DSplayer

I guess there are former Tomcat pilots and maintainers that seemingly agree that there were flares and chaff that could be deployed from the BOL/LAU-138 rails for the F-14 (Jungle from Episode 9 and of course Tung from Episode 23 of the F-14 Tomcast) who can help support the implementation of flares for our F-14. Tung even had a great story that accompanied his episode where he described how the BOL-IR packages would create streaks along the horizontal stabs after using them. It does make sense that a single BOL chaff module is roughly 1/4 as effective as a ALE-39 chaff cartridge since its roughly 1/4 the volume of one. But is it historical that a single press of the chaff deploy switch on the ALE-39 deploy 4 BOL modules in order to compensate for the lower chaff count or is it a thing you guys did to make the LAU-138 chaff bundles actually effective? If it is just a DCS thing, I wouldn't mind the ability for a special menu and a mission editor option for the disabling the LAU-138 firing 4 charges at once and bring up the LAU-138 chaff deploy count to 160 instead of 40 (since it would deploy 1 from each side instead of 4 from each side) even if its less effective than the typical DCS chaff charge. Here's some documents I was able to find relating to the MJU-52/B flare cartridge for the LAU-138 but it's highly possible that you guys have already found these documents: https://www.jmu.edu/cisr/research/OIG/Iraq/highres/09-Pyrotechnic.pdf https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/navy/ntsp/aecm-a_2001.pdf This one states that the MJU-52/B "which when expelled from the sealed container, performs similarly to the MJU-27A/B Decoy Flare [the flare cartridge used by the ALE-39] by generating heat through a pyrophoric process." "MJU-52/B utilizes the same flatpacks as the BOL chaff to facilitate operational use of the BOL dispenser. The difference between the RF and IR packages revolves around the different payload of the decoy devices" https://www.chemring.com/~/media/Files/C/Chemring-V3/documents/countermeasures/l5a2-bol-ir-brochure.pdf It seems like there might be more information from "F-14A/B/D A/G TACTICAL MANUAL, NWP 3-22.5-F14A/B/D, VOLUME III, NAVAIR 01-F14AAD-1T-2" but I've been unable to find the document online.

A bit disappointing. Maybe HB can release the changelogs for what they have planned a bit earlier so we can anxiously wait to actually see them when the patch drops.

I also forgot to post this:

During the latest F-14 Tomcast episode, Tung describes utilizing BOL-IR with 3 BOL (LAU-138) rails along with the the 2 buckets of 30 for a total 540 flare charges on his F-14D over Afghanistan. Of course the F-14D and F-14B (U) used the ALE-47 instead of the older ALE-39 but I would think you should still be able to load flare charges (MJU-52/B) into the LAU-138 and fire them off one at a time from the rails. Also firing 4 of these BOL packages at a time from each rail (like we have in-game right now) doesn’t sound right anymore after hearing about how they were used by both Jungle and Tung in their respective Tomcast episodes (but they were both F-14D pilots so that could be the difference). https://man.fas.org/dod-101/sys/ac/equip/mju-52.htm

Source for the original image btw (from Uncovering the F-14A/B/D Tomcat by Dave Coreman):

I know that our Mirage F1CE will come with the ALE-40 as its countermeasure system but I'm wondering if Spain or any other Mirage F1 operator outside of France use the Matra Corail rails for their countermeasure system. Would be pretty fun to just dump a buttload of flares and chaff at the cost of probably a high amount of drag.

Tung talks about the BOL rails (LAU-138) being able to use flares (5:24). He could be misremembering or misspoke but he said "I was carrying 540 flares as a FAC-A 3 BOL rails with a 160 a piece and 2 buckets" relating to him loading flares. EDIT: BOL-IR probably? MJU-52 chaff for the BOL rail. Maybe you can stuff 160 of those 1 rail and then fire them individually? Also 3 BOL rails? That means he carried both on 1A and 8A along with one on 1B (since 8B most likely had LANTIRN) loaded with BOL-IR (further mentioned at 44:45).

Probably could be like the fuel probe on the JF-17 and the ALE-39 loadout which use the ground crew menu as well as a mission editor option.

Reviving this topic for more hype:

If I remember correct what the magnetic course on the TID did was it gave the magnetic heading that the target was traveling towards. This can still be determined by pressing either the SPD or HDG CAP buttons. The heading of the target can be determined by looking at the HD and CR data lines (which mean the same thing). EDIT: HD is true heading and CR appears to be Magnetic Course with another name? Not too sure since the manual hasn’t been updated with some info that might be helpful.

Tbh I found it as a pretty fun party trick when I'm playing the F-14 with my buddies. Just the shock and awe as the F-14 does a push up basically.

Another one that could make a huge distinction is the beaver tail at the back and having multiple versions of those to choose from. Of course it sounds like it would be basically impossible since it would probably require changing the model.

I was playing around with the new spider detent implementation and I had noticed that the detent doesn't catch at 68 degrees but does if you just move the Emergency Wing Sweep handle just a little bit forward (and have the Captain's bars correspond roughly to where it is). Is this correct? Does it not catch beyond 64-67 degrees or so? Video Example:

Iirc the F-18 could also get AWACS datalink info from Link-4 sources along with their being an option in the SA page for choosing Link-4 as a source but this isn’t implemented yet on our F-18 (the option is x’d out). I could be wrong with my assessment and that option might be for something else Link-4 related.

Is there a possibility that in the future you guys could possibly collaborate with ED for a unified Link 4 code that has integration with LotATC similar to how TAF works with the Mirage 2000 (being able to choose what target is being sent to the aircraft via TAF)? Example video:

For those people that didn't read or see this little message from IronMike relating to an overhaul/further development of AIM-54C and AIM-54 motor performance: Sounds like we're in for a treat later this yea\r.

I can't wait to hear more about this subject soon! With this the AIM-54C might be my go to missile again. #WaitingFor3rdPartyMissileAPI

When using the ACLS with the Case 1 Recovery instant action mission, it seems like the ACLS doesn't move your plane at all. I'd assume this is similar to the AP in general degraded when the latest OB patch released. ACLSF14Test1.trkACLSF14Test2.trk

A track or video would be helpful in determining what's exactly going wrong with your specific employment of the missiles. Make sure you're in TWS or in an STT mode when trying to employ AIM-54s (unless you have the ACM cover up which is just maddogging the AIM-54s out to a range of 10nms). If you're in TWS or STT, you'll see an inverted T on both the VDI and HUD with a range marker on the left of the TID. Maybe I'll run up a video on what I do utilizing your mission or something if you need it. Those ranges for AIM-54 employment really depend on your speed and altitude and the target's speed and altitude. You can reach out and hit targets up to 100nm still at 30k.

Realistically you wouldn't be able to mount cooled AIM-54s on pylons 5 and 4 without the front AIM-54 pallets (6 and 3) since the front pallets carry the cooling for the rear pylons as well. In DCS, its a known issue that even if the missiles are there, the pylons can sometimes are not due to how the game interprets model arguments.

Problem: The R-3S and R-3R (which has the same Cx and Cy values as the R-3S) have too high of drag compared to the AIM-9B (the closest contemporary missile) which causes it to not reach the same speed as the AIM-9B. Even though the Cx_pil value is lower than all the other AIM-9s (0.01 vs 1.88), the Cx_k values are substantially higher for the R-3S and R-3R. Graphs: ASL = Above Sea Level and uses the right vertical scale M = Mach and uses the left vertical scale All tests launched at the labelled altitude while straight and level with active pause on while at Mach 1.1. 500m 6km 12km Leatherneck Bug Tracker Link: https://leatherneck-sim.mantishub.io/view.php?id=1184

Jumby talks about active phoenix shots (9:10) along with cutting the missile (dropping support completely but it sounds like it could be manually done, 33:50). Pretty cool take on that AIM-54 shot against that MiG-25 in early '99.