Kalasnkova74

Again, classification rules are not necessarily bound by common sense. Just because an aircraft’s technology is obsolete doesn’t mean it’s fair game. Look at the F-117. It’s literally a museum piece now and multiple generations behind modern LO weapons systems. Still classified, and still (probably) not coming to DCS or any other simulation level game.

The sticking point will be the F-4Es learning curve. HAL9000 won’t be flying overwatch to save you from a poor control input. That’s going to be a big change for players used to the current roster of FBW aircraft. The F-14 is perhaps the most “manual” of the Cold War jets in game, and it’s fairly tame vs the F-4E which will punish the crew for poor control decisions. Even the F-4E with slats will adverse yaw and depart if one’s not careful. Flip side is without a FBW computer supervising things,just like the F-14 one can do trickbag maneuvers with the Phantom too. Isn’t the -MLA and -MLD wing structure strengthened for a 6G maximum turn? I was under the impression when MiG lightened the MiG-23 they also corrected structural problems (thus one justification for the 4G limit) with the wing carry through box encountered on earlier models. If memory serves, a MiG-23MLD can sustain a 16 Degree/Sec turn at 360 ish knots. Much like other MiGs the later Flogger can out turn the Phantom in terms of radius and can certainly outrun one , but it can’t match the F-4s turn rate at the same speed. Earlier MiG-23 models couldn’t hope to hang with an F-4 (or any tactical fighter) without grave risk of departing above 3.5G.

Doesn’t matter. Classification rules don’t care about common sense. Believe it or not, despite the incident being literally taught in schools all over the world specifics about the “Gary” Powers shoot down is still classified. During an interview, a fellow squadron mate of Powers back in the day couldn’t disclose any specifics or talk about the incident. Didn’t matter that the pilot was long retired from the USAF or that the incident involved is a long way from secret. Not only does making a module take time and require extensive research, it should be noted that information WE can query on the internet is not necessarily approved for release. Files and documents leaked or uploaded online illegally cannot be used by ED or a 3rd party, and neither can declassified documents/manuals written by a third party country that never legally operated the aircraft.

Based on Istvan Toperczer’s book on the NVA MiGs, their more skilled pilots had no issue going in the vertical. As usual, pilot skill plays a large factor. Note that Driscoll & Cunningham got into multiple vertical climbs against a MiG-17 before pulling the “hitting the brakes & they’ll fly right by” move. We need not elaborate how often US aggressor pilots in the 4477th TES also stomped on F-4s that made bad BFM decisions. Essentially if a MiG got close enough to an F-4 where their acceleration could be leveraged (and the Phantom got slow) , it was bad news for the Phantom. The key was keeping one’s distance /speed and letting the MiG bleed energy. I’m not read up on RAF Lightnings to verify this, but F-104s were dangerously capable planes when -again- flown correctly. The flying pencil was hard to see visually, difficult to acquire on Radar pre-AESA, and if flown fast was basically untouchable by anything else flying. I see no reason why the British Lightnings wouldn’t be any less capable. As far as equipment vs equipment goes, again pilot skill is the big variable. That a Mirage 2000 beat a Viper says nothing about how an F-4E will stack up. F-22s flown by new pilots lose to T-38s flown by expert qualified Red Air in exercises. Should we conclude the T-38 is a god tier air superiority fighter? Bottom line it’s the crew, not the crate. Supporting documentation:

What I suspect will happen is people unfamiliar with how to fight the F-4E will fly it like an oversized Hornet , die , and then proclaim the Phantom II useless in a BFM scenario. As the old newsreels once said, you heard it here first!

I think the A-4EC just ignored this and acts like a landing gear catapult aircraft for expediency’s sake, but an F-4B/F-4J/F-4S module will need a bridle compatible carrier. Might be why HB’s starting with the land based Phantom IIs.

Correct me if I missed something but as of summer 2022 Heatblur made it clear that while December ‘22 was their goal, it was by no means set in stone they would meet that date. I’d understand the angst if they stated December ‘22 was a definite launch date, but far as I know HB didn’t commit to that.

It will be a learning curve for most DCS players. BFM for example in the F-4E is a very different dance than what one does with the teen series or Su-27/Mig-29s. If flying the F-5E is a frustrating experience for someone, the F-4E is unlikely to initially be their cup of tea.

Technical projects are inherently unpredictable. It’s not like construction where you’re building something and as long as the inputs arrive on time you’ll make Date X. One intransigent code problem (or other issue) could totally nuke your schedule; conversely a code task booked for two weeks may be concluded faster. With a module like this, I can’t imagine the opportunities for delays and issues that could come up. Given the complexity and capabilities being modeled here , it’s very possible HB themselves doesn’t know yet when this module will be definitely completed. They likely have a solid range of time where they’re confident it’ll probably be ready, but forget about Date X, month Y, year Z.

Not feasible. The developers and ED would have to “classify” the development process to ensure the project is kept secret up to a confirmed launch date. Seeing as actual state secrets are not uncommonly leaked, I put the probability of this at a fat 0%. The moment a screenshot or bug report gets leaked we’re back to square one with the “are we there yet” chatter. What it comes down to is we just need to suck it up and be patient. If Pope Julius could wait four years for the Sistine Chapel, we can give Heatblur another 12-24 months. When it’s done, it’s done.

…then why are the last three posts people commenting on the release date instead of the liveries? IMO, further discussion on that topic is useless. HB’s not sitting on a finished F-4E module just to torture us out of spite. When it’s ready it’ll come. If it’s next week or next year I’ll be happy either way.

I’m serious. The F-4 module’s software test & validation can easily take as much or even more time than making the plane in the first place. Example; launching a Sidewinder. It’s not enough to verify the player can launch a Sidewinder one time. Heatblur’s testing team has to verify the player can launch a Sidewinder against multiple targets, types of targets, and on all maps. Lots of work given DCS’s AI and player vehicle inventory. Then Heatblur has to do it all over again, except now with the other three rails. Then they have to test the “failure function” scenario. Meaning situations where the player tries to launch a Sidewinder but it shouldn’t fire due to a configuration switch. So HB has to test all those scenarios but with the Master Arm off. This process must be repeated for every interactive system in the module. If and when a bug’s found, it has to be troubleshot, fixed and the scenario retested until the problem’s eliminated. The more bugs found, the longer the process takes. Because software is dependent on certain elements, you can’t check some things until other items are done. Practical example; if Heatblur’s still working on the radar, they can’t test AIM-7 functionality. It’s a process that is inherently unpredictable , absolutely necessary and notoriously wrecks schedules. One stubborn bug can hold up a code project for weeks. Between testing and documentation , I can credibly see it being another calendar year before the F-4s ready and released.

My total shot in the dark guess is December 2024. It looks close, but the F-4E is such a beast + the Jester AI that there’s assuredly lot of moving parts to test, fix & retest . Even simple software changes can tie up teams for months on validation>publish>UAT cycles. Even if the jet was “done” today I can easily picture testing & documentation taking the rest of the year.

Interesting. I always thought having two trained heads is better than one, especially when it comes to overall SA. In modern air combat systems management is as important as flying the jet, and having Jester to do that for the F-4 frees me up to actually focus on the flying bit.

It makes sense; I believe the Heatblur team used a museum German F-4E as a template aircraft.

Case in point:

Not hb, but I’ll be your huckleberry:

Yes and no. The colors are real, but the German F-4 variant and it’s avionics will not be modeled.

The Phantom will be upon us…soon

The War Thunder F-4C is a terribly broken thing, as is the -E which followed.

Sounds like Mikoyan & Gurevich should meet up with McDonnell & Douglas at the flagpole. I’ll bring the camera.

Heatblur’s already laid out the news. They set a date for end of year 2022, and then Something Unpleasant Happened in February 2022. So for totally unforeseen reasons the module is delayed. That’s life, and I’m perfectly OK with that. I’d rather get a fully fleshed out F-4E module in Summer 2023 or later than a buggy mess released to meet an unrealistic deadline. We’ve all seen THAT movie before.

Relax, they’re not dropping the module at 11:59pm GMT. New DCS modules do not have deadlines. When it’s ready, we’ll all know about it.

I’m not sure we are talking about the same aircraft here. The F-4E shot down double digit aircraft in the Middle East , both in Israeli and Iranian service. Then there’s the minor dust up with Saddam Hussein in 1991, where zero Coalition aircraft were lost to SAMs while the F-4G Weasels were on station. Southeast Asia needs no elaboration. If that doesn’t meet your standard of “interesting”, neither do the USN/USMC Phantom IIs. I wouldn’t call the F-4E inflexible either. It is, after all, still in frontline service with Turkey, Iran, Greece, and South Korea. Japan retired theirs just two years ago. Meanwhile, the final US Navy F-4 left for the boneyard before Bill Clinton set foot in the White House.