UWBuRn

Try to approach the basket slower, you seem doing rather good, except that you lose speed control just before connecting. If you try to get in too fast, everything becomes more difficoult.

@HB, just a clarification, so enabling ECM from jester menu does the following places the ECM in RPT mode, meaning it will actually jam ONLY when locked up, correct? Oh, cool, i missed that part... well i hope ED address this together with Hornet ECM update.

Please look at latest update on the Hornet from Wags. It will be just an auto ON-OFF on the ECM: honestly, i hope that if F-14 ECM behaviour (and F-18 will be the same shortly) breaks FC3 A/C radar the latter will be updated to cope with them, not that it becomes the reason to hold back improvements on the subject. I very well remember when the 15 sec delay was introduced, it was just a workaround to avoid players manually turning it on and off trashing locks, probably radars should have been allowed to keep locks somehow or maybe was just more realistic to have to reacquire lock.

Happening a lot also to me, if the server list gets long it freezes and i have to kill DCS from the task manager.

Your question was legit, it should go in the FAQ. Anyway i can understand that par of the discussion that sparked after your question (and i had my share in other occasions) might sound a bit silly for who did fly for real and put a lot of effort in the module.

Oh, so i'm not the only one! I find Hornet HUD expecially annoying... Having a more advanced HUD would be nice in some situations, i mean, i guess it was an inprovement IRL, it should be also in the sim. However, i think this was discussed many times before and it's highly unlikely to come. As for all the debate... imho the sim allows you to switch too quickly from an F-16, to an F-14 to a MiG-29 (or whatever you like). So it's easy to start wishing for improvements on the A/C, expecially if you start playing in MP, where the competitive aspect gets relevant really quick. Someone would also like weapons that were not available. Many were expecting the Tomcat to be the ultimate A/C with the ultimate weapon to get easy kills online... then they take the Tomcat and find themself unable to do what were doing on the F-15 or F-16 and gets frustrated. IRL it's different, you get assigned to a unit with an A/C, you must get the better of it. Plus you're placing your life on it, so better know how to fly it properly, there's no refly button (just forgetting that you will just not get there if don't know the basis or how to fly safely). To the users discharge i must say that many DCS modules just don't have the depth to encourage you to improve how you fly. However i feel that for the first time in DCS with the F-14 I have an aircraft that i just find interesting to fly around even without shooting at something (and DCS sometimes can be somewhat dull if you don't shoot at something or if you don't fly with someone else). So yes, after many years messing around with flight sims, i find myself going after the points @Victory205 is listing out. Someone might think of this as taking things too seriously... well, it's an opportunity to enjoy the sim from a different perspective, maybe when one it's tired of shooting everything that moves. @Dannyvandelft i'm not talking directly at you, but your question raised some nice discussion!

Have you tried waiting for a while? They take a few seconds to go in overspwet position.

Once in TWS-A, Jester is not affecting things out anymore. It's all on the radar itself to sort things out. As for the discussion that has been running for quite a bit, TWS-A will struggle keeping track of maneuvering targets. Also it will struggle when you maneuver: for example, when you shoot, if you want to do an A-Pole or F-Pole (turning from the target as much as possible to reduce closure rate), you have to maneuver gently or it's likely that the track will be lost. Maybe HB is still going to tune things a bit, but thoose seem to be realistic limitations and are likely to stay. (Also the Hornet int TWS has some resembling behaviour when maneuvering hard, expecially if the PRF is not set to the optimal option) As for the TID range, from my experience TWS-A takes into account only target within TID range, so setting it at 50 nm will make it ignore the 70 nm target, even if the radar it's still detecting it.

Eh, we're with pretty tight restrictions also here, i'm getting "drunk" on flying DCS as i ad to expend some days off and i don't have much else to do, that's the only good side of the situation. The PK against AI is really dependent on the AI level... i think that on the PVE server i'm flying upon it's at "trained" level, so missiles are very effective. Honestly i don't care about Ace anymore, they keep acting dumb in a lot of occasions and they cheat in others. I agree that STT is not the prefered mode for engagement, and that's bad, because at some ranges would be just much better to lock on the target and have the possibility to fire maybe more than one round rather, than fighting the WCS in TWS-A. In general, i feel that STT is very sensitive to azimuth: this makes sense (at leats for PD), because as the azimuth increases, the target closure decreases and you get closer to the rejection thresholds. This is pretty evident when foing F-Poles, as you take max azimuth, usually the bandit does the same, so you end up in the worst possible situation with a closure speed close to zero. Nonetheless i have seen plenty occasions of lock lost without apparent reason (target above me, closure in the range of 1000 kts, hot). I tend to agree that for DCS Fox1 are worse than Fox3, even if all the rest is the same. What i'm really struggling on are Sparrows: i'm not fully understanding how the behave in the recent updates (basically after they were broken and fixed). They seem to go off the rail and go straight for quite a bit, then sometimes they steer on target, sometimes not, as if after going straight they are not anymore in a position and direction to see the target. Some times i had the impression they were missing the CW illumination as if they were fired in flood mode and i was not pointing straight to the target - even if i was rather sure they were fired in PDSTT. BTW, Phoenixes in PSTT and TCS get the angles from the WCS and fire active off the rail, i'm unsure if they do get the angles with BRSIT, i think not. Anyway at active off the rails ranges they are pretty deadly.

There's already the auto MLC in the WCS, the auto setting should be good enough in my opinion. However, and i wrote it on some other topic also, sometime looks like to me that even with the MLC off (antenna looking up because you're well below of the target) the radar it's still quite prone to notching. I will try to pay more attention to it. Then there should be a whole chapter on Pulse modes, thoose need tuning to work, usually asking jester to go in PSTT results in a lost lock. Honestly i tried to play with them in the backseat, but i don't have enough experience on what settings are most effective in which situation... maybe @QuiGon can chime in and list a few of them (maybe also for PDSTT), as per other posts he seems to know them quite well. Anyway, i wouldn't like to access many more additional setting through the wheel, it's impractical in my opinion. What i would like is to be able to define some kind of "standing" for Jester and let it act accordingly. Otherwise, if that's not possible/viable, maybe a a small buff on the radar/WCS when Jester is in the back seat could be a workaround... i mean, it's not that bad when you get used to him, but any improvement would be welcome.

Had some time to do some more testing, nothing systematic but i flew plenty of time on some PvE server with many different situations plus some SP. Overall, in my opinion, this is the best update of the Tomcat since a long time: All the last changes brought in in the last 3 months seem to work coherently, the target size settings now helps mitigating the AI starting evasive maneuvers before pitbull and the working TTI is very helpful for deciding when to break off and keep the distance I never experienced Jester going crazy bashing buttons or switching to RWS just after firing Exiting TWS-A after firing seems more consistent (some update ago was rather messy) I spent some time comparing AIM-7 behaviour on F-14 and F-18, they seem more or less the same, some difference i noticed before was probably related in some shot taking place at short distance in PSTT mode (probably after PAL), with the missile going straight for a moment and then steering as if the target was not illuminated by Flood mode I know this is on ED side, but something has changed on the AIM-54 guidance (don't know if in the hotfix or in the patch of the 17th), they seem to maneuver violently bleeding a lot of energy and i've definitely seen more AIM-54 running out of energy than before (and i never shooted near Rmax) Probably for the first time since Tomcat release, AIM-54C outperform AIM-54A Mk.60, the better chaff rejection of the C and the guidance behaviour described above more frequently happening on the A (probably again related to chaff rejection) make the C behave more consistently, plus you have the smokeless engine From a more tactical point of view: Against the AI, always setting the target size to large helps countering the early maneuvering that tends to screw up TWS, against lone targets i had a quite high PKs (i would say around 80%, mostly shooting at mid-high alt, 30-40nm, AI at pretty dumbish level i guess) Having to prefer the AIM-54C with a little shorter legs i had to fire closer to 30 nm than to 40 nm to have enough energy; if they missile fails, you are more or less in the "weak spot" for the Tomcat (with Jester, at least), outside PAL range and with the target at the distance where the time consuming steps to tell Jester where to look at usually end up in failing to re-engage the target; i need to try again forcing myself at shooting at longer ditance to see how it goes Trying to perform PDSTT engagements ends many times with Jester losing lock: i don't have enough experience in the back seat to know the tricks of ho to keep lock in edge cases, but i keep reading here and there that a capable RIO should be able to do so... Jsester for sure it's not. Even disabling the option to swith automatically from PDSTT to PSTT and commanding him to switch while most appropriate doesn't seems to help. I want to stress that with difficuilties with a stable STT i only refer to favourable conditions (targets above or high alt engagements, where clutter should not be too much of a problem) Even with all the limitations, i still prefer TWS for AIM-54 shots, the ARH terminal phase is just too good to not be used plus, as said, PDSTT (with Jester) has its slice of limitations too AIM-7 are garbage (also on F-18), probably it was too much time since i used them at mid ranges and maybe they changed somewhat since them but i was unable to score any hit outside 12 nm at mid altitude There's a large performance gap between the A and B 'Cats: with a heavy combat load (4PH + 2SP + 2SW) the A requires a lot of burner, struggles in climbs and at accelerating prior of engagements - probably also affected by limitation in the stores drag modelling as already noted In the future, any improvement to Jester fizzling out with the AWG-9 settings to get the max out of it and maybe some "crew contract" to let him go after the highest threat by himself would be great.

What is the expected behaviour for a 54C fired in SARH mode when the lock is lost? Should it steer in some direction or just go straight? I just fired a 54C on a PvE server (that's why i have no track or ACMI) in PDSTT at 25 miles, lost lock, couldn't reaquire, started looking at the missile, it was more or less following the bandit with a 1.6G turn, then it did some left right "wobbling" and then lost the lock and went straight: i had the impression it went pitbull and then went after some chaffs. I was expecting the missile just to go straight unless the lock could be reacquired. I also have the impression that AIM-7 (used M version) are still somewhat off, on two occasion i fired at around 12 miles and they just went straight. On the bright side, TTI is working fine and it's very helpful in engagements.

Thanks for the explanition, it confirms more or less what i was thinking of. ;)

Can you point me out the most critical points to keep stable locks, in your experience? I admit i fly mostly in the front seat, leaving Jester playing with the radar, but when i tried it by myself i found out there's not much you can do when you have missiles in the air, it's mostly how you fly the aircraft in relation to target. Did i miss something big? Then there's another question that i have over my mind, in relation to missile effectivness: the distance of the receiver antenna (the missile) does affect chaff effectivness? I mean both IRL and DCS, because i guess that at some distances and aspects the chaff cloud can confuse the missile seeker more easily than others, i'm courious to know if in DCS some of this is modelled or if it's just like throwing a dice.

If you really ask me, AWG-9 it's disappointing many times, i asked a lot of times how much this is accurate or not (i even PMed IronMike) but i didn't got any answer. Reading "thorugh the lines" of other answers in other topics here and there, they say the limitations are accurate, yet there are a few conditions that are somewhat hard to belive. Honestly (look at my registration date), i witnessed ages when missiles behaviour has been much worse than now: yet i know it's frustrating, you do things right and then things completely out of your control (ghost contacts, PDSTT lost lock, weak missile guidance, questionable chaff resistance) screw you up. Personally i would prefer the WCS/missile combination to be more on the overperforming side to concentrate on the tactical aspects - not just for the Tomcat, i mean for every a/c.

Well, the latest missile changes (complete or not that they are) made missile more reliant on support from the launching platform - as it should be. With the current Jester/AWG-9 combination it's rather easy having issues with TWS or losing PDSTT lock, hence trashing missiles. Yesterday i've been surprised to find out that TWS-A "seems" (as i'm testing with AI, so lot of quirks involved) to perform better against target far away. My typical testing ground is firing at two Veteran MiG-29S at around 30-35 nm angels 20, this ends up almost always with ghost contacts in TWS-A, with missiles trashed. Yesterday i tried engaging them at 50 nm, and, to my surprise, TWS tracks were more stable, with less ghost contacts and with quite a few missile scoring (A Mk60). Overall, up to a certain range, i would say 40-45 miles, the Tomcat-Phoenix combination it's quite effective, punishing unreacting bandits or keeping pressure over them allowing you to keep the initiative. Below 15 miles you have PAL, you tend to go straight in STT and active off the rail or not, Phoenix are rather deadly as it will have a lot of energy. In the middle between 40 miles and 15 miles you are on the weak side, with TWS more prone to screw up, less time to react, high risk of losing of losing PDSTT lock: unfortunately, given the effective range of the AIM-54 it's were you are willing to fire most of the times against fighters.

There were sevaral sub-versions of the C, i should look again after some interesting read i found somewhere (maybe Quora, so, not 100% reliable but was well argumented): IIRC only the latest one (that was field reprogrammable) had sensible improvement for fighter engagements. Some source states that as the explosive charge was big, on some version this was exploited (fragmentation?) obtaining some kind of "shotgun" effect for targets within 200 feets (but it seems exaggerated to me).

Yeah, that's exactly what i taught of. As said, to me it's a decent compromise at least to know that the go active command (which i guess it's just not there, as i think it's under the hood still distance based) has been sent. Yeah, i think at the current stage digging up dead channels is something we have to live with, i don't have high hopes of this getting addressed - feels like a very special edge case that should be cared in ED API - honestly i can live with it. PDSTT it's another story. IMO HB made the workaround on the TTI, ED new missile API it's just not there yet, or not entirely.

Well, my impression on the latest patch and the addition of the A variant are mostly positive. It's nice to have the A as i think, with it's engines (and related limitations) impersonates very well the Tomcat reputation after what you can read about of it of who flew with and against it. Moreso, as someone already posted in other topics, it was the most produced Tomcat variant, the one operated for the longest time and can fit well in some scenarios (Cold War). Having both A and B seem great, as ones looking for a more competitive platform (expecially fo PvP) will steer to the B, ones looking for more challanges and more historically related stuff can enjoy the A. Speaking of challenges, i'm enjoying burner cat shots, the differences in engine response during traps and in flight refuelling, and had some fun trapping on a single engine after smoking up the other one on some high alt hard maneuvering. I'm a little surprised about the anemic performance at transonic speeds, as it really seems to struggle getting past M1.05-1.10, but if that's not correct i have no doubt HB has the capability, the documentation and support to address it. About the skins, i'm glad the iconic Sundowners it's in! :D Yes, i was expecting more of them, but it's understandable that they had to be delayed and honestly i don't care much about that - if you're in gurry there are plenty B skins that can be placed on the A. What disappoints me? The turn rate on the B (not the i feel the urge to do some PvP with other aircrafts but it's not clear why it was broken) and the Sparrows not working, as this is a major let down (expecially when we already have some issues with the Phoenix). Being a SW developer for work by myself, i very well understand how this kind of things come along, yet from a consumer point of view it's frustrating, because now it's broken and as te 'Cat it's not and ED module you don't know if it will be hot fixed the next week or if we have to wait a month (and i cannot forget the stuck cat issue the went on for several months, no matter if it was on ED side or not). What do i expect from the future? That now that we enjoy the A and as soon as the thins went off with the last patch are fixed, the focus can slip for a while on polishing up Jester, AWG-9 and related quirks, making the Tomcat shine in the A2A role that was it's raison d'être. As thoose are nailed, the next big one would be the making Jester operating the LANTIRN. Thoose would allow anybody fly without a human RIO (because of SP, bacause they don't want, because they can't) to enjoy the 'Cat completely. So that's my two cents. In the meantime, thanks for the A, you really deserve it! :)

Back IT, i ran again some test with the latest OB (18th November), against a large target (Tu-22) non maneuvering, no ECM and no chaffs (turned off from mission editor) flying at 0.9M, 35k feet. Shot an AIM-45C at 75 nm in TWS, keep lock till missile hit, TTI at 32 jumped to 16 (flashing), missile hit after 3-4 seconds of TTI reaching 0 Shot an AIM-45C at 75 nm in TWS, kept lock till missile was 15 nm from target (broke with PLM), missile lost track, when TWS reacquired the track the missile started going after the target again even if the track on the TDI was not indicating the target beign shot at Shot an AIM-54C at 75 nm in TWS, kept lock till missile was 15 nm from target (broke with PLM and the shutted off radar), missile missed target going far above target Shot an AIM-45C at 75 nm in PDSTT, kept lock till missile was 15 nm from target (broke with PLM), missile lost track, when TWS reacquired the track the missile started going after the target again even if the track on the TDI was not indicating the target beign shot at Shot an AIM-54C at 75 nm in PDSTT, kept lock till missile was 15 nm from target (broke with PLM and the shutted off radar), missile hit the target Shot an AIM-54C at 75 nm in PDSTT, kept lock till missile was 15 nm from target (broke by commanding Jester and the shutted off radar), missile hit the target Shot an AIM-54C at 75 nm in PDSTT, kept lock till missile was 15 nm from target (broke by turning away), missile missed target going far above target Shot an AIM-54C at 75 nm in PDSTT, kept lock till missile was 15 nm from target (broke with PLM, holding PLM), missile missed target going far above target So TWS/PDSTT still seems off to me: PDSTT once lost shoud be lost and should not switch to A A TWS guided missile should not receive target updates from what in fact it's another track The TTI jumping, while odd, it's a welcome change (or workaround, i bet it does when the missile actually goes pitbull) as it makes things more predictable.

Love the VF-111 skin on a proper A!

Older RWR will arrive later on with an earlier Tomcat model. ;)

See https://forums.eagle.ru/forum/english/licensed-third-party-projects/heatblur-simulations/dcs-f-14a-b/7143442-control-bindings-reset?p=7143575#post7143575 ;)

Just go to %UserProfile%\Saved Games\DCS\Config\Input in Windows explorer, select F-14B folder, paste it and rename the copied one to F-14. Same applies for the RIO one. When you're ok with the controls and checked everything you can delete the old F-14B folders.

Ok, so now is the day, we can start asking "are we there yet?" and pressing F5. :D