Kageseigi

One benefit that I really like about buying modules on Steam is that you can play them on both Steam and Standalone. I don't know if that's true for all modules, but it works for every module that I've purchased. I really, really wish you could do the reverse, and could purchase Standalone modules, then transfer them to Steam. I really hate the thought of being locked out of a module I bought if I decide (for a good reason or not) to use the different version of DCS. Though DCS is not the only game that suffers from this.

Is it possible to use Track IR, but override a single axis with another device? My throttle can control my pilot's vertical movement when DCS does not detect Track IR. But when it does, my throttle control stops working, even when I disable the Track IR Y-axis both in DCS controls menu and in the Track IR app. As far as I can tell, there isn't anything interfering with the pilot's vertical movement... there's nothing assigned to control it at all (other than my throttle). In the DCS control options menu, the "Head Tracker : UP/Down" input is blank. It seems as though DCS just overrides ALL of the pilot's movements with Track IR inputs even if specific axes are not assigned to use Track IR... like it just reads an input of zero. Surely there is a way to bypass that?

Thanks, guys! It turned out to be "Absolute Vertical Shift Camera View"

My Track IR doesn't handle Y-tracking (vertical movement) very well, but the controls menu seemingly won't let me assign a HOTAS axis to the Head-Tracker category. I would like to have some control over my vertical positioning in some situations (e.g. pulling heavy lead while still maintaining visual on the target below the nose), and my throttle has a self-centering axis, so it seems like it would be a great alternative. I even looked for the TrackIR input file so I could try transferring the commands to the HOTAS input file, but I couldn't find it anywhere. Is there any way to accomplish this? Thank you!

In light of recent events, the cynic in me says your problem in this particular case is because the MiG-23 is already dead

Indeed! Umm, if I hook myself up to Elon Musk's AI interface, does that mean I'll get to fly the A-6 also?

Didn't the IRST allow F-14's to detect and track F-22's at one time? Or is that myth/hush-hush?

Indeed. Does anyone know what those conditions are specifically? According to the manual: I guess that two of those conditions could be to have the AIM-7 selected and also have boresight mode selected. But I'm not exactly sure how to interpret the above line... It says "in addition to when launched in boresight mode," then continues to say that "the radar will also switch to flood mode when a target is lost, either before launch or after launch." Does that mean that it will switch to flood mode in "normal" mode when a target is lost? I understand it working if the target is lost after the missile is launched in normal mode, but what does the "before launch" mean? The time between the trigger press and the actual launch during normal mode? Or after the trigger press and before the launch during boresight mode (which doesn't actually have a target to lose?)? Or it will simply enter flood mode when you select AIM-7 and boresight mode (being "before launch")? And also, if the radar switches to flood mode after a target has been lost in normal mode, how long will the radar stay in flood mode? Haha, so many questions! And here is another. Outside of flood mode, is there any way to get the AWG-9 to send a continuous wave/guidance frequency (whether it be through an STT lock or some other method) without having to actually launch a missile? Basically, to keep a target defensive through unceasing RWR active missile alerts? I suppose it would be the opposite tactic of using TWS: instead of launching a silent "stealth" missile, create a loud "phantom" missile.

Very interesting! I'm curious. I've read that the F-15's radar can "flood" an area with a signal that causes RWR's to display active missile launches/guidance even without needing to fire a missile. Does the AWG-9's boresight/flood mode do the same thing? If so, are there any range limitations?

I think that is the main source of frustration for me. It doesn't matter if the Phoenix is five times faster and more maneuverable than any other missile, or has ten times the range... if its guidance system doesn't track, it almost becomes like a super long-range gun shot. I don't know how well a real Phoenix would be able to track more modern fighters dependably (or if there is actually anyone who does know), but I do hope ED hurries and gives it the attention and care it deserves. But I want to thank you guys at HB for doing your best to get the kinematics as close as can be! I hope ED does as much with the guidance system! But I'm sure everyone at HB is even more eager for that than us players!

Speaking of which, is there any way to STT a hooked target yourself from the front seat with that mod? I couldn't seem to find one. Without that ability, it just seems to make it even more frustrating... like someone waving a sugar-cookie flavored candle in your face, but not having any actual sugar cookies to eat! Alas, such a terrible, but effective method of torture! So please tell me there are actual sugar cookies in the mod!

Interesting, thank you, guys! A snap view seems like it could get me close to what I need, but I believe it locks the view in place, overriding Track IR. Is there a way to allow headtracking to still work with a snap view? I do like its simplicity, being able to toggle back and forth between two specific views with a button press, but the tracking is rather important. P.S. Oh, and I don't believe I stated the purpose for the question in the original post. It is to be able to change views when needed... a low view for normal flight operations, and a high view for dogfighting (as Squiffy spoke of). Since the seat already moves up and down in the Sabre, it seemed like the simplest method of achieving my goal.

I'm curious, it there a way to manually raise the pilot's seat (as it is in landing/takeoff mode) without dropping the gear? I believe there is the option to remove the raised position altogether, so maybe there is an option to leave it there or manually adjust it also? Thank you!

Different mission, different design, different time. You could also say there's a reason why the F-15 isn't launched from carrier decks, goes Mach 3, or has swing-wing capability. It was never designed for it, and there was never a need for it. The F-14 was also going to carry the AIM-120 (if the budget had been approved), but that doesn't mean it would have given up the AIM-54 (or its planned successors). The Tomcat was literally designed for the Phoenix, and having that long-range capability is what made it even more formidable and threatening, even if it wasn't what would directly cause the kill. It was the airborne equivalent of a spear versus a sword. To be fair, there is a lot about DCS that is not accurate to reality, especially when it comes to sensors and countermeasures. It may just be my personal opinion, but I suspect there are just as many (if not more) DCSisms that are going against the F-14/AIM-54 effectiveness as going for it. Whether they be due to the F-14/AIM-54 implementation that hinders itself (radars losing track too easily, missiles going into a loft after getting notched, inaccurate tracking/activation due to old missile API, etc.) or to overperforming defensive systems of other systems/modules (omniscient RWR, unrealistic ECM, RNG chaff, etc.). I'm very grateful for DCS and Eagle Dynamics for what they have created. But I do consider Heatblur to produce the highest quality simulations (though I may be biased). And when you have different developers creating modules, you're going to have different levels of quality and accuracy. Meshing them all together while trying to maintain realistic and intended functionality is a task I do not envy. And when systems are intertwined, and they are worked on by different developers (e.g. Heatblur's F-14 radar with ED's missile guidance with Mag3's MiG-21 RWR), things are bound to have problems. So I definitely would not praise or condemn the real F-14/AIM-54's capabilities based on its performance in DCS at any given time. Yes, they are old technology. But they were also the most advanced technology at the time, and continued to be upgraded. Really, I'm surprised with how little actual (reliable) information is known about the Phoenix for how old it is. It seems no one truly knows what it was and was not actually capable of. And that's a mystery that may never be solved. Were the F-14 and AIM-54 as great as the legends say? Probably not. But were they as "ineffective" as they are currently implemented/speculated? Also probably not. Reality is most likely somewhere between the two... the question is: where exactly?

I'm afraid I can't give details now, as I'm traveling this week. I actually had to copy and paste the new commands from the mod (2.7) files into my game (2.9) files. They are in the pilot controls list, but I think they are named similarly to the RIO controls. So the hooking controls are under the Hand Control Unit category... the half-action and full-action commands. Also the HCU horizontal and vertical axes.