, the AIM-4, especially the later model G, might actually do pretty well if you're about to fire within good parameters. You'll just have to suffer from the lack of a proximity fuse. Also it seems like the AIM-4 can actually pull a good amount of Gs according to the official Standard Missile Characteristics documents.

Some major things that I picked up from skimming the podcast: - They've gone past the development milestone "which puts it in a position that [RAZBAM] can be pretty certain that it's going to the user's hands and [a] really really really close term" (16:09-16:38) but Ron refrained from disclosing a specific release date or month or timeframe. - What not to expect for EA is the TFR, some A/G radar modes, and some weapons (44:17-44:36) I suggest listening the podcast for yourself since the two points I just listed are of course just two snippets from a 47 minute long podcast and there is definitely a lot more interesting stuff said that I didn't include.