Swordsman422

Yes. I never move it off of TGT. I do have CDES boxed as well. I don't know if this is relevant, and it shouldn't be, but I am targeting static ground vehicles instead of live ones. This is a ground attack training range custom mission that I have made.

Hey guys, I've been trying to learn the use of the TPOD and LGBs, and am having a rather frustrating time. I have watched both the Grim Reapers and Spudknocker tutorial videos multiple times and I cannot figure out what I'm doing wrong. I am in A/G Master Mode, my PACS for the GBUs are set, master arm is on, laser is armed, weapons selected. When I use TDC press to designate a target, the target cursor goes off PTRK/ATRK and into snowplow so that I have to move the cursor back over the target and use auto acquisition press to box PTRK/ATRK again. I get the bomb azimuth line, but it is off center and does not line up with the target. I never get TREL and TTGT is always 00:00. Any hints? Thanks.

Now we can all sit back and play the second movement of "March to Glory" on repeat like it's 1999 all over again.

Caught the new DCS profile photo on the FB page like 5 minutes after it was updated and decided to pop onto the website. Decked out in SE, so I ran the updater and sure enough, she's ready to be put in the stable.

A very special hell? The one they reserve for child molesters and people who talk at the theater? (referencing Firefly for anyone not aware...) Yeah... Navy liveries look really janky on long-nose phantoms. Back to the topic at hand, VF-143's unusual red F-4J liveries are some I'd like to see.

Part of the Heatblur Forge. You'll see a variety of minor cockpit modifications randomly applied to your plane. In this case, your aircraft's ACM panel has buttons that habitually come loose during cat shots, and the safety wire is an attempt to prevent that from occurring.

Awesome. That's my favorite VF-154 livery, the TPS with just the two grey stripes on the tail. Those birds worked hard for a living.

People are talking about removing the glove pylons, but I'd like the ability to define what pylon is attached to 1B and 8B if they are empty. You didn't often see those pylons downloaded if they weren't being used.

Bear in mind that it's not universally true for US aircraft. The F-14 being a prime example (original F-14B prototype, F-14A+ production aircraft assuming the F-14B label later on, etc). The waters get muddier the further back you go, especially in USN inventories (looking at you, F-4 Phantom and F-8 Crusader).

Please note I'm not coming down on either side of the issue. Since someone asked, here is the Wikipedia list of US air-to-air combat victories since post-Vietnam. I'm searching for a list of F-15 kills in other services that include the weapon used, but am so far coming up empty. Still, here is as good a place to start as any. USAF F-15Cs have accounted for 36 of the F-15's 102 air combat victories. Notable that USAF F-15s have 10 kills with the AiM-9, 23 with the AiM-7, and 3 with the AiM-120. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_combat_victories_of_United_States_military_aircraft_since_the_Vietnam_War

No. That's the livery that VF-84 was wearing at the time of filming. Unlike Top Gun, there were no special fictional paint schemes for Final Countdown.

Ah, that's the A I missed. The one with the VF-103 F-14B livery. Definitely not a D.

A lot of the systems that were maintenance-heavy remained on the D. The wiring, hydraulics, and wing sweep mechanisms were some of the big time items, and those didn't go away when the D was introduced. About a third of the Ds built were actually rebuilds of As. They were still hogs, just hogs with more digital data busses and MFDs in place of CRT screens.

The only new Grumman product I noticed in the trailer was an F6F Hellcat. The F-14s I saw were all Bs.

Just tested this and can confirm. They must have done it quietly. I never saw them add it for SC users in the changelog.

I'm glad that we have a full squadron of VF-24 represented, but one nitpick is that in the US Navy after 1980, the numbers 8 and 9 were not used in carrier-based fixed-wing aircraft, so there would not be a 208 or 209 in 1998. It would be more appropriate for these aircraft to be 214 and 215.

This belongs in the Supercarrier forum, as it is a feature pertinent to that module and not the F-14. If this had been about the Forrestal, it'd be a different story. Anyway, no, the barricade and barricade recoveries have not yet been implemented for the SC module.

The F-14B was called the F-14B before the advent of LANTIRN and PTID. The F-14A+ production ended in 1990 and it was redesignated F-14B on 1 May, 1991. The first LANTIRN upgrades were made in testing in March of 1995. So there were NEVER new F-14Bs delivered with the PTID. As with the F-14A, they were upgraded with it as they received LANTIRN capability.

Let people make what they want. Don't like it? Don't download it. Want something else or something specific that no one else is making? Download the paint kit and get to work.

Catapult Assisted Take-Off But Arrested Recovery. Meaning the F-14 requires a catapult system to launch off the deck and must recover with arresting cables. Kuznetsov is a STOBAR, or Short Take-Off But Arrested Recovery carrier. It's not a bug. Just the compatibility hasn't been developed, and I wouldn't hold your breath. You're as likely to get CATOBAR-compatible Su-33s as a STOBAR F-14 or F/A-18. The real jets weren't cross-compatible.

Sure. But Heatblur isn't going to solve it half way, because there are an equal number of people to whom it does matter getting typeface, size, and positioning correct, including Heatblur. It's just gonna take far more effort than can be given priority yet.

I collect flight helmets and gear, and have several APH-6, HGU-33, -55, and -68s. You actually CAN buy an adapter to adapt the helmet and mask comms to computer audio input/output... But it's not something I do. Older helmet liners made of foam-stuffed leather don't breathe very well, so they get pretty stuffy under there. Even newer comfort-fit TPLs are just kinda okay in that they'll absorb the sweat better but remain pretty hot. There is only so far into the realm of immersion I'll go.

Considering Heatblur hadn't originally planned for an Iranian F-14 at all, I think the idea now is that it'll just be the -135 Early with maybe a removable TCS and missile load limits. I wouldn't expect the avionics to be any different from the -135 Early. But I could be wrong. I keep being so lately. It would be a nice surprise if, but that's not a breath I'm gonna hold.

They could, but the issue is that HB wants to represent the F-14's systems correctly and realistically. Same reason they haven't given us a PTID. They don't have docs for it and don't want to just guess at the functions or use inaccurate representation. Whether that's good or bad is subjective, but they're the folks making the call.

Probably because the museum jets they used for 3D scans didn't have their pylons off when they were scanned. And any rate, you are not wrong to supposed that the retort would be that fleet jets of the variants we have modeled didn't typically fly without their tanks. Nor is that retort unearned. But options are nice and foresight is always good to have.