Matze81

Seeing this, I’m wondering if I completely missed something in previous patch notes. Can we change the chin pod for the player aircraft? If so, is it done by adding a custom argument to the description.lua of the livery?

Have any F-14 changes made it in? I noticed yesterday already, that none of the announced changes of this thread are mentioned in the official change log (https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/news/changelog/).

I only now had a chance to try it and you were right of course! I wasn’t aware that we can assign the „off“ state of our two-way Warthog switches. Quite embarrassing actually! Thank you very much for helping me out @Tomcatter87!

Excellent first impression. Beautiful! Thank you Heatblur! One quick question about the key bindings. I like using two way switches on the Warthog throttle for Gear and Hook. These switches only generate a button press in the up position. In the Tomcat this worked well, because there’s a key binding „Gear up - else down“. So if the 2 way switch is up, the gear is up; if the switch is down the gear is down. The F-4 doesn’t seem to have this key binding (Gear up - else down) option unfortunately. I did see and try a different Two way gear binding in the F-4 settings, but then the switch had the opposite effect. When the switch was down, the gear went up and vice versa. Quite counter-intuitive. Maybe I just didn’t see the obvious. I didn’t have a lot of time to test the F-4 today. But if any of you guys know what I’m talking about and know how to make it work in the F-4, I’d be thankful if you could point me in the right direction.

Menu screen looks awesome!!!

If you bought the F4 from Heatblur directly, make sure you activate the licence key in your ED account profile.

The delay is clearly @draconus fault. He set May 22nd as the patch date already 4 weeks ago!

Thanks for trying to help. Good idea about the Internet archive. Wouldn’t have thought of that. Do you get a stable download connection? I got it to initiate after a few tries, but it keeps interrupting the download after downloading less than 150 MB at a very slow pace (only around 200 KB/s or less). So it doesn’t work in my case unfortunately. But still, appreciate you trying to help!

Same here. Could one of you kind legends maybe re-upload it or something? Would be very much appreciated.

Now, that Iran plans to retire their Tomcats in 2024, it might increase the chances that at least some more information on the F-14D becomes officially available to the public/the developers.

Mk84: Always Low Drag; no option to drop with a „drag chute“ or something alike. Mk84 AIR: You have the option to either drop it as Low drag bomb (select Nose fuze) or you can drop it as high drag bomb (drag device deploys when you select Tail or N/T fuze setting) Mk84 AIR GP: General purpose bomb; Not quite sure where it differs from the one I just described. Mk84 AIR TP: Inert Training bomb (Blue marking); Shouldn’t explode.

Apparently it is; At least when compared to Syria. Here‘s something they mentioned in December:

Famous last words…

Beautiful skins! One small thing I noticed, in case you’re interested: The stripes of the US national insignia usually penetrate the dark circle a bit on both sides. Like in this image:

I do see the point your making in the posts above and it’s certainly not completely impossible that a Heatblur Tornado might happen at some point. I just think it is unlikely for Heatblur to develop another Tornado version, after AviaStorm successfully released their 1989 Tornado. Even if it would be a later or ADV or ECR etc. version. Kinda like Razbam developing an F-14D. Would be weird somehow (to me at least).

But not from Heatblur unfortunately, I guess. Unless they team up with the Tornado guys like they did with the Eurofighter dudes. Here’s hoping…

I don’t know if it’s properly implemented in DCS, but try the following: Set the Tanker Tacan to 92y. Set 29y A/A Tacan in your own jet and see if it works. That’s how it’s often done in real life. Btw, it doesn’t have to be the 92/29 combination. Any two numbers that are 63 apart works. 92/29 is just easy to remember.

Yes, but in case of the Tornado we can let it slide. #ObjectiveStatement?

OP is correct. It was brought up before in this thread: The thread was labeled “No Bug”, but Cobra847 did post that the nozzle will be corrected (third post from the bottom; September 23rd):

Thank you for looking into it! I noticed it only with the Tomcat. The issue is not present in the Hornet or the F-16 for example. I’m quite certain Flaming Cliffs aircraft are also not affected.

Bug: F-14A/B; Afterburner Flame not visible in External (F2) View, when game was paused in Cockpit (F1) View Can I reproduce it 100%: yes How to reproduce/ description: Step1: Engage Afterburner while in Cockpit (F1) View (for most obvious result engage full AB/Zone 5) Step2: Pause the game Step 3: Press F2 and rotate view to see the rear/nozzle area of the jet Result: Nozzles are open as expected, but there is no visible Afterburner flame Additional Note: Afterburner flame becomes visible within ~1 second, if you un-pause the game while still in F2-View. DCS Version: Stable 2.5.6.61527.3 Mods: None This bug is obviously not a big issue. It’s a mild annoyance, if you’re like me and tend to pause the game sometimes, when an “interesting” situation occurs, which you’d like to screenshot in External View. As I said above, the AB flame appears within roughly one second, if you un-pause the game, while still in External View, but often enough, the “screenshot-moment” is gone within that time. But again: Mild annoyance, not a biggie.

It’s not a variant thing, since the top right comparison photo in my original post is also an F-14D. The tires in the photos you posted do seem a bit fuller, which indeed could make a difference, but they still seem further apart than in-game. I’m sure if I’ll try to recreate a similar camera angle in-game it would confirm it.

I apologize if this has been brought up before, but I noticed a while ago, that the two nose gear tires of the Tomcat in DCS seem to be closer together than they actually were in real life. The camera angles of the attached comparison screenshots are not always perfectly matched, but they should still make it clear what I mean. The whole thing is certainly not a biggie, just a small discrepancy I'd say, but maybe HB still would like to add it to their list of small fixes (with very low priority of course). But anyway, the DCS Tomcat is glorious either way! Thanks a lot for all the effort and attention to detail you pump into that module. It really shows and one can "feel" the difference (hard to explain that one...).