DSplayer

How many sweeps does the radar make over the area where the target was supposed to be until the target becomes X'd out in TWS modes? Or, more simply, how long does radar contact need to be lost with a target before the AWG-9 considered it lost?

In the promotional film, Phoenixes are fired at 3:24, 3:34, 3:39, and 5:01. A Sparrow is launched at 4:49 and 8:35. A missile that probably (and probably wrong assessment by me) is an AIM-9 is launched at 8:47. Those should be all the missile time stamps. -- Watching this AIM-54C promotional video shows that the 54's motor lights pretty early after being released from the pylon. There is even slowed down footage. Phoenixes are launched at 0:08, 1:06, 1:34, 1:55 (glove pylon launch), 2:02, and 2:17.

It goes active when there is something is in the expected vicinity of the track hold target iirc. Track hold targets are generally never accurate anyway and I’ve had X’d out targets go active when they only get X’d out just before active.

I've had this happen before when rearming as a RIO. I think it's actual fuel since it decreased at the same rate but we never got down low enough of fuel where we could separate between the potentially fake fuel and real fuel.

I think it's simply a texturing error on HB's part. Probably will be fixed with the EGT for the F-14B gets added in October.

When it flashes, its active even if you get an X. The missile can go active on a track hold target that has been X'd out if the missile sees something.

I just think this is merely a variation caused by manufacturing the canopy itself and not an intended feature like the Malcolm Hood on P-51s.

The TCS was still retained in the F-14D. It had a dual chin bulge with a TCS and the IRST.

Still broken as of September 4th. Would like to make a skin but I can't make a skin easily if I don't have access to the paint kit.

In 2009 there was a testing firing of an AIM-120 with the host aircraft having it's radar in standby while a wingman guided the missile using the MIDS system. I wonder if DCS can currently support this feature and if we could see it implemented in the future. Source Archived Link to Article from Eurofighter.com

It doesn't accurately reflect the improvements but in terms of DCS, there is a difference but imo it obviously isn't representative of how I think the missile performed irl compared to the earlier models.

Not exactly the same but the difference is super small in the code. The ccm is a slightly better value on the C than on the A.

The APG-71 would also mean that the notch filter/gate would be a lot smaller and that means a lot less work as a RIO to hold locks. The PTID probably allows for a slightly better interface for RIOs to interact with and maybe allows for better SA (on top of Link 16). Those MFDs in the front and back allow for more info at the same time too.

Unfortunately similar investigations in the past have resulted in no changes thanks to lack of information. Maybe a new set of eyes thanks to the passage of time could result in something new coming up but I personally doubt anything will change.

Maybe after the AIM-54 API gets updated too when that comes out. They said somewhere Late Summer or Fall iirc.

Is the paint kit that is in the first post still up to date? I'm trying to edit the LAU-7 pylon but it only has the Base + UV Guide as layers and doesn't include weathering.

You guys are getting drastically off topic. RAZBAM will not make the CFTs on the F-15E removable. I know everyone has their wishes but it just will not happen. Especially it will require a new FM for something that the F-15E rarely do and even when it does, it is only for maintenance (flying between depots, etc.). It's just not going to happen. I wish the F-15C could be high fidelity since it absolutely sucks to remember keybinds for stuff that you would generally be an MFD button or a switch. But I know that it isn't going to happen unless ED (or someone grants someone else a license) decides to do so.

I've seen other people make either LANTIRN, TCS, and/or HUD camera videos. How does one do that in the F-14?

Also on the F-14, the ECM automatically "blinks" unlike other aircraft where it does a constant jam.

As someone who died to Kula in a TACT match to a regrettably super long range Phoenix and is an avid F-14 RIO and Pilot, I do not believe the AIM-54 should be banned in the competitive scene. Most of the problems with the 54, I believe, are problems with DCS itself and not the AIM-54. The AIM-54 could get improved with the new API so it could perform a bit better (super high G turns that drain all the speed) but overall the Phoenix is only hard to defeat when you're not so sure what you are doing or in a rush. Notching the 54 is easy, just requires a bit of practice and quick reaction times.

This is not realistic as the pilot cannot deploy flares and chaff individually at the same time. He has to use the DLC button to deploy countermeasures.

A F-14 RIO plays a Star Wars N64 game on his PTID with a N64 controller. Also, I assume the PTID has a video input which I find pretty weird.

Firing with TCS Slave is a bit of a not complete thing at the moment. Maybe when they finish the TCS it would be a good idea for Jester to be able to access it. For the SP PD switch, you do not need to use the switch to fire in PD-STT for it to work. Sparrows in the Tomcat are a bit of a hit or a miss at the moment since they legit just refuse to track sometimes.

I firmly believe that Jester is not at fault for most or all problems when it comes to locks. The only problems that he causes is switching from PD-STT to P-STT automatically (which can be turned off in the special menu). Idk how TCS slave would help and SP PD doesn't do much and I think only helps in longer range Sparrow engagements. For my wishlist, I would like him to be able to switch the MLC to out or in (automatically or via an option to tell him) and the ability to tell him to stop chaffing since he wastes all my chaff when I'm fighting SAMs or missiles that are defeated already.

What part weren't you guys able to reproduce? Was it the no RWR warning bit? Feel free to take it to DM's if you need me to explain further in detail.