captain_dalan

VF-33 is available to the A and VF-31 and 33 for the B? Or should they all be available to both A and B?

Kudos for the very good question!

Always a pleasure!

Has the radar reacquired the target and built a new track after losing the original one?

That's the old (pre-HB) Phoenix FM or something very similar to it. They were known to sprint at mach 5 as low as 15000ft or so. Very flat, very fast.

Worth a try!

Though sometimes lagging, Jester's callouts are IMO pretty much correct. It's just that they don't translate well to most head mounted face trackers. I noticed this for the first time when i experimented with a VR about a year ago. Suddenly he got them all right. It's then that i noticed the 2D representation in DCS (on a flat screen) skewers your spatial orientation. Especially when bandits are very high or medium low. A tiny offset can result in shifts from 2 to 10 or from 3 to 9, despite looking to us as if the bandit is still in its original aspect.

What if the angle is that way so you can use to monitor the wings?

Is that actual fuel or a display error?

Maybe it's expected to offset the angle after launch?

As a general rule? Yes. In this case, not quite. Cd for 11 degrees alpha (true) at 22 degree sweep 0.2 at low mach (bellow 0.5). Cd for 12.5 degrees alpha (true) at 68 degree sweep, 0.2. Exactly the same. In this case the alpha induced drag for high wing sweep lags behind the low sweep, fairly proportionally, until very high angles of attack (close to stall). It's the Cl that's rather higher at low mach, 1.02 for 11deg, 22^ VS 0.89 for 12.5deg 68^, that gives a better Cl/Cd with wings forward then wings aft. However, as you mentioned, the increase in mach will add to the drag component (parasitic in this case) which will nullify any lift advantages for the purposes of excess power (Ps), so worst sustained turns. The advantages of increased lift remain though, so higher available g's (but not sustainable).

Yep, right on all accounts! LOL! Seriously though, no point going that fast. I mean, i can see it making sense in the A, as your energy is hard to recover once you bleed it all off, especially bellow 360 knots, so you want have some spare, just in case bugging out becomes a good idea or something. But if you dedicate yourself to a one circle, don't enter a merge above 400-420. Even less if you are willing to risk it. Your bandit is an AI, right?

Aye, 30-31 compared to 35-36 IIRC

1. Also more drag. Depending on circumstances maybe even up to 25-30% more. 2. Why are you at mach 0.9 if you plan is to go one circle?

Ah i see, i will give the B a try as well, though L/D should still be the same

And rudder input. I just figured now much ridder it takes to keep her level in a flat turn at 30 units a month or so back...... back to the old drawing board!

It could be the handling. She is much more predictable when the wings don't move. This is just a blitz and very precisely measured check. Data from tacview. A huge mountain of salt, only 3 passes per break point, so not that pedantic: Sustained turns, F-14A 54000lbs GW, 500-1000ft, airspeed in TAS wings auto: 330 - 5.1g 350 - 5.3g 400 - 6.3g 450 - 6.4g 500 - 8.3g wings forward: 330 -5.0g 350 -5.4g 400 -6.0g 450 -6.0g 500 -7.4g Hardly any difference 300-350 and slight drop above that. The A does seam to be overpowered above 450 so it may be distorting my measures. I don't have time for a systematic check though Did you fight the JF-17 very slow?

What STR values did you get in comparison to AUTO? What wings forward should do is get max the lift available to you per mach, for the price of increased induced drag. So you CLmax curve should be a bit better above mach 0.55 or so (depending on altitude) but your Ps should suffer. Never ran the tests in DCS myself, but the L/D calculations based on the data available to me imply it. To the OP, listen to @Spurts, he knows what he's talking about. GS is probably the least proficient F-14 driver i've seen on youtube and the least well informed one, so take everything he mentions on his channel with a huge grain of salt.

Haha, i know your pain mate. I have been waiting for this upgrade in almost a year

Yikes! Will we have to relearn to read to buffet in order to figure out what AoA are we at? Should the A be supersonic at altitude and with stores now? P.S. Thanks for the heads up, this has to be my number 1 most anticipated upgrade since release!

Visual fixes don't seam like flight model features to me

Ooh nice! Similar to what i usually do, 4x2x2 or 2x3x2 with the tanks added of course. My success rate is hard to estimate though, as the missiles changed often in last 2 years. At the best of times, i'd say slightly better then 50%, even when the first one is fired as a deterrent. For well timed shots, fired inside best parameters even up to 70-75%. At worst, especially before i disabled the Jester auto P-STT option, it was abysmal, something like 20-25%. They seam rather bad down low, like south of 5000ft, when they turn into a WVR missile essentially. Angels 15 and above they can be useful for 10+ NM shots, which fills the Phoenix - Sidewinder gap nicely

I don't pay for the fuel, so pedantic isn't the way to go (for me). Roughly speaking though, when loitering i try to keep the FF in the middle of the lower strip and when cruising, either at the upper end or slightly above it, depending on the altitude. Flew 3-4 sorties over the Caucasus mountains this way and still landed with plenty of fuel left Not quite scientific, i know, but hey, it works for shooting bad guys!

I most certain DON'T know, but similarly to @Lt_Jaeger up there, use the lower strip for loiter or cruise. The upper i don't pay any attention to at all....

Admit it, you NEVER use Sparrows, do ya? SHAME!