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.

Hello! I never seen or knew that this mechanic actually had a model/visual difference in DCS. Just amazing... My questions are now: If the P&W-TF-30 engines made it necessary to diffuse the air into slower meals for the engine to reduce damage to the engine face etc, why does the F-110 GE-400 engines need it, is it just safer and not necessary to remove? Would I be wrong in saying the F-110 has a much stronger ''face'' that the engine simply could have ignored this system? The F-16 has used practically the same engine but doesn't have these ramps, is it because the F-16 simply uses a different solution or never was intended to fly that fast? (solutions like a submerged intake or a twin curved intake, etc)

We have gone over this hundreds of times, that was the NASA test which had different parameters and a lighter weight if I'm not mistaken and maybe even a different motor... The reason why the Iranian F-14's AIM-54's performed so well was mostly to do with the lack of awareness the Iraqi pilots older airframes RWR and SA and that data is very much up in the air because who trusts Iranian kill counts, while alot of it is not even confirmed by second sources other than the Iranians themselfs. DD_Fenrir did a good post here: ''An "AIM-54" did reach Mach 5... sort of. The Mach 5 figure comes from here: NASA's plan to use an F-15 to launch hypersonic Phoenix missiles - Sandboxx But when you read just how many modifications NASA made to the missile to get it to reach Mach 5 you start to understand just how little this test missile has in common with a US Navy fleet missile. All of the internal components related to the missile’s guidance system and explosive payload were completely removed, including its guidance computer and radar tracker, leaving just its propulsion and control sections at the rear of the missile intact a new nose with slightly more sloping angles was added to what would now be primary and secondary payload sections with the same 15″ diameter as the original components. The primary payload section measured about 57 inches long and, based on the weight of the guidance section it replaced, could carry approximately 184 pounds worth of testing equipment. It's an AIM-54 in name only. Then there's the flight profile - the fact that the launch was committed at Mach 2 and that the missile was not required to make any steering corrections as it had no target widens the gap between it and a fleet Phoenix; there's so little in common here with an operational launch of an AIM-54 that it might as well be a completely different missile.''

That is the VF-31 skin that is quite new, only for the F-14A. This is not a WIP F-14A (early) screenshot. The F-14A early will not have a TCS.

Bad news buddy...

I have seen pictures of an Iranian F-14 with AIM-9P's. The AIM-54A's are correct. They retrofitted or supplied their ''Persian Cats'' with their old F-4's AIM-7E-4 Sparrows and later when the AIM-54A's got lost in storage or war they tried to impliment MIM-23 Hawk missiles by changing the AWG-9's CW-illuminator to search for aerial targets. Even in 2009 we have seen AIM-9P's on the un-modernised F-14's (not the AM upgrade from what I think is 2012). Total order: 1974: 30 A-model Tomcats with spare parts, replacement engines + 424 AIM-64A's Mid 1974: (six months later) they made a second order of 50 extra Tomcats and 290 AIM-54's. (not all missiles came because of the 1978/79 revolution) 1982: Iran-Lebanon hostage crisis, USA made a deal to sell AIM-54's (unknown number or how/if they got them) and bombracks for the Tomcats. (only 4 were modified to carry bombs what I know, of at that time atleast) TLDR = To answer your question I have heard from a different forum post that the Sidewinders the F-14 Iran came with was the AIM-9P-3's because they already had P-1's and P-2's from their F-4's. Also after 1978 they had a hard time getting new imports but they got replacements by Israel/black markets and other sources to make up their aging F-14's. Later when we see the ''too modernized'' versions we would say russia or china and even home grown developments to cover everything from weapons and parts etc... Which we won't get for good reasons. (I have not made enough research to see if 110% of this is correct)

Awesome, I remember some week ago when I launched a 50+nm AIM-54C Mk-47 at a Russian A-50 AWACS over a SA-11 site, I heard SAM launches just as I launched and flipped over and ran away to base, I turned of my DECM just as I went feet wet and cold, no idea if it made them leave HOJ and loose track.

I think it has 360° coverage and yes, missiles with HOJ capability will home in on it. -Nice. Is it best to just turn it off when there is a air missile in the air? It would break the HOJ lock atleast, maybe if it's active it won't matter? So outside around 28nm it could be effective to trash missiles if you crank or run away from modern air missiles or atleast reduce the effective loft/range of enemy missiles?. It's all the same as it is with all the other jammers in DCS (at least the ones on full fidelity modules), so burnthrough against other player controlled aircraft for example is at about 28 nm. -Alright. Same for SAM's or it depends? Does SAM's have HOJ too, for example the SA-11 or is it always effective to employ the DECM then? Thanks for the good answers.

I always thought it did something but does it just reduce the engagement range of sams and enemy jet radars and make a jamming target on PVP radars etc? I also don't know which directions it works, must be 360 right? I always use it when strafing ground sams (Shilka, Rapier & SA-8) or fly near sam networks. Does it HOJ missiles like the R-27ER or AIM-120C etc? Does it have a cooldown after use or overheating? What is the general burnthough by a SA-11 or a MiG-29 radar? Is it stupid to use against a modern jet like a F-16C or F/A-18 in PVP because it reveals your location? When should you use it? Too many questions on my part but always were interested by the DECM like the early ALQ-100 and ALQ-126. The ALQ-100: ''AN/ALQ-100 would simultaneously deceive radars in one or more frequency bands or modes of operation. It would also detonate or dud continuous wave proximity fuses in SAM, AAM, or AAA projectiles.'' The ALQ-126: ''A trackbreaker designed to defeat pulse-mode SAM and AAA radars,'' I don't know if this one has the extra ALQ-162 track breaker or the B model of the ALQ-126. More of a F-4 jammer combo.

My solution is to lower the brightness to 0% and then the lower the contrast, but the contrast must be above 0%, 5-15% depending on light and moonlight or burning vehicles etc. Have worked for me for years. I play on 1440p on a 4k screen. Might not be the best for searching and loitering a target area but if you have references to go by you should be able to pick out alot faster, especially if the sight locks when you think you see a target while going in for a run.