OnlyforDCS

Not gonna happen.

The F5F is the two seat trainer version right? The airplane is quite small, and the F variant was three feet longer than the E version we have in the sim. Could that account for the difference in stability compared to the DCS version?

I'd dig one. However DCS needs a comms update (which is coming in 2019 hopefully) for it to be an effective interceptor. In fact quite a few modules in DCS feel incomplete with GCI in the state it's currently at. In multiplayer with a person doing live GCI a Foxbat could really do some damage.

Pretty much this. Also, very few people fail to take into account the short "throw" or travel of our desktop joysticks compared to the long control columns found in the real warbirds. This is where most of the weirdness comes from, and why people do joystick extensions in DCS. More travel = more sensitive or finer control inputs. Another solution is FFB. Once you try it it's very hard to go back to a regular spring stick. What MOST people use though is curves. I personally dislike them and didn't use them even before moving to FFB, but they do make people's lives easier.

Aye Cap'n! :pilotfly:

The only thing that they can't show for now is the back seat even though it's functional, and LANTIRN. So I believe there is plenty to show, but you gotta realize most of these content creators have day jobs. It takes time to get to know a module, probably through trial and error for most, since HB have their hands full with completing the jet and can't babysit content creators, and who knows how complete the manual is and whether the content creators have access to it. Then on top of all of that, they have to set up their missions in a way to best demonstrate what they wan't to show and finally record the video and then do some post-production. As for the start-up, take-off and landing being done by Heatblur, does anyone have a link to where they actually confirmed they will be doing that exclusively?

I take it you mean that you would never attempt to pull so many g's ever so it's kind of a moot point?

The action starts from about 21:13 into the video if you wan't to take a look, but basically it goes down like this: Magz does an instantaneous 21 g turn and completely wrecks his plane, though it's still kind of flyable. The issue is not with the damage modeling, which seems to be great, but whether the FCS would allow the pilot to pull so many g's and effectively break his plane and even kill himself or if the bob-weights system in place would simply provide too much counterforce on the stick to do that?

Heya there Victory, did you watch MagzTV's video? What do you think about the part where he overstressed the airframe and broke his engines? Would that be possible to do (if very undesireable) in the real Tomcat?

This is all cool and everything but Im not talking about building a FFB system from the ground up. Im talking about Heatblur simulating an approximation of the real system in the F14, which could then be used to support existing force feedback sticks (like the FFB2). Obviously not in a 1 to 1 ratio. Deano87 brought up a great point. Is Heatblur's F14 module simulating the system at all is the question, since the pilot can effortlessly pull enough g's to overstress the airframe and damage it (like we see in MagzTV's video)?

Well, I wasn't talking about a FULL feedback control stick. Just any appreciable stiffening with an onset of g (within the limits of what force feedback joysticks can do) would be really, really great to have. It won't be exactly like the real thing, but it will go a long way to providing excellent feedback that a spring loaded joystick just can't reproduce. Anyone who's tried FFB can attest to this with the other DCS modules that do support it.

Ahh okay. Got it. So the control column stiffens up the higher the G loading. Actually this opens up very interesting potential solutions to force feedback implementation for the module too, and that is something that I would very much like to see implemented in Heatblur's F14. So now the question remains how much force was required to pull back on the stick for any given G in the real plane.

Yeah I get that. What Im trying to say though is that with the F14 it's probable that at certain flight regimes pulling the stick to its max deflection might be advantageous, while at others it might kill you. The pilot is trained to recognize this, with the help of the artificial forces, and limiting the deflection rate of the stick to prevent airplane damage or pilot death, would make it much less capable in many of it's other flight regimes.

What control forces? Unless you mean artificial ones, there are no direct control forces in the F14. As for the artificial control forces, remember that the F14 doesn't have fly by wire, there is no computer that determines the max ammount of g that you can pull dependant on the flight regime. AFAIK it doesn't even feature the limited CAS system present in the F15. Im 99% sure that Heatblur have modeled the ammount corrently, but there are at least a couple of real F14 pilots here that can confirm or deny this. MAGZ has already stated that the plane allows you to break it, though its very forgiving if you know what you're doing but extremely bad piloting will get you killed in the F14.

Pretty much what Defaulface said. Im not sure what amazingme's video is trying to prove. That the Spitfire shouldn't be able to pull 11g's ever?

Thanks for the info! Awesome to have an actual Tomcat pilot as a regular forum member. Would love to hear more about those SAS systems and their application.

Really? Well you learn something new every day. I thought that the F14D was actually the lighter airframe and had better rated engines. Thanks.

How about providing some evidence instead of spouting the same stuff in different threads? Either that or quit trolling. Well if you won't I will. Only took me 2 minutes too. http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=28783 NAVAIR chart of the F14. Found on the F16 forums of all places! From the chart we can see that the F14 has a comparable sustained turn rate to the F16, and a MUCH better instantaneous turn rate at lower speeds. Granted this for the F14D, which has the better T/W ratio compared to the B model, but since we are talking about turning in WVR (not climbing or running) you don't really need the big powerplants of the D model at lower speeds. Now please tell me that the Mig23 (any model you want) without providing evidence is an equivalent or better dogfighter than the F16, please oh please, and you will finally out yourself as the troll you probably are.

Looks like we've got some "truthers" on the forums. Damn shame if you ask me :(

You should probably PM Zeus.

Well you gotta be fair here, they've only had a limited amount of time to learn the basic functionality of the airframe AND produce content to show to the public. Both jabbers and mags have stated that this first video is meant as a basic introduction to the airframe and both (as well as other content creators who have access to the module) have stated that they will release in-depth videos of the different systems as they get more comfortable with them. No one wants to go in-depth into specific systems and release information that is incomplete or god-forbid outright wrong ;) They would get torn to shreds by the online community. Give em time, they will get there.

Also from what we've heard from the developers so far, most of the rear seat functionality is already working it's just that it's lacking in the art department compared to the front seat and rather than face the wrath of angry internet warriors they wanna polish that up some before showing it to the general public :)

It all depends. I have all of them, and have to say that the only one I don't enjoy is the Dora. For pure flying fun the Spit is my go to plane. It's also the best dogfighter of them all, but it's also the slowest of them all. For pure BnZ the tiny 109K is where it's at, in that regard it's similar to the Stang. But unlike the stang it can also hold it's own in a dogfight. Just not for long against a skilled Spit player. Just be prepared for a learning curve. All of those planes handle quite differently to the Mustang, especially on take off and landing.

Why would you think what I wrote was a confrontational answer? Well I apologize in any case, maybe Jabbers can weigh in with his opinion. I could be wrong about it, maybe the shaking is overdone, but I did read one of the alpha tester's comments about it and I always trust the developer of a module over these kinds of things over my own personal opinions, and I tried to illustrate that in my answer to your question.

Well you obviously don't like the F14, so I guess there is absolutely every reason to believe you over everyone else, including the developers, actual pilots who worked with them on the module, and Eagle Dynamics over the veracity of this module and it's weapon systems. Obviously YOU know for a fact that the Tomcat can't hit anything other than the side of a barn and turns as slow as molasses and is inferior to anything the Soviets put in the sky, there is no need to provide any references because it's you who are telling us, it's just the way it is.