Bearfoot

You have misread the posts. "Nice" not in terms of how well the plane flies. But rather how nice it is to fly in terms of fun/satisfaction. The F-18's (and to a larger extent?) the F-16's computer definitely flies the plane "nicely" for you, and probably a lot nicer for an new or beginner pilot, picking up a lot of slack and making up for shortcomings. But that is why it feels relatively antiseptic/on-rails compared to the F-14, and that is why it does not feel so satisfying.

So, despite all the positive answers on this thread, I think that this is a very complex issue. Many different factors need to be considered and balanced. Fortunately, though, there is a very helpful decision-making flowchart you can follow that integrates all the issues and using it will lead you to the absolutely 100% correct and infallible choice to make in your case. Here is the flowchart. I suggest you work your way carefully through it as it guides you, and I am sure you will be happy with the result.

They have stated they will look into improving Iceman a little -- e.g. giving him (or her) orbit capability.

Discussed in: https://www.fighterpilotpodcast.com/episodes/005-aerial-refueling/

For under $200 --- No doubt you want the Logitech X-56. As mentioned, it is a stick + throttle combo (2 separate units).. But be warned --- the throttle is a bit of a lottery in terms of longevity. Some have had it last for years. Others have had it die in a few. But I have not heard of any complaints of the stick itself. I myself had one for a few years till I upgraded. I know this is an unpopular opinion, but I would skip the Thrustmaster Warthog unless you can buy one for $150 or so. It makes a convincing appearance of quality on the outside. And it feels really good in the hand. But it is no better than the X-56 at any rate. Maybe worse, in fact, if you are into precision flying (horrible stiction). Full disclosure: I had the X-56 for a few years till the throttle died. Then went to the TM Warthog + 20cm Sahaj extension. Then went to the VKB Gunfighter II. The difference in precision between the X-56 and TM Warthog itself was non-existent. What DID make a HUGE difference was the extension. Then when I went to the VKB I realized what a precision controller really was.

FASCINATING! Thanks for sharing.

+2

"Nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnyes?" What I mean by that is that: (a) The TM stick is absolutely not worth the money for the crappy gimbal --- no separation of X/Y axis, relatively poor precision, and stiction city. It used to be that you did not have any choice for anything better in the sub $1000 range. That's not the case now -- VKB, VIRPIL, Libra, etc. etc. Simply, unconditionally, absolutely, and objectively better products for exactly the things that the WH stick lacks: separate X/Y axes, MUCH higher precision, and no stiction. Plus adjustable tension etc. BUT .... (b) Out of stock or difficult to get So! If I need a stick TODAY and could not afford to play the waiting game, then sure, I would get the TM stick. With a sinking feeling of resignation --- It will do the job (particularly for jets, if not props or helos) well enough, but I will always have the feeling in the back of my mind that for a just little bit more I could have done a LOT better.

This bird is so beautiful to look at and see fly. I think we are seeing only a small proportion of the possible videos that people want to make because it is so difficult to capture. Doubly sad because it is so difficult to these fly IRL nowadays (unless you are Iranian) ....

I posted a similar question here a while back: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=248356 The responses were very helpful. Basically, as @TLTeo said: use AoB to control the climb --- more AoB, less climb and vice versa. So (making sure wings are swept back fully) bank steeply and pull watching VSI --- if above 0 bank some more, if less than 0 relax bank angle. As you settle into turn your speed should drop and you will lose lift, but just around that time you will bring wings to auto and you will get back lift. Drop the gear once the speed is slow enough. But I've found dropping my flaps during the turn can make the turn rougher for me. Once I drop flaps the turn becomes really slow but I find it hard to control the ballooning. So I try and delay the flaps till I'm just returning to level on the downwind. During the turn itself if I find myself climbing or dropping I am not shy about using the stick to reposition my nose on the horizon to get a 0 rate of climb. Looks ugly as I am wobbling and there is typically minor PIO over/below the horizon. But it keeps me the ballpark. Obviously, still got a lot of work to do.

Challenge accepted!

Huh. Just saw this thread. I actually asked for something related (though different) here: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=250223 I think centering on a waypoiint or bullseye is also very useful.

Yes, I did. All of it. Did you? Nothing in that thread provided the answer to the question of my post.

Is this feature already there and I am missing it? Or do people just not find it necessary?

Thanks all for the generous advice and tips! Bomb mode (and trimming once established in stable formation next to tanker in bomb mode) helped keep the sight picture for longer. Still lose the sight picture in close and honestly there still seems no feedback to correct adjust vertical position without looking at the basket. But somehow, maybe using the force, I now manage to plug in 3-4 times ... out of 30-40 tries true, but that's more than zero! Now the challenge is STAYING plugged in!

My wings are in auto. I can see the higher AoA helping with the picture. Will give it a try.

Thank you so much for this! Really wonderful trainer. The feedback makes a HUGE difference in both learning as well as building up confidence in what you have learned. Do we have to call the ball using a radio menu or something? I see "CLARA ..." on my scoresheet summary (which BTW shows up fine in my VR view). (p.s. would LOVE to see something like this for A2A refueling --- maybe calling out station-keeping feedback!)

Would it be possible for us to ask Jester to recenter the display in ground stab mode? Maybe submenu with options like: reset/center (on aircraft), with then options like N, 30, 60, E, etc., where "30" centers in the upper left quadrat (e.g., 2/3's of the way along line from center to edge)?

It's long been implemented. Backspace.

Some examples of different sight pictures This is one of the canonical refueling videos, and the pod remains visible right there at the top of the canopy all the way into plugin. Mine disappears before that, and if I try to keep it in sight at the top of the canopy like that I come in too high even though my horizontal position is good. Here the pod is halfway down the canopy frame. In my case, even with it at top of the frame I am too high. So there is clearly a different baseline perspective. This is more what I see. No pod during the last critical seconds of final approach! Just the basket. Once plugged in we can move up to regain sight of the pod and keep station, but what do we reference for height in the initial approach to plugin?

Thanks. With regards to the first suggestion: I'm flying single-player only while learning the basics here. (Though I do guns only BFM online for stress relief or when I am tired of failing!). I am intrigued by your second suggestion. So the idea is to get the same altitude as the basket and then somehow or other keep her level as I move forward? I can see that working. I've seen a video where someone comes in with the basket in line with the warning light, so if correct that would be one reference to use for this approach. But I would have to look at the basket to do that.

Glad I'm not alone! I've been told, and read, and heard x10000, to "not look at the basket". But without an external reference I have no idea how to get it in. When you duck your head so you can see the tanker, what do you watch or line up with? And how do you ensure consistency in the angle of your duck when learning the line up cues? E.g., if today you duck too low you might end up coming in too high.

I manage to get the horizontal lineup fine, at least until the final moments by keeping the refueling pod just right of the HUD center. It's the vertical that I keep missing. I am typically too high with the pod jammed against the top of my windshield and going lower causes me to loose sight of the pod entirely. I've found a bunch of videos online, but I think there are differences in the view position (I suspect all the famous ones are using TrackIR isntead of VR?). In my case, the pod (and in fact, the entire wing) just disappears above the front windshield bars as I get close, so I have nothing to reference in the final crucial seconds. I can dip my head to regain sight of the pod, but then it is not so useful as a reference as the amount I dip my head and the angle I look changes everything. Ditto for adjusting baseline VR height. What do you folks who use VR use as reference for the height/vertical station keeping on the final approach to the basket?

"Air Combat Memoirs Of The Iranian Air Force Pilots: Iranian Air Force Pilots In Combat 1980-88" https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B018AEDLNA/ "Tomcat Fury: A Combat History of the F-14" https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07XQJQ6XX/ Should also note that the Osprey series on the Tomcat are also excellent readings for our favorite star in action: "F-14 Tomcat Units of Operation Enduring Freedom" https://ospreypublishing.com/f-14-tomcat-units-of-operation-enduring-freedom "US Navy F-14 Tomcat Units of Operation Iraqi Freedom" https://ospreypublishing.com/us-navy-f-14-tomcat-units-of-operation-iraqi-freedom "Iranian F-14 Tomcat Units in Combat" https://ospreypublishing.com/iranian-f-14-tomcat-units-in-combat

Yeah, not buying the realism argument. Fiddling with multiple levels of phantasmagorical menus dancing in front of your eyes by nodding your head up/down/left/right and then pressing a key does not strike me as a better simulation of saying "do blah" than assigning a key bind to do the same. There might be other arguments for one vs the other, but realism is not it.