BlackLion213

Thank you Razbam! I've taken several flights and I am extremely pleased thus far. The EFM is very convincing and is still rewarding in spite of being FBW. Loads seem to have a big (and expected) impact on flight performance. The flight model really feels "right" to me. The external model is beautiful and so far, the module has performed very well from an FPS standpoint. Thank you for the hard work. I was a pre-order customer and I am extremely satisfied thus far. :thumbup: This Mirage 2000 is an outstanding DCS addition! The view from the cockpit is excellent and very immersive. I love these big tanks! This module is huge fun to fly! Very satisfied customer and ready to buy more from your team. :D -Nick

Luckily, no US Pilot has ever tried to evade an AIM-54....so it's hard to know how easy it is compared to the AMRAAM. Could be easier...or harder. We'll see what happens when it comes to DCS. I'd bet that the updated AIM-54 is a bit different than what is depicted currently in DCS, but who knows? Though I agree, don't expect the Tomcat to be an unbeatable force in BVR, but also don't take it for granted. ;) -Nick

Quick update. I was out of town for the past 4 days and updated DCS 2.0 today. Took a few test flights and the MiG-21 seems to be working perfectly. I fired up the radar, took a evening flight from Groom Lake to McCarran, and did some touch and go landings. Everything seemed to be working, just like DCS 1.5. :thumbup: I didn't encounter any frame rate issues or other problems. I'll try some weapons employment soon, but I'm really happy with things at the moment. Thank you to LNS for fixing it. I will be spending a lot more time on NTTR now that things are sorted. :D Some eye candy from the flight. Some of the photos have the frame-rate counter and frame rates are quite good on NTTR with the MiG-21 (quite close to what I see in DCS 1.5 - except for directly over Vegas which is lower, but more than acceptable - 50s). NTTR also looks amazing. I am still in awe that it can look this good and still run so well on a regular computer - this is a REALLY good time for flight sim enthusiasts! Happy Holidays to everyone, I hope the MiG-21 treats you well if you have some time off. ;) -Nick

I heard the same. It's a great podcast BTW. The Harrier GR.7/9 is an excellent choice, both because it is an excellent aircraft and because of it's commonality with the AV-8B. Razbam also mentioned trying to do a Night Attack AV-8B if the Gr.7/9 goes well. I was hoping for the A-7E, it's one of my top 5 favorite aircraft (with the understanding that my top 3 are all F-14s...:D). But I think that the Harrier is a better choice, mostly because operating a VSTOL aircraft like that will offer a totally different experience from any other fixed wing aircraft in DCS. I am all for diversity in DCS and it will certainly help to bring more users/customers into DCS. Hopefully, they will still do an A-7 in the not-to-distant future. It would pair up really well with the upcoming F-14A and could share theaters and carrier ops. Still, I am very excited to try the Harrier and I hope the project goes well. I will definitely buy it! -Nick

Thank you! I love these podcasts and it was great to hear from the Razbam team. Very informative and entertaining. Thanks again! -Nick

Great banner, happy to see a new one. :) I'm looking forward to your December updates....and the eventual Deltas and Wasps. :D Enjoy the time off! -Nick

I suspect its because the cockpit is mostly empty. I love seeing Tomcats, but not such a fan of visiting them at most museums. Because of the "de-mil" process, most static display aircraft look like corpses. There is no suspension of disbelief that they can fly, they just look gutted. There are a few museums where the Tomcat is in great shape: Smithsonian, Seattle Museum of flight, Wings over the Rockies to name a few (there are others too, I just don't know the names). -Nick

Love the pictures guys! Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays. -Nick

I won't complain about your complaints....;) Though I doubt that it changes things for Leatherneck or the other 3rd parties. But people should be able to say that they don't like something, if they are courteous and reasonable IMHO. My only objection was your decision to make things personal and talk about health issues. This forum will be a better place if we leave that sort of thing out of the conversation. -Nick

The F4U and AJS-37 are reasonably official, Cobra more or less confirmed that it was a leak with this post: http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2588175&postcount=2582 That said, I would really like to know more, especially since they are planning new features and theaters. These things can have a huge impact and simply knowing the identity of the aircraft hardly completes the picture. Even a short overview describing their current plans/hopes would be really appreciated. Much like the first post of this thread. Let's please keep the personal stuff out of the conversation. Everyone around here assumes that sick means URI/cold...there are much worse things that can happen to any of us, even those in their 20's. Let's not minimize these things and try to use it as leverage. It's cheap..... -Nick

Whoa! Impressive bug, that didn't happen to me. It might be because of using the auto-start? I did a manual start and there were no issues. That is an awesome looking bug...like a millipede. :D -Nick PS - the skin you chose looks awesome in NTTR, even more so without the bug. :)

Go figure...Berkeley resident...always glass half-empty. ;) I live in Kensington BTW. Nice to meet you part-time neighbor. :) That's a nice selection of part-time residences. -Nick

It is working! However, there are caveats. The radar causes the program to crash, so you need to cold start and not turn on the radar. Also, my AOA gauge was not working and it was a bit "stuttery" compared to the F-15C or A-10C (so is the L-39C BTW, not sure why). The MiG works beautifully in DCS1.5 and that is where I fly it for now. Though I might do a little sightseeing in NTTR now that things sort-of work. :D -Nick

There are still a lot of online articles that discuss the Tomcat, even 10 years after it's retirement. Here are a few that I ran across recently. Many are from Jalopnik in the past year or so. http://jalopnik.com/ There are a bunch of other ones that can be found with a google search, but most forum goers won't learn much from them - it's stuff like "the F-14 could track 24 targets at once or Iran also bought the F-14"... I think the Jalopnik ones are pretty good. Recording from the Gulf of Sidra Elite F-14 Flight Officer Explains Why The Tomcat Was So Influential This Throwback F-14 Demo Video Will Bring Tomcat Lovers To Tears Last Tomcat Demo This Topgun Instructor Watched The F-14 Go From Tomcat To 'Bombcat' BTW - if you read any of these articles, make sure you read this one. It's REALLY good and covers the changes that took place during the Leatherneck Tomcat's operational era perfectly (1985ish to 1995ish) TOP GUN Day Special: The Super Tomcat That Was Never Built What It Was Like Being A Topgun Instructor While They Filmed Top Gun How To Successfully Get Launched Off A Carrier At Night In A F-14 Tomcat And we can't forget about this one! :thumbup: -Nick

I just noticed that the stall performance seems to be better, was it recently updated? I didn't remember a patch since 1.5.2, but it no longer gets stuck at 36 deg alpha. Now, if I drop the stick the nose follows and the alpha decreases, even if the aircraft has been stalled for >10 sec. Also, sustained stalls seem to cause more "roll off" than before (?). Anyway, seems like the performance has been fixed and I like this behavior better - "feels" more realistic. :thumbup: -Nick

Not sure, I didn't write the article. Though I suppose that there may not be very many details concerning the actual encounter, no one was supposed to talk about it publicly, mostly because there was a fear that it would hurt international F-15 sales. Plus, the article title is about both Hoser and the Tomcat's success in the first Tomcat vs Eagle hassle. Maybe I didn't sell it right. ;) But I liked this article so I figured it was worth sharing. -Nick

Very true, the TF30 can make impressive power at low altitudes or high speeds as Turkeydriver said. Static T/W ratios give a rather incomplete view of aircraft performance since so many factors effect actual engine thrust. The F-15C's T/W ratio at combat weight is actually 0.6.....@25,000' where it's engines make less than half of their rated static thrust. The T/W ratio is helpful for comparisons and guestimating relative capabilities, but not something to dwell on IMHO. Different airframe/engine combinations will have different ideal altitudes and conditions. For the F-14A and the TF30, it loves the air at low altitude and it's performance is much better. The TF30 gets a surprisingly big boost at low altitudes or high speeds. However, the TF30 also sees more deterioration in thrust with altitude than most other afterburning turbofans. Both reliability and power are at their best below 10,000', but US training doctrine dictates that all ACM training have a minimum hard-deck of 10,000' . As a result, the F-14A almost never got to fight under it's ideal conditions (though many Tomcat drivers did have the chance to engage closer to the deck during some international training missions, etc). However, in Fleet and RAG training, F-14A's would still routinely beat F-14B/D's in ACM training. And of course this is worth considering: And this: Gunning down eagles...how it all started :) The F-14A has fewer tools to work with and A LOT more gotchas than either the F-14B/D or other 4th gen fighters, but it was still quite capable if operated properly. -Nick

Thank you for the invite. :) It is an amazing Museum and I'm glad that it's still expanding. When I was last there a 4th (?) Hangar was under construction. -Nick

I just remembered....I'm not really supposed to post stuff for other sims/games. :doh: Anyway, I decided to round out the weekend with a few F-14 references, especially those that are not as well-known. The First is "Tomcat Alley". It's actually a rather old site, I don't think it has been updated since 1999.... Which does give it a different perspective from most active sites. It also has over a 1000 photos, some which I have not seen posted elsewhere Tomcat Alley Next is a photo site that primarily covers USN topics and has a big selection Tomcat pictures. It is broken down by squadron and many of the squadrons are incomplete. However, it also has a broad selection of unique photos and is worth a look. Seaforces VF mainpage Lastly, there is an online collection of USN cruisebooks. If you know the specific cruise that you are interested in, it is a great place to find reference pictures for a specific livery. Some cruisebooks are minimal on photos while others a treasure trove. Also, if you are interested in a specific squadron cruise, look at the entire cruisebook, not just the section for the specific squadron. Great pictures can be hidden away in other sections of the book. USN Cruisebooks Anyway, I hope this stuff is helpful. -Nick PS - I made a point of not disappointing Frisco. ;)

:huh:....not sure what you mean. -Nick PS - I grew up about 10 miles from WPAFB and wen to undergrad at Wright State. Still visit the museum every time I visit my parents.

I think that the development pace will pick-up over the next 2 years or so. DCS2 needs to get fully sorted and this, understandably, is taking most of ED's attention. Also, many of the pending modules (especially modern-ish ones) have unique features that are new to DCS. Things like A-G radar, Carrier ops, Multi-crew, variable geometry wings, thrust reversers, etc. As these systems are worked out and modules released, creating similar systems will become more straightforward. Hence, more content with more predictable development time. This is my guess, at least. :music_whistling: Plus, the F-15E can complete more than one hour of mission time without tanking. ;) The -229 equipped F-15E's have serious performance in climb and acceleration, even with CFTs. 29,000 lbs of thrust per engine can sole a lot of problems. :D I'm definitely with King Hrothgar on this. My favorite aircraft are the 4th Gen US aircraft, but there is little doubt that it would be better to continue offering a broad variety of aircraft in DCS. As much as I would like to try flying both the F-15E and F/A-18C, they will operate in a way (from a systems standpoint) that is much more similar than say the A-7...not to mention a MiG-27 or Tornado. One of the things I like most about the upcoming Mirage 2000 is that it's systems are a bit different from the standard US stuff (while still looking familiar to an American). The development of the F-14A (if Leatherneck delivers on Maps the way we are hoping) will offer the A-7E a good home. I find it to be really fun learning how to do things the "old fashion way" while also getting to try aircraft with all of the modern pilot aides. I really want an F-15E in DCS and it would fit into the Straight of Hormuz and NTTR very well, but developing a wide-range of aircraft and eras is a better way to go IMHO. Plus, I'm pretty confident that the F-15E will come our way in the not-to-distant future (in DCS terms that is). It's a highly popular and relevant platform, I think it's day will come. :D -Nick

It could happen, but it would take a few unfortunate failures. I think there were official protocols for coming aboard the boat with asymmetric wing sweep positions from the NASA testing. However, if the wing sweep precluded operating the outboard wing flaps, then speeds would be to high for an arrested landing (too much energy for the arresting gear). I don't remember what the max sweep would be. You're right, that would be a challenging situation. The F-14 was hard enough to bring aboard the boat when most things were working. ;) -Nick PS - I don't know if LNS will model that. There current F-14 module plans are pretty extensive from what they've said, but this would be a really rare event from what I've gathered.

Nice find! Thank you for posting. -Nick

From my reading, Fleet Aircrews spent about 90% of their time flying with the wing sweep mode in "Auto" - meaning the air-data computer would automatically select the best sweep position. Especially for ACM, Auto tended to be the best mode (with a few sneaky exceptions :)). There were 3 modes for wing sweep that were directed through the air-data computer with a separate manual override. These were selected with a 4 position hat switch on the throttle. The modes were: auto, bomb, and manual select. Auto mode works the way you might expect, it automatically moves the wing into the ideal position given airspeed, altitude, and other factors that I don't recall. This air-data computer also operated the maneuvering flaps (which incorporated AOA data into the algorithm) and the glove vanes in the F-14A (when operable). One of the unique wing sweep features of the F-14 was the rate of sweep: it can sweep from 20 deg (full forward) to 68 deg (full back) in about 3 seconds. The F-111 take about 10 seconds to do the same. I think the MiG-23 takes about 8-10 seconds per position change (so about 16-20 seconds total). This fast sweep rate for the Tomcat makes the automatic wing sweep position changes much more helpful and allows it to largely keep up with energy changes during maneuvers. Bomb mode was originally designed for (you guessed it!) A-G weapons delivery. It limits wing sweep to 55 deg or greater and automatically extends the glove vanes above Mach 0.35. In practice, it was used operationally for a few specific things. Pilots would select bomb mode just after an arrested landing so the wings would start sweeping while they retracted the hook, flaps, and taxied out of the landing area. Bomb mode was reportedly the easiest position for aerial refueling, but pictures would suggest that pilots didn't use it much for this once out of the RAG. Finally, many pilots would use Bomb mode for pictures because it looked cool. Here is bomb mode in an early 80s F-14A, before the integration of TCS: Manual mode again is what it sounds like: the pilot can use the wing sweep position switch on the throttle to move the wings forward or back. They cannot use this switch to sweep into a position of less sweep than the computer recommends, but he can sweep back as far as desired. This is how Tomcats perform those sweep demos for airshows. If the aircraft accelerates to a speed where the air-data computer recommends a sweep position greater or equal to the manually selected sweep, manual mode will revert to Auto. Pilots would commonly use this for parade formation so that all the Tomcats would have the same sweep position (generally 68 deg aft). There was also a manual override that would bypass the air-data computer. It had a yellow handle and was covered with plexiglass. The pilot could use it to select any sweep position and would also need to use it to select oversweep (75 deg) for parking/storage. "Hoser" Satrapa also used this manual override to develop a spin recovery technique for the Tomcat. You mentioned the changing center of pressure with wing sweep. When the wings were swept aft to 68 deg, there was a big change in center of pressure and center of gravity. This exerted a significant downward force on the nose that would help to pull an F-14 out of a spin. It worked very reliably if you were above 10,000'. There were a few rare instances (like <5 for the Tomcat's whole career?) of slight wing asymmetry developing in the fleet after a combined actuator/wing interconnect failure. This asymmetries (IIRC) were only a few degrees. These pictures: Are from NASA testing where one wing was locked forward and the other slowly swept back for testing. There was no mechanism or control that would allow it to be deliberately created by the pilot, so I don't think anything like this would be modeled by Leatherneck. Anyway, I hope this more-or-less answers your questions. -Nick

It's fine to criticize, though it's only productive if there is a specific goal. In this case, Leatherneck is undoubtably working to get the MiG-21 functioning right in DCS2. It reminds me of something said to one of my colleagues during a case by the attending: "Come on, you need to move along faster...and be more careful". His response: "wait a minute, do you want be to go faster OR be more careful...because I can't do both". :) My point asking for something to happen faster when someone is working as fast as they can is not going to change things. I'm sure Leatherneck wanted the MiG-21 to work perfectly in DCS2 and now they are working to fix it. Reminding them of that failing does little (or nothing) to change the situation - they just need to fix it. With DCS1.5 there was a problem and they fixed it within hours. This time the fix is taking longer. I am confident that if there were a quick fix, it would be out already. Do you disagree? Are they deliberately holding back on us? (if so...that would be something to criticize...;)). -Nick PS - this sounds more like constructive criticism/feedback.