Eagle7907

[iNVESTIGATING]Post-Designate Issues-Bombs fall way short I’ve griped about this before and was edumacated by several on Discord that, when rippling, the designation point is from the middle of the ripple distance for all bombs set. In other words, you set 4 bombs to ripple, at 500’ spacing. The computation is set in the middle of 1500’ run. Example: Pickle <500’> Pickle <250’>designation point<250’>Pickle <500’>Pickle Try to make your aim point in the middle of your intended release path. Is this correct? I don’t know and never heard of it until recently, but it does work when aiming this way. I dropped 8 CBUs over a length of about 4000’ with tanks. No mercy. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I don’t think ED has a problem of extreme attrition. They are pretty unique and has the hearts of many fans, however with the news of many enhancements being put off for an indeterminable amount of time, that will turn people off a bit. The thing is if they were first honest about the timeframe of these things in the first place would’ve prevented people from getting disappointed. Anyways, like other times in the past, it’s usually just communications is the problem, not just the wait time in itself. I, too, am disappointed. I won’t stop playing though, just because of its unique play and continuous refinement. I’ve seen worse in the gaming industry. ED certainly isn’t on the bottom of that list. But they have made mistakes that could’ve been avoidable. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I’ve seen better, I’ve seen worse.... Anyways, to each their own. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Since it has been indicated that the internal testing will be ramped up since the mistakes made for 2.5.6 release. I wonder how much this will push back SC and other planned releases? I appreciate them doing more testing. 2.5.6 was a disaster. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Right. I got the FS points for many other areas, that actually shows the datum. Problem is the wing isn't a wing from a Cessna and is irregularly shaped. To get the mean we would have measure from the narrowest and the widest. Now, its obvious where its wide. Narrow? I dunno. Wing tip? :dunno:

So far HB hasn't indicated that they will provide or do anything to allow the player to know their CG. Could that change? Sure. Could they have everything they need? The chances are good. However, that could be a looooong time from now. I would guess they are more interested in getting TWS Auto, Jester LANTRIN, and many, many other fixes/features implemented before they touch something like CG. That's where a possible stop gap of me finding fuselage points for various things to compute CG come in. Yes, I know I still need the basic CG to complete it, but I am hoping that maybe HB could also provide something to help us with that. Who knows?

Right, the CG is simulated. Clearly it is. The question is by how much in accuracy. But even if it’s not, we can still determine by how much and adjust. Anyways, I don’t doubt the programming capabilities. My next resource to look into is museums or archives to see if maybe they were able to get a hold of this for preservation. I did find a doc that has FS points but it doesn’t have them for weapons or fuel/wings. It does have the points for gear and various other things but I don’t think I can use that to determine CG from stores. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Exactly. Me too. It adds more immersion. I think my idea is a pretty good one. It doesn’t necessarily have to be exactly like form F, which is what the pilots would get that shows the basic weight and CG, stores loaded their weight and moment CG deltas, fuel loaded and CG delta, and the grand total for takeoff weight and CG thus for trim position. That could all fit in a kneeboard page. Now, can it be done? I don’t know, that’s up to HB. Either way, if I can find what I am looking for.....that’s already half way, maybe more. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I can live with it “not working that way” if indeed that’s what DCS has done. But what myself and I think some others would like to see it work in a way that it does require us to have the jet correctly trimmed and notated as it should. Is that too hard to ask/desire? I don’t really think so. Especially if this developer can simulate a two person crew aircraft into one (with pretty darn good effect) then the ability for us to have a page in the kneeboard showing our weight/loadout/%MAC for takeoff would be doable. Better yet if I can just find the data I’m looking for myself, which you seem highly against, may just provide us our own of determining if CG is simulated like the real jet, and if it is we can use that and make our own calculation for takeoff CG. If it doesn’t match, then......oh well. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Also try selecting different A/A weapons. That seems to work for me as well since the Gun and Aim-9 defaults to ACM, I think. The 7s and 120s default to RWS 2-bar scan, as well. Something I’ve done as well when I can’t get it to exit whatever it’s doing. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Hey Draconus, I’m not asking for docs. I’m seeking guidance on where to find what I’m seeking and collaborate with those who are also seeking what I am seeking which is the FS points for the weapons carriage. I know the jets CG varies from airframe to airframe. But the hardpoints shouldn’t, especially since the A/B is the same fuselage. So are you saying CG is more something calculated passively with in DCS? If so, I do agree. Otherwise, we would be able to see the effects of loadouts/fuel burns and how the CG shifts fore and aft. What I would like to know is does it match with the real jet appropriately, if so will we be given a simplified graph from HB that will provide our CG for cat shots, if it doesn’t match then is there a way we can create our own graph to correspond with the sim? I know it’s not a highly sought feature, but this is just one that would make it stand out with the immersion even more. Maybe HB could make a kneeboard page that would mimic Form F with font that looks handwritten from the weight and balance officer? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

CG computation F-14A/B Okay. I don’t think it supersedes it. 01-1B-50 is for the weigh and balance control officers and how they maintain an accurate log of the aircraft basic operating weights and CG. 01-1B-40 is the document that comes with the airframe from the manufacturer. The one I have is just an example or blank because the title page has no model or serial number filled. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Can you be more specific? This document, 01-1B-40 doesn't have the model or serial no filled.

Hey Nealius, I found a 01-1B-40, and this manual simply is a weight and balance guide for dummies. Is this the manual you found? Flipping through this it seems to be more of an example than anything pertaining to a particular airframe. It does say, "The aircraft manufacturer inserts all identifying data on the title page of this manual and on the various charts and forms. He completes all charts, including sample weight and balance clearance Form F, if applicable, at time of delivery. All subsequent changes in weight and balance shall be recorded by weight and balance technicians in accordance with instructions contained herein and NAVAIR 01-1B-50." Unfortunately since this manual I found seems to be more of a guidance and not complete since it isn't aircraft specific, or missing actual data. I think these manuals were destroyed. Since the aircraft was taken out of service and some were sold to other countries.

Here's a quick video I made. It's pretty clear and not only shows aft CG is simulated, but also forward CG. Pretty cool. https://www.dropbox.com/s/lhpg6e2mpo433fi/CG%20test.mp4?dl=0 The next question is, would HB even know what the CG is? For all they know, it could be a bunch of variables with no concise reading. :dunno:

Oh yeah, they are definitely simulating aft CG. Did two launches. One vanilla. One with two mk-84s on the rear. It immediately went into a 60-70 degree attitude leaving the deck. Try it.

CG computation F-14A/B It's not just the docs, its how and why they are split like this is the why we are puzzled. But, I'm guessing the book the NATOPs refers to may in fact be a reference for each tail number's operating CG, along with all the hardpoint CG locations and the example of how to calculate a flight's CG for takeoff. I what don't understand why the calculation portion was not included in the performance manual? Also, what happened to this document? Just something that may never get solved. Who knows, when the Navy got rid of them, the books probably got tossed as well. There would be no need for them to keep those records. HB may not know. Because we don't even know if lateral CG is something that is simulated in the first place. If it isn't then there is nothing they would indicate nor provide on those values. It's pretty simple for ED to simulate the Hornet varying trim values for cat launches because its all predicated on weight. All they have to do is program the sim to react the way it should for such values without applying any effects of CG. If there was a way for use to put a 400lbs pilot versus a 150lbs pilot in the cockpit, then that would be a sure way of knowing. Or do a control of a vanilla jet as little fuel as possible. Then put two of the heaviest bombs on the furthest back of the same jet. Have them both launch with the same trim setting and compare? I'll try it.

Yeah I see it too. Hmm... it’s such a mystery. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Track showing a cold start up. Again, the datalink symbology isn't appearing. https://www.dropbox.com/s/rxyxsesfg8azc98/A10%20startup%20datalink.trk?dl=0 Again, created by fast mission generated.

No, I don’t think so. I’ve started the jet just like the 1000 times I’ve done before, however I do remember I forgot to turn the radio switch on the main panel. I turned it on after takeoff, but it should still work right? Also after it didn’t come on after discovered, I ended the flight then made the mission an air start. It still was missing the symbology on the TAD. I dunno..... Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Hmm...that is weird. What’s even more strange is the “A” performance tables don’t even specify where/how to determine CG. So it only deepens the mystery. I was hoping since it’s somewhat the same airframe with the station locations, that the arms can be at least determined from that, but alas nothing there. Yes the performance numbers will be off (different engines) but the center of gravity should be roughly the same. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Hello all, I apologize, because I know that this was discussed some time ago, but I can't seem to find it in a search. I know our trim setting for cat shots is determined by our center of gravity. So I was curious, since I couldn't locate documentation detailing calculating this for the B, if I could find this for the older A model. Well.... I didn't, even after acquiring documentation with currency. So now, I'm wondering (and I know I don't need to, but it's the nerd inside of me) if our F-14 CG in fact changes or is even affected in game? Also, if it does, how did the pilots know their CG? I understand there is a basic CG for each individual airframe, but where's this data the details the arm of each individual station and computation for the balance of fuel? Also, if CG is part of DCS, then what would our jet's CG be? This part seems very vague still and I would like to know more. Thanks to all for the help. I want to know, because I love this jet. It's a rock star compared to the others available. So much fun, and so much more to come!

Yep. I saw this too. They stay presented under the jet after you pickle them. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

On a separate note, I just updated today, and in the notes mentions the debrief being fixed. I just did a campaign mission in the F-14. It still gave me an invalid error. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

That’s good, but why is it marked correct as is? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro