Stackup

Iirc it's because the team behind it want to keep it freely available as a hobby they do for fun instead of a job. Plus I think they said they would have to entirely redo the aircraft and learn the SDK since what they have now is a bunch of workarounds to get stuff working. It would be nice if ED would better support mods in terms of SDK access. Per their FAQ, access to the SDK would allow fully functioning radios, the ability to use guided weapons like the Bullpup, the possibility of buddy tanking, and better supercarrier integration.

nullToo bad we likely have to wait for the world map and all the new tech features we've been told are coming. Destructible terrain and trees, IR missiles and AI that can't see through clouds, improved infantry, etc. Then there's napalm/incendiarys which are still on the F-18 roadmap and used by a lot of upcoming planes, AIM-9E, AIM-4D, extended fuse bombs, CBU pods like the A-4 mod(which were used on the F-4E but we aren't getting them for some reason), and lot's of other stuff that hasn't been mentioned including period correct ground, naval, and air assets. For now, at least there are mods and what I like to call "Vietnam at home" or "I can't believe it's not Vietnam for the 30 seconds it takes to traverse the southern part of Guam".null

Part of me hopes the Kiowa does come first since that's also been a long time coming. It's basically gonna come down to what the patch cycle actually ends up being and who gets done with ED QA testing first. The February update could push the 6 week cycle into April making the F-4 miss the March release deadline. That and whether or not Heatblur is correct about their testing team, since ED has yet to recieve a release candidate of the F-4. Heatblur has said they have a good enough testing team that it will make the ED QA testing easier, but I would think that no matter how good the module is, it will take at least a couple of weeks of ED testing to get it tested and properly into an update patch. I suppose we'll find out eventually, but I will be pleasantly surprised if we don't see yet another delay. Need my A-6E AI and the Early F-14A. Oh and the F-4E might be nice too

The Phantom module was used to completely revamp Heatblurs codebase including Jester 2.0 and the new RWR system, not to mention that every single component has been meticulously detailed with degradation, wear, and failure with the new component system. The F-14 has no where near that level of component modelling and while they will be backporting things like Jester 2.0, the grease pencil, and the RWR(at least for the Early A with the Strobe RWR that needs the sounds), adding the component system would probably require them to redo the entire F-14 as it goes so far as to model that some lightbulbs might burn out faster or might randomly be dimmer than others. Hydraulic pistons might stick in places, targeting pod motors can be worn out seperately on the x and y axes, etc. No other module has ever done this. Also don't forget that the F-4E is even more analogue than the F-14. Take the radar especially. Imagine how hard it will be to "interpret the smudges" and lock onto the target instead of the ground. It's that much harder to code because they have to include the ground clutter a lot more and animate that onto the scope realistically.

That explains it

That would be because it was never intended to be a dedicated anti-ship aircraft, especially not in USAF service and not in the USN either as the A-6 had that role at that time. On the otherhand, it does have access to an extensive array of conventional ordinance such as mk80 series and rockeye cluster bombs as well as guided munitions like the Maverick, Bullpup, and laser guided bombs which can be used quite effectively against ships. It can, and it has carried them in every gameplay video released by Heatblur and even fired them in the wild weasel video they released 2 weeks ago. They show the AGM-65D directly at 3:42 and there's a dedicated section in the manual that might be worth a look. https://f4.manuals.heatblur.se/stores/air_to_ground/missiles/maverick.html It can't. They did test mount a Ma-31 AsM (license-built KH-31) at some point, but this just wasn't ever the intended role of the Phantom. It was primarily a fleet-defense interceptor designed to shoot down Soviet bombers. The air to ground role was expanded during and after Vietnam with the Marines and Air Force, but they didn't waste their time with specialized anti-ship operations/weapons as the Navy already had the A-6 and A-7 to fulfill that role and it's the Navy's job to sink ships. The A-6 will have the Harpoon whenever we end up getting that.

No GPU-5/A mentioned either...

Not to get entirely off topic, but have they recently changed their minds on this? Last I heard, the Iranian version was just a bonus due to public outcry and gonna just be the Early -135GR, but with TCS and other systems disabled with a bullet fairing to cover the TCS pod. Now it's more likely the TCS pod will be removed since they did that with the fuel tank pylons after having said they wouldn't. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the -91GR has the original beaver tail that would require a redo of the external model which they've said they won't do for the Early -135GR. It's all rather confusing and they've also said they are using the blocks to differentiate the models internally, but they aren't making exact copies of a particular block due to cahnges over the blocks lifetimes. Same thing with the F-4.

This exactly. DCS doesn't have and likely never will have all the correct units to make most missions historically accurate, so it just blows my mind when people get so anal about historical accuracy. This entire game is just one big anachronistic mess, but we make do with it because there's really no other alternatives to DCS. I'll be flying the F-4E over the Marianas in pseudo-Vietnam scenarios despite the fact we don't have basically any correct units and because it's pretty much the only jungle we have in game. The SA-2 is an 80s variant, the MiG-21 and 19 are both the wrong version, the ships aren't there, early manpads aren't there, the F-4E we are getting isn't correct for Vietnam really either and I hold out some small hope that Heatblur gives us the option for the early strobe RWR since they are going to all the trouble to make one for the early F-14A. Luckily the MiG-17F, F-100D, and A-1H are all in the works and will be correct for this, but we still won't have a Vietnam map by then and probably not napalm either. Just to screw with the historical purists, here's a KC-135A refueling a B-52D(WIP). Oh, wait, it's a KC-135R and a B-52H painted up to look the part because the correct versions I need aren't in DCS or available as mods. GIMP and my rudimentary skin-making skills to the rescue, lol.

The AGM-45B is already in game though and available to put on the ED AI unit... What makes it unavailable for the Heatblur F-4E?

This was answered in both videos they've put out recently, one quite explicitly. If you go to 5:30 in this video, you will see that they are making an entire character customizer that will be the first of it's kind in DCS. And in the newest video we can see a pilot that is not white.

They said not for the F-4E because of the cockpit modifications the STARM requires. I do believe they are planning to get it onto the A-6E and it did make an erroneous appearance in the original store description of the F-4E so it is at least on their radar.

Do you really believe the video intended to be historically accurate? No, it's for building hype as you said. As such, they made up a fake mission, in a fake conflict to show off the SEAD capabilities of the F-4E. How is that false advertising? The F-4E is perfectly capable of the mission set as shown in the video, whether it would have been technically classified as a Wild Weasel mission 50 years ago or not. We aren't in the 60s, 70s, or 80s anymore and like it or not, Wild Weasel has become the common term the majority of people associate with the mission depicted in the video. So they used the terminology people in general are familiar with. In other words they catered to the majority of their audience who is paying them by buying their aircraft. It doesn't matter that this particular squadron never did this in real life because DCS is a game! It's not real life and neither is the mission depicted in the video. Most of DCS is historically inaccurate anyways, with made up missions and conflicts, AI units from the wrong time period that fly like UFOs and see through terrain and clouds, aircraft missing weapons because they haven't been added yet, etc. It's pretty laughable to expect a marketing video to be a perfectly historical representation of an aircraft because that's not the goal of marketing a game. Heatblur is simulating the F-4E the aircraft, not making a documentary film on its real life usage. You've made your point that you dislike the video based on the historical innaccracies. That's fine and you're entitled to your own opinion, but the video wasn't made for perfect historical accuracy, it was made to advertise the DCS: F-4E module and show it performing the SEAD role. It did what it was made to do perfectly.

Yes. The F-4E uses the boom refueling method as it is an air force jet. The naval version (coming much later as a separate module, J or S likely) will use the probe and drogue system like all navy jets. The Israelis bolted a probe onto their E's and that is confirmed to be an optional visual feature coming later, but it may not be functional as DCS is kind of stupid in that it only allows one type of refueling for each unit. Hence why there are two different KC-135 units when there should only be one.

This also all has to be done to the level of a full Heatblur module since that's what the A-6 is now. We are just getting the AI first because that's what it was when the F-14 launched 4 years ago. Then at the beginning of 2021, following the Reach for the Skies video, it was announced that the A-6 would be a full fidelity module. So it's been a long time for the AI to come and you can also add to this all the other missing features and variants of the F-14, the remaining three Forrestal class carriers, and the J-35 Draken AI. Then we learn about the Phantom which is gonna be really awesome and add all this new stuff to DCS, but also it's in the way of everything else and getting delayed time and time again and you can see why some people just aren't interested in just accepting an appearance of this stuff once every year if it even gets mentioned at all. To include the summer 2023 release announcement we got in May 2023 that said the A-6 AI was comig by the end of summer. We need less guessing and more just getting the job done. Cobra himself has said he isn't happy about how long it's taken either in this reddit post from 5 months ago: Hopefully we see the A-6 AI this year, but unless we start seeing a ramp up in Phantom content, it would be increasingly doubtful. 2 months to go on Winter 23-24 window and a WSO cockpit and manual reveal last week, so we shall see what they can do. Here's also still hoping we can get an early A-6E without the TRAM pod as an additonal option.

I heard there was an FAQ released for the Kiowa on the Polychop Discord, but no one had posted it here yet so I went and found it. Here it is for those who haven't seen it yet. Looking forward to release! OH-58D(R) Kiowa Warrior Module FAQ Q: What version of the OH-58D Kiowa will we get? A: OH-58D(R) CDS4, dating from around 2016. However, the mission editor has access to options to customize the aircraft to represent older airframes with systems such as AN/ALQ-144 Infra-red Countermeasures, the Pilot Display Unit and the removal of the Mast Mounted Sight. Q: Can I shoot the M4 out of the door? A: Yes Q: Is there going to be multicrew? A: Yes Q: Will there be a data link or similar? A: The Improved Data Modem (IDM) is a similar system that allows for transmission of data between player aircraft. This includes but is not limited to the following features: Free-text Messaging, Target Sharing and Remote Hellfire Missions. The OH-58D is also equipped with the Level 2 Manned-Unmanned System (L2MUMS) which allows for video and data transmission between player controlled OH-58Ds and AI UAVs. Q: What price tag is it going to have? A: 69,99 USD Q: Will it have a George AI? A: The OH-58D will not have a ‘George’ AI on release but this feature is our highest priority after release. Q: Will it be on Early Access or Pre-Purchase? If so, will there be a discount? A: The OH-58D will not see an early access release or pre-purchase period. Q: Will a paintkit be available on release? A: This is very unlikely Q: What weapons will be available for this aircraft? A: M3P .50-caliber machine gun, various 2.75 inch rockets (including laser guided APKWS), AGM-114K Hellfire, Air-To-Air-Stinger missiles and the trusty M4 carbine on the dash. Q: Can we throw the smoke grenades that are on the dashboard? A: Yes Q: Does the Kiowa have a HMD (Helmet Mounted Display) or HUD? A: The OH-58D has an Optical Display Assembly (ODA) (also referred to as Anvis Display Symbology System - ADSS) which is a helmet mounted sight for use with Night Vision Goggles. Optionally the Pilot Display Unit (PDU) can be installed which provides a limited HUD for weapons symbology. Q: Does the Kiowa have a data cartridge? A: Yes - the Personal Computer Data Transfer System (PC-DTS) is a data cartridge system that can save and load data to/from a JSON file. The saved data includes Routes, Waypoints, Target Points, Radio frequencies, Notepad data and more. Q: Will the FARP Asset pack that was shown in 2019 be released with the Kiowa? A: No, sadly it will not. While it seemed like a great idea back in 2019, the implications of having to support and maintain 30+ assets indefinitely have the potential to become a burden on our small team. Q: Are force feedback controllers supported? A: Testing this is in progress. Q: Is the flight model of the Gazelle representative of the Kiowa’s flight model? A: The flight model (and all other areas of development) of the OH-58D has undergone a rigorous testing process with both our internal SMEs and those from Eagle Dynamics. During the entire development process we have had access to - and direct feedback from - experienced Kiowa pilots and crew chiefs who contribute directly to the validation of the flight model and systems of the OH-58D.

The annoying bit is that the 24 Mk-82's was shown off in 2023 and Beyond (1:35) and now they've been saying we can only do 22 because of this special weapon adapter thing. The TER does get in the way of the rear Sidewinder fins without the SWA yes, but only for firing them, not for loading them. However, assuming that the TER is jettisoned when you press the emergency jettison button to shed weight for a dogfight, you would no longer have the clearance problem and could fire your Sidewinders without issue. If that is the case, I think it should still be an option, but not allow you to fire the Sidewinders if the TER is equipped without the SWA or maybe it explodes if you do or just fails to fire. The other thing is that how close to the ground is too close? I would think that even with the SWA, 3x Mk-82's probably wouldn't scrape the ground and 3x Mk-81's really shouldn't. Mk-83's, M-117's, and the CBU's I get, as those are pretty big in diameter. The only other reason I can think of would be if it exceeds the max pylon weight and I don't think it does. 22 isn't that much different than 24 and it is really a ridiculous loadout, but all the same I'd be very interested to know if it was a manual or SME that limited smaller bombs from being triple racked on TER's with the SWA. Or perhaps maybe a new screenshot of how close it is to the ground to get a better perspective, because I can't find any pictures of the SWA itself (other than the one that has already been posted on the discord and this forum and the screenshots with the GBU-12's), let alone one on the plane with bombs loaded and the aircraft sitting on the ground.

Heatblur has said previously that the current Iceman pilot AI the Tomcat has is about all they can/will do in terms of AI piloting. So don't expect anything more than a glorified autopilot, its not gonna do refueling for you or anything like that. Fly this heading at this altitude will be basically it. Any 2-seat plane Heatblur makes using the Jester AI will be fully mission capable with a single player pilot just like the Tomcat. The future naval Phantom and Intruder will be the same way.

I'm very excited about the A-6 too, but we just didn't see it here, we saw a label. 2024 and Beyond had a couple of great shots in it and I believe that the AI will either release with the F-4E or in the next patch after it.

Nope. I saw a custom made representation of a map kind of like a 3D tacview. There was a group labeled "A-6", but that part of the video isn't made with DCS and the actual unit never made an appearance so I don't count it.

They are doing an H not an E

Good thing the reveal trailer was in October then. Safest bet is still March although February could maybe happen. I'm hoping we'll have a flyable Intruder in 2029. Maybe even the naval F-4 depending on how things shake out.

Oh I certainly hope so!

They did say on Discord the WSO pit and manual are pretty much just waiting on them to finish the details of the reveal video/screenshot/writeup or however they plan to do it. Could be really close so hope for something tomorrow and plan for 2 more weeks.