ValhallaAB

You need to cycle weapons on the stick, off/bombs, gun, sidewinder, aim-7 and aim-54. it's the big red switch on your right thumb just opposite of the ordinance drop / pickle button. Forward firing weapons use trigger and everything that falls use the pickle button.

Don't think this is scientific but try to use WHOT (White hot) for the color mode. Don't know if it even matters but my RIO said that worked for him alot better when we lased and destroyed SA-8's on airfields in Caucasus. Other than that I need to RIO alot more and I have my own problems trying to lase targets with that bowl of pixels.

null This loadout is one of my go-to for crowded places with lots of light targets and some SAM threat which I can fly over, Rapier sites in this case 8000m / 26k feet for safety. I dropped my GBU-16's on the two sites and took out the remaining 4x ZSU-23-4 by dropping Mk-82 bombs as normal while in a slight dive, almost loosing a wing from the AAA fire. However when I expended my remaining 670+ rounds of AP/HE 20mm I still had 3x BMP-1/2 left. I figured I had enough skill to aim my ADL on the target at a 40* dive and boresight the missiles (I fired my 2 AIM-9's too but they went up and much more spread to the sides of the ADL. The AIM-54 Phoenix however did a great straight line for the target a bit under my ADL, (I aimed for the empty area between the two units). First try ever doing it because I saw somebody do a similar thing to boats or a crowded factory with light vehicles. A BMP-1 is hard to crack with the 20mm unless you come straight from above and waste 100 rounds or so. The reason for posting this is if anybody has any similar experiences or funny air-to-air-air-to-ground experiments. If this topic already exists and is alot wider than the F-14 I understand but without my AIM-54 I would have gone home one less enemy down and not as happy as I am that I tried. null

Here again to share some screenshots I made with some experimenting. null

Tacview-20230731-213101-DCS-Client-PersianConquest_V3.4.zip.acmi I've done my fair share of testing against AI with the AIM-54, this tacview is just one example of shots that would not have connected if the pitch up bug etc would still be here. It's a 45nm shot against a low MiG-21 while I fly 34k around mach 1. Despite all the near notching behaviour of the AI and the small chaff it released my missile still hit with .8 mach speed. Not great, not terrible. I'm suprised it hit but I've done other missions and gotten great results such as having atleast 5 AI targets do a manouver kill for me...

Messed around in 4K and got some nice wallpapers.

I got the physical book but that won't help much unless you know a page you want a photo of or translated etc.

''F-14D NK-104 (BuNo 164347) of VF-11 flies of the coast of California on 2 February 1995, VF-11 added the capability to use night vision goggles. These allows pilots to see in the dark, replacing instruments flying with a clear (but green-tinted) view of the world around them. The NVG's are mounted on the pilots helmet and flip up when not needed. Since NVGs mulitiply availalbe light hundreds of times, changes had to be made to the F-14's internal and instrument lightning. VF-11 developed a set of filters and lenses to fit over cockpit intruments and controls to allow the flight crew to change between normal and NVG lightning. (Ted Carlson, Fotodynamics)'' - Squadron Signal, Don Greer 2007 I heard the custom filters are things like the hud filter ''pull'' and the plastic screen ''brick'' which you put over the VDI screen when using the TCS or LANTIRN pod at night etc.

A good swedish book I recommend is ''System 37 Viggen'' by SFF (Svensk Flyghistorisk Förening) Ulf Edlund and Hans Kampf are the editorial managers. 223 pages of great data and insight by testpilots and mechanical engineers over the years before and after the Viggen, published in 2009 and SFF has made a similar book on the J-35 Draken which is amazing. If you only want digital or english I sadly have very few tips.

Yeah, that is better worded. The overall HP bypass on the TF-30 is 18-1 and 31-1 on the F110 from what I read, not that it makes huge difference from your words. I also read that the F110 GE-400 had a 32% higher thrust and it's lean fuel burn rate makes the jet CAP loiter time 34% higher, it's radius in MIL power increased it's mission radius to 62% and it's time to high altitude by a whopping 61%.

I need to check that position on the 3rd ramp. Does the F-14 ramp system + engine just form a kind of ramjet engine but with a compressor face and blades lol, really cool similarities. Compressed air on the ramps must then form higher pressure and thus reduce the use of the compressor stage in the engine and thus reducing fuel consumption or fuel flow right? Fuel per mile must then be very high, high up that is. I recently read that the engine ramps could over-collapse to make the intake as open as can be to make landing and takeoff easier.

Yes, thank you all very much for your input, it has been very interesting, If you want do discuss more engine history, corruption, decisions, feel free to continue but if somebody says: STAY ON TOPIC, it wasn't me who made that decision. I could do this all day so please feel free to continue in this thread (or ask for a new thread if you feel it's necessary).

What were the differences in the USMC plan if they invested early? I know very little of this. I am guessing Grumman had a problem with budgets and sale orders until the Iranian sale made it possible to continue alot better.