Baz000

imagine how much you can see at night, do you see the bodies of the people moving around and maybe their float coats? Or do you just see lights wands only moving around... Also, very limited ship lighting as well. Takes some real balls to do what these guys do with that kind of wing span on a E-2C.

That is pretty much what I heard but you do a far better and more precise job of throwing the specific numbers out there as well as covering the different versions of F-14 models. One point I do want to add though is that I forgot if it is the CAG or the individual squadrons themselves that specify it but there is a minimum fuel level target be no less than to arrive trapped on deck (meaning a minimum reserve you are not intended to use unless in an emergency) as well as a set fuel state for example holding in the Marshall stack or after a few bolters where now you need to head to the tanker or have one hawk you over the carrier. I saw a interview on sea wings (man I miss that show, and wings, and wings of the red star) where an A-6 BN was talking about his pilot missing the wires on like 7 attempts trying to land at night. I forget if he said if it was during a storm too or not may have been. I only heard of the F-14 flying without external tanks on ashore, that said... There is a big difference between a F-14 flying without tanks and a F-18 without tanks, one has a far larger handicap than the other... Can you guess which? found the clip of him talking about missing the wires 7 times after a very long mission. "we just wanna get the thing down on the deck and go home."

Is that per chance why they seldom if ever would carry six aim-54? Normally I've seen 2 or 4 aim-54 in the tunnel. Six is similar to that shot of a C model Hornet with 10 aim-120.

Did you ever wonder why on a lot of control towers and various other places they have signs that say? "field elevation blah blah blah" usually big and in red color. US pilots set altimeter to field elevation(QNH), not zero(QFE) and to transition altitude at 18,000 ft which coincidentally is also when you get into class A airspace from G and need to start flying IFR from VFR too... I get frustrated with my friends across the pond on this too in DCS when flying out of Nellis, just set the darn thing to what gets you field elevation on the ground (1,860 ft MSL) and then don't touch it unless we fly above 18,000 ft MSL, and remember what we had it set to so we can change it back to before transition so we have the darn field elevation again.

The idea being that your indicated airspeed at on speed AOA will show as faster when your aircraft is heavier compared to when your aircraft is lighter in gross weight, not taking additional drag from weapons or pylons into account. Like you guys on here trying to measure SL top dash performance with a jet that has fuel pylon mounts under each engine nacelle vs void of them. Don't you think having those little additions protruding from the bottom of the plane may make the plane not reach top speed as quickly or as high of a speed? Correct DLC state can only really be one of two things, right? Either the pilot has it activated by the stick button or not. I was actually wondering about how "bring-back" capabilities do actually work on the F-14 for trapping on the boat. I think I understand for AIM-54 pretty well... Dooms day-6 (plan to shoot things) otherwise most you normally see would be 4, or 2, or 1. The problem with 6 was either you had to dump fuel or jett expensive missiles to get down to max trap weight, and if you chose dump fuel then you have very little margin for trapping at the boat before you need to hit the tanker. Also, the plane prefers the 54's in the "tunnel" vs the glove pylons. So, I wonder if it gets somewhat more sporty to land with a 54 mounted on each glove pylon. I was wondering about "bring-back" capabilities of various bomb loads loaded inside the tunnel, which arguably could weigh more than six 54s. In that case, I'd figure you would jettison bombs in the case of an mission abort? For example. I do a lot of wondering...

In reality, based on anecdotal evidence of pilot/RIO interviews is that the pilot would tell the RIO he sees the ball and then the RIO would utilize the radio to make the ball call to paddles. Or vice versa CLARA. The DCS behavior currently is the Tomcat pilot calls the ball or CLARA much the same way as the DCS Hornet. My suggestion would be that the pilot uses the ball keybind (we should get a keybind added for Clara too) to prompt Jester to call "200 Tomcat ball 4.0 or whatever" or "CLARA" after being prompted to by the human Tomcat pilot. We don't need Tomcat pilot voice lines necessarily but it would be nice to have your pilot not be a complete mute maybe, even if it is just "Iceman" voice lines like when the human is RIO and the pilot is AI. If both had voice lines you could actually experience a little back and forth communications inside your cockpit, provided that it is appropriate and somewhat realistic.

Pilots would get the RIOs to give them descent rate call outs, or just stay quiet, but it depends on what each individual pilot wanted from their RIO... Also, the RIO would call the ball over the radio so why aren't we hearing Jester calling the ball?

Why do you think such data is "very valid" in the absence of actual flight test data at SL? I think that is the crux of the debate.

A 3rd party developer did scrap idea of doing a T-2 a long time ago

I understand that, really I do... It pains me that the Hornet was out performing the Viper so badly that I was smacking my friend around in BFM when the Viper first came out and all I had to do was get the Hornet slow with my stick in my lap. Now, that doesn't seem to be the case any more but at the time, it was really frustrating seeing him struggle Sometimes we need to subdue our passions and just let time take its course

Do you believe in Magick?

you may need to add some Jester related trigger or marker or something in the mission editor maybe

That is an unofficial mod aircraft, can you please use for example another 2 F-14s instead behind them and see if the same situation exists?

Look guys, you have a former real life verified not virtual squadron F-14 pilot telling you the data points you are using to derive your information regarding performance characteristics at SL is flat out invalid. I'm sure he is understanding your testing methodology and how you are arriving at your conclusions. The fact of the matter seems to be that the baseline performance charts/statistics you are using are mathematically derived anomalies, amalgamations of engineers with slide rules... Not actual flight test data of performance. This reminds me of a scene in "that dumb movie" where Maverick and Goose seem to think they got a "valid" kill on Jester, they are so cocky about it that they then do a fly-by of the tower in that ubiquitous coffee spilling scene. A scene that isn't played too often is them getting spoken to by the CO about breaking the "hard-deck" which is there to simulate the GROUND (ground mort, because actually flying into the real ground would be very very bad!) in ACM. So, the CO is there asking him "Why did you decide to follow Jester and also fly into the ground?" I'm sure they are stunned to be asked such because they are so focused on the objective of killing Jester in that hop that they completely disregard the established safety rules. But, they don't react in condemnation or engage in some sort of logical fallacy of an argument of "yeah, but we killed Jester! MAN!"... Yeah? But you fools chased him into the ground and flew into the ground yourselves... I present for you the two scenes for your viewing scrutiny and entertainment. Look at the disparity between the two clips and understand what Victory205 is telling us. And if you don't understand him, maybe ask him kindly if he could clarify maybe something you don't understand entirely or if he could explain something in a way you can understand, maybe use different terms more familiar to a layman, etc...

landing lights only used in really shitty weather and only upon demand of the LSOs to turn them on ( at least these days apparently, dunno if in the past they would or would not) You can clearly see the differentiation of it and the orange approach light on the nose... Also, yeah I realize it is a Growler and far more recent of footage too. I can't speak of practices of the 70s-80s but apparently they are doing such now these days.

I was reading around in the Natops, like I usually do when I need to sleep and I noticed that in the one I was reading it shows the lights dials ranging from generally 0-14 not 0-9 like we have in DCS and I was wondering why. So, I went and looked at the A model and B model Natops and saw the same thing 0-14 not 0-9 so i'm just wondering why the discrepancy? B on top and A on bottom

Listen guys, all is well... The sky is blue and the grass is green, and the MiGs are red. I returned with a rabbit from my funny farm today and I "offered it" upon the altar of Goose, which is a replica of the canopy that I had erected in honor of the F-14 airframe that was lost during the filming of "that dumb movie." Too soon? I did this act so we can bring the thread back to its point of equilibrium, much like trying to fly at a trimmed state and hitting turbulence and coming back to smooth air. So, guys we hit some turbulent air and now we are out and it is clear skies ahead... Don't make me start breaking out the naval jargon

I never heard of this Cooper fella but now I'm interested to learn about him, I take it he musta been like a USN version of a Boyd and his OODA loop. The only other Cooper I heard of is B.D. Cooper but they never found him or the money lol. See, that is also a really big reason why I like conversing with you. When I was new to all this DCS stuff and this whole aviation world, I used to... and I think quite shamefully, put pilots up on a pedestal. And in particular, especially fighter pilots... I've known a few Navy aviators over the years but they flew P-3s or were commissioned flight crew on board P-3s. It was like you guys were flying chariots of the gods to me, as tho I would go blind if I were to make direct eye contact haha. Gone are those days, of being so "starstruck" as time marched on. Now, these days I just look at you guys as regular Joe's who just had an extraordinary opportunity in your lives. After all, we are all human beings and are built from the same stuff. So, thank you for not being a pretentious fighter puke attention diva, I've seen enough of those both on and off of here.

Now, I wanna know what made a Tinker Burger so famous and I'm craving one gosh darn it... It could be the worst burger in the world but now I'm intrigued. Man, imagine if you didn't touch your hand there because they rolled out the red carpet and had ladders for you guys... If I had shoulder straps on my chair I would have been hanging in suspense reading that story, and it wasn't even a salty sea story! Oh and how you wove so slick like a Rumplestiltskin in a flight suit a part of our theoretical discussion into it... Was genius! Where you stated the thing was a dog, oh you sly devil, you! I saw what you did there. We need like a pinned "Victory's corner" or something where we can read about your anecdotal experiences in the F-14 and in aviation. Dammit now I'm craving a burger, plenty of carrots on the rabbit farm but no burgers. It would be crazy if some day DCS could simulate airframe wear and tear and abuse and aging, etc so that when 2 aircraft fly together in a trimmed state they are not in actual identical trim inputs by the pilots.

I think the cover is as intended, doesn't seem like you can close the cover when the handle is extended out of the spider extent. In case 1 you shouldn't have spoilers deployed like ashore upon landing unless you are referring to DLC. You may want to revisit your before landing checklist, make sure you commit it in your memory. Even DLC you shouldn't be engaged any longer once you have trapped aboard the boat. Make sure on main gear touchdown you are indeed powering up to at least MIL, there are micro switches that retract the speed brake and DLC upon selection of MIL, but you may want to get into the habit of manually retracting the speed brakes with the switch on the throttle simultaneously with your application of MIL power. This was done as a failsafe to ensure speed break retraction if it ended up being a bolter. What I do after trapping on the boat re: wing sweep for parking is flaps up, once flaps become fully retracted I select bomb mode for the wings using the hat selector switch on the throttle, this should move them aft to 55 degrees... This seems to be the most expeditious way to sweep the wings aft to alleviate clearance problems immediately when clearing the landing deck after trapping. Then I manually select them aft to 68 degrees, again using the hat switch on the throttle. Then to put them into the oversweep position, I just lift the cover up and pull the handle out of the spider detent. You will notice that your handle is not at the forward most position anymore and a light comes on your caution panel saying Hz tail auth... Now all you have to do is wait for the wing airbags to deflate, which is indicated by the Hz tail auth light on your caution panel no longer being illuminated. Once that happens you will have a "over" flag appear on your wing sweep indicator and then you can move the emergency wing sweep handle to the fully aft oversweep position and your wings move into oversweep for parking. I hope that helps you.

Honestly guys, I know you like using those scripts to test but realistically if i'm in the pit flying the thing it is damn hard to see how many Gs i'm pulling in DCS while i'm trying to stay padlocked on a MiG in my chili... At best I can glance at the AOA tape and go by my feedback cues and Jester yelling and hooping and hollering in the back. The G meter is not mounted in the best place in the cockpit. I think part of this, you need to maintain some perspective to what the end goal ought to be. Let me say this tho, I appreciate that we have people like hummingbird and others tho have such zeal to hunt down the various data points and make sure the DCS version of this plane pays homage to the real McCoy that right now you can only fly in Iran. But most of all, I appreciate that we can sit here and discuss and debate and learn new things... Sometimes we take such for granted without the slightest thought.

the interior cockpit lights got bugged in the last patch I think... The white and the red lights are not showing any ambient lighting inside your cockpit. As far as the SC, no lights on what so ever at all unless you are tying to signal brake failure... Which in that case the deck crew will find the nearest salty Chief and toss them under the wheels to stop the plane. Or you have all your lights on but the master light switch off and use it to signal for cat launch like a hand salute in day time when the shooter commands power up.

Listen guys, i'm no USNTPS pilot nor will I pretend to be... Tho I do have a patch from them and HX-21 Blackjacks from an airshow I went to years ago. But I promise they are in a plastic bag with other patches I have and not attached to any article of clothing of mine and especially not when virtually flying in DCS. I have to be honest with you, when you get into the mathematics and some of the terms of art it does become difficult to follow as a lay person who just has some basic knowledge from self-learning and a little bit of formal instruction in unmanned aircraft systems. I think I see where the point of contention is, figures which are mathematically derived based on flight testing data have a probability of error associated with them because it is physically impossible in the real world to replicate the exact same flight conditions and pilot inputs without any variation... So 3% margin is apparently what to shoot for in accuracy to hit the top bar in flight testing. With that said, there are other forms of testing as well for certain things you can't flight test safely or are so cost prohibitive such as you would perform in wind tunnels or computer simulations. Like, for example in this video this flight test wasn't intended to become a improv test of trying to pull a F-14A out of a flat spin... IRL it is a very risky business to be in, especially as a test pilot.

So aren't they identical airframes and loadout configurations? the only difference is 20% increase in gross weight, yeah? yeah even if its 2 Vulcans haha

I'm sticking with my original answer of the lighter aircraft... Final answer, I'm very confident about it.