-
Posts
564 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by turkeydriver
-
The "claim" by Iran rolls right with their propaganda. They wanted to see if their F-14s could take some Russian equipment, primarily the engines. This never worked and didn't happen. There are pictures of an Iranian F-14 carrying an R-27, nothing about it shooting or engaging a target. The radar upgrade is not a replaced AWG-9. This upgrade was announced the same time the US Navy upgraded the old F-16A/Bs radar with something that reportedly extended the detection range by 15%. This is a blanket statement and may have just been a software upgrade or some easy, low-cost on the line hardware change. At the same time- the Iranians stated they had extended the radar range of the F-5 and F-14A by 15%. It has to be related.
-
LOL Us maintenance types don't have the information of performance specs- just descriptions in a manual. That type of info needs a pilot or an engineer with complete access to the actual specs. We just fix what the kids break while they're burning holes in the sky.
-
The biggest asset the AWG-9 had besides its raw power and detection range, was its sensitive receiver, so the AWG-9 tracked you at range without tripping your RWR. Of course espionage and the fall of Iran did the job of negating that asset. STT gives you the longest range launch with the AIM-54, TWS mode gave you the ability for multiple shots and didnt trip your RWR, at least back then.....
-
Iranian Tomcats with Russian missiles, possible for DCS??
turkeydriver replied to carss's topic in DCS: F-14A & B
Yep even the top pic is a photoshop- you don't fire weapons with full flaps and the correct pylon adapter isn't even installed. I know they fired the HAWK SAM from the F-14, but they never hit anything with it. -
Iranian Tomcats with Russian missiles, possible for DCS??
turkeydriver replied to carss's topic in DCS: F-14A & B
I'd be careful with implementing what is seen in pictures and reported as "carried" since it could be interpreted as propaganda. The HAWK integration, while carried, was never successful because the missile had problems tracking the radar signal. The Alamo is listed as being carried.....not successfully engaging targets. From all the recent pictures I've seen with Tomcats in intercept or escort, the few Iranian F-14s are carrying live AIM-9P and Perhaps Sparrows. I think I've seen one with an AIM-54/Iranian AIM-54 clone(don't remember the name). If anyone can produce credible evidence of these "new" weapons being successful in target engagements I'd like to see them implemented, otherwise, no. -
The AST-21 was a tomcat project, ASF-14, Tomcat-21 were all advanced tomcats that weren't built but yes the F-21 designation was used for the Adversary Kfir. The Tomcat 21 had that number just to denote that it was intended as a 21st century concept. It might have had an F-25 designation if not F-14E or F-14F. I just read a bit of info that when the aircraft is juat past the sound barrier not the entire airframe is supersonic, so its not efficient. Its more efficient that .99 Mach, but SuperCRUISE, the idea that you can economically cruise about supersonic speed doesn't really happen until above Mach 1.3 depending on the airframe. So this would explain why the F-14/15/16 are NOT considered supercruise capable although in specific configurations they can maintain above Mach speed without afterburner.
-
I have to spread rep around before I can give you any more.....
-
My thoughts are the hope that the digital components and more modern avionics of the F-14D might have made the AMRAAM more agreeable to the APG-71, no guarantee though. In an ALL OUT WAR scenario, the F-14 would only carry air to air armament. It would be considered to valuable to lose in an A-G mission, and the AST-21 would have been a reality by 1998 and carried the full spectrum of A-G and A-A ordnance. But the F-14A through D would only have carried their 3 AIM types. You might have seen the entire F-14 fleet upgraded to D standard, possibly with an AMRAAM update, and most likely with an AIM-154/155 put back into development. There's just too much that goes into system integration to say that a war would have made it happen on the F-14. For weapons that use the main sensor, integration takes years! I say this because ALL OUT WAR mandates a respectable air threat, and a respectable air threat would have prevented the F-14 from moving to the A-G mission. The military would have used the higher performance intrinsic to the airframe and just poured money into sensor upgrades and missile production.
-
World War 3,4,5 and 6 would not have given the F-14A/B AMRAAM. In all reality if WW3 started in 1989, perhaps the F-14D might have possibly eventually received AMRAAM, but the missile had trouble being integrated into the AWG-9/APG-71. Of course the jet could carry it dumb, but the avionics part was the tough part. This also help the decision to shift the AMRAAM money to the LANTIRN project. If you want an F-14 with AMRAAM, you want a fantasy F-14 with a restarted production line, AST-21 airframe, new engines, and a new avionics. There's no logic to incorporate AMRAAM with this project from any perspective of realism. It would only be incorporated in a fantasy mode where the F-15s also carry AIM-54s and the Flankers carry R-33s.... Bottom line, AMRAAM + AWG-9 doesn't have any basis.
-
Will the F-14B that Leatherneck is working on have a LANTIRN pod?
turkeydriver replied to Blitz262's topic in DCS: F-14A & B
From the above NTP.... "The F-14A (usually equipped with a TID) requires the PTID when configured for LANTIRN. The F14B Upgrade is equipped with the PTID. The F-14D Aircraft uses existing Multi-Function Displays or a PTID when configured for LANTIRN." Thanks for clarifying that for me. II thought operational F-14As operated the same as the test aircraft with the TID in interleave mode... -
Will the F-14B that Leatherneck is working on have a LANTIRN pod?
turkeydriver replied to Blitz262's topic in DCS: F-14A & B
Thank you for that read! The symbology is great! Ii had no idea what JDAM employment looked like on the PTID. That's some great info LN can use if they don't already have it (if they add JDAM in the future) -
Will the F-14B that Leatherneck is working on have a LANTIRN pod?
turkeydriver replied to Blitz262's topic in DCS: F-14A & B
Right on point Blacklion! Although I didn't know the F-14A fishbowl ever got replaced. I forgot that LN was planning different periods for their tomcats. I want to be able to compare both jets in the same roles. For instance, an F-14A is lighter and can bring back more ordnance to the boat and most likely launch with more. Throughout my career, I've never known the Tomcats to have varied missions based on their model, but they all transitioned to the same mission set around the same time( depending on which air wing was prepping for deployment and who received upgrades in what order). We're not getting JDAM AFAIK, soo the databus differences shouldn't matter. I'd like the fly the F-14A and B side by side. The F-14A has glove vanes deploy when bomb mode is selected for wing sweep for more stability IIRC- these subtle nuances are what this picky guy is looking for. -
Will the F-14B that Leatherneck is working on have a LANTIRN pod?
turkeydriver replied to Blitz262's topic in DCS: F-14A & B
Clearly my comments were nuked. The F-14B backseat changes when you add the LANTIRN. Also reality by that time made the F-14B mostly a bomber. You have a permanent 1000lb LANTIRN pod on one side permanently(cannot jettison IIRC, only remove post flight). I want the F-14A+/F-14B strictly first as a fighter-of course that just means that all the engine management you learned with the F-14A is not needed and you can get longer legs on your flight depending on your fuel management. The F-14A is lighter than the F-14B, so when youre at fighting speed down low, you shouldn't have a problem beating one. If a LANTIRN is added, and supported, it should be to both models, not specific to the F-14B. The "Bombcat" upgrade that the F-14B received was in the very late 90s and resulted in significant cockpit changes. The backseat displays will be different and there will be an actual HUD. To clarify, I dodnt want the bombcat upgrade specific to the F-14B. If we get LANTIRN, it should be to both the F-14A and F-14B, but don't DELAY the release to implement these. -
Will the F-14B that Leatherneck is working on have a LANTIRN pod?
turkeydriver replied to Blitz262's topic in DCS: F-14A & B
I'm hoping it doesn't carry the LANTIRN in the initial release, because that one aspect could fund extra develop and attention. I love the bombing capability of the F-14, but it should be a pure Air to Air beast where we can explore its potential and realize its awesomeness in this aspect. The mid 1990s F-14B didn't have the burner restrictions and its a mature platform by that time- Only thing better was an F-14D. Give me an accurate AWG-9 package with accurate AIM-7/AIIM-54 parameters when coupled with the AWG-9. -
The Five Maneuvers That Were Prohibited In The F-14 Tomcat
turkeydriver replied to KesMonkey's topic in DCS: F-14A & B
Why? You would never launch a jet with a downing discrepancy like that. Sure it could take off- it would be a very long very high speed take off like a Mirage III. -
The Five Maneuvers That Were Prohibited In The F-14 Tomcat
turkeydriver replied to KesMonkey's topic in DCS: F-14A & B
The turkey had a decent instantaneous roll rate at speed- but at corner speed its roll rate is lower than most other fighters out there. If the wings were swept already at the end of the runway they had to have been manually swept aft- no way he's hitting .8 Mach by the end of the runway unless maybe he hijacked a pair of JSF F135 motors. Wish I could have seen it, would have been awesome. -
The close range tests were to find the minimum successful engagement range and to see if it was effective in the WVR envelope. These tests are good to use in tail shots, since every radar missile's best engagement is a head on shot, and the worst is tail on(edit***worst is 90 degree deflection, but tail on is less than ideal)- this being a successful, maneuvering, tail-on shot speaks volumes to its effectiveness. Before we were smart about radar missiles in the fleet we gave them a bad rap- ala Vietnam- can't use your AIM-7 BVR head-on forced most shots to be tail-on, which outside of maneuvering and long launch sequence is a tough shot for a radar missile.
-
Thanks! I don't have any test data for the F-14B or D but the F-14A in the 1970s was tested to either Mach 1.7 or Mach 1.8 as VMAX for missile launch.
-
AFAIK the VMAX for AIM-54 launch was Mach 1.7, unless they only tested to that speed and called it a day....
-
Motor still burning- that's a close range shot-motor only gets you to high altitude and enough to tip over and start the kinetic cruise back down.
-
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/research/Phoenix/phoenixmissile_prt.htm This shows what the retired AIM-54 was proposed to be used for. You can see the F-15 could only carry the weapon where it carried a fuel tank, and barely had enough clearance on the belly. The only modification was the removal of the warhead compartment and replaced with test equipment. Same rocket and flight profile. That's a fast missile, go ahead and try to dodge it. You need to be 13 years old and all hopped up on 10 cans of Mountain Dew to have any hope of a twitch dodge.
-
False. but that's a dead horse. The F-14 wasn't considered an expendable asset for nuclear weapon delivery when the carrier was full of A-6s and F-18s that were already wired for tactical nuke delivery. This mission was later viewed as near obsolete because of the tomahawk capability. The F-14 just wasn't wired to arm the device, but it had the room. It was just never explored.
-
If we allowed everything ever hung under a tomcat to be carried in the sim, then we've have to add all the crazy carl loadouts to the other jets too.....I'm not keen on seeing an F-16 with a tomahawk under each wing. let's simulate realism.
-
Will the F-14B be coming with the DFCS?
turkeydriver replied to Hummingbird's topic in DCS: F-14A & B
It shouldn't, its a mid-90s F-14B which had the same A-G capability as the F-14A. The DFCS system was still in testing until the later 90s and was first implemented on the remaining F-14A fleet, followed by the F-14B and F-14D. That way there are no major FM changes between the 2 versions they give us besides being heavier with more powerful engines and no glove vanes. -
Those manuals were not cleared for public release. Don't download them if you find them unless you know they're OK to be released.