Banzaiib

This thread is completely off topic. I asked a question originally about some jester changes that were in patch notes for an april patch. HB subsequently said they'd be in the next patch, but then, because software development ain't a straight fricken line, they changed that schedule... c'est la vie. And I appreciate their clarification. Anyone complaining about the F-14 status needs a rectal-cranial-inversion. (complaining, not commenting or discussing issues and additional features needed) It took more than 8 months post EA beginning before the Hornet could fire a maverick. The 14 is in great condition, but definitely needs some lovin', which HB has continuously and regularly communicated. If I could have closed this thread after Cobra's response, I would have, as these things tend to spiral into an austistic spectrum nightmare.

Tell that to B-52 pilots... I'm gonna need your source on this.

You said on here that the jester improvements (RWS, ground stabilized, etc) will make it into the next patch. That's what I was looking for. Now you're saying something different...

Did the jester improvements (ground stabilized, RWS, etc) that did not make into the last patch make it into the patch today (5/8/2019)? Are there any other notes for the F-14B? (I didn't see any in the ED patch notes).

You assume? Well I assume that the slow down in development updates is a result of F-16 development... that doesn't make either of us right. I feel the plane fly differently when I fire a missile off a double rack. It yaws and rolls in the opposite direction. Could you also perform this test with double racked MK-83's?

WTF are you talking about? You carry way more weight in fuel than you do AIM-54's... they're not going to cripple you in a turn fight. You should use them to set up the turn fight to your advantage if they don't outright kill your opponent(s), by forcing them to make defensive maneuvers that you can take advantage of..., and if you don't fire all of them, who cares? So long as you win the fight...

Runs fine on my 8700k, 16gigs of ram with GTX970. 60 fps most of the time depending on the mission

Have you tried with buddy lasing? I droped about 100 GBUs this week with A-10's and Harriers buddy lasing and not a single one hooked up in CCIP mode. "Not too close"???? How can the GBU be dropped too close to the target and not hook up to the laser? That just seems silly.

yes... tested back to back, where one GBU dropped in auto, the other in CCIP. Same laser code from the donor aircraft / jtac. The ccip bombs dropped from 15k ft. and land within 100 ft of the target, so they should be well within the FOV of the guidance sensor. Also tested with GBU 24, 10, 12, and 16 in multiple flights.

The title says it all. If you drop any GBU from the F-14 in CCIP mode (or the equivalent "pilot" mode title, I forget the technical term in the F-14), it will not hook up to a laser from another aircraft. If you CCRP / Auto mode drop the bomb by marking a target with the PAL button, the GBU will guide from an external laser appropriately. I have tested this with A-10, Harrier, JTAC, and drone lasers. On the F-18, a CCIP GBU will hook up to the laser, but on the F-14, a CCIP dropped GBU will not guide. Again, auto-mode dropped GBU's will respond to / guide from buddy lasers, but CCIP mode drops will not. I have no idea if this is realistic or not, but I suspect that it's wrong, since you can drop in pilot mode and guide the bomb with your own lantirn laser.

I noticed the exact same thing, and I've found that how you start the plane can affect engine performance. If you push the throttle forward before letting the RPM hit 25 - 30%, then I think you get an engine over-temp condition or something that damages the engine, and the performance suffers exactly like you've noticed. Try starting the engines by letting the air cart fully spool the engine before introducing fuel, or just air-start and see if you have the same problem. Since changing my startup routine, i've had no problem running circles around F-18's

There is supposed to be an indicator on the TID, I believe. The TID went through several upgrades throughout the F-14A and B lifetime. For example, the cycling range, aspect and altitude data was replaced by a 2 line readout in many F-14B's. Hopefully we get that update.

this patch is backwards compatible. You could always revert.

There any way you can update us on what made it in and what didnt?

I was dropping them about 30 - 50 meters away from the target... as close as i can without actually hitting them. I report this because the Harrier was lasing, and the hornet's laser maverick would pick up the laser and lock, so I know it's working and the Harrier is lasing properly, but the GBU's wouldn't hook up and guide. I tried every GBU the hornet and tomcat can carry. Same problem, all on laser code 1688. I'll test again tonight and post a track on a 3rd party site i guess.

I can't post a track, because they're always too big in multiplayer, but buddy lasing is not working for GBU's on the F-18 or F-14 with an A-10 lasing or a Harrier lasing.

You're right about the notching of the enemy AI, and No, i can't upload the tacview, because the file is too large, Sorry! It should be damned near impossible to notch inside 2 miles... I never lost lock, btw, the missile just went stupid... This is not even close to a realistic modeling of SARH missile guidance... unless it is, i never flew a real jet :)

I was pretty surprised at how bad they are. Not sure how I can load a track on here when the track file limit is 5 mb. Almost any multiplayer track will be more than that.

The first 4 AIM-54C's that i fired in this track file tracked the SU-25's perfectly when STT locked and boresight mode was selected (ACM Active), but the last 2 AIM-54C's did not track at all. well.. turns out the track is pretty big, and I can't attach it...

Yep. Just had jester die from a SAM hit, but was able to land. He did not come back after repair... if he's supposed to... Also, the canopy didn't come back after I ejected him for stinking up the cockpit, then repaired again...

Units of Angle is a function of Angle of Attack and aircraft weight. This way, you can fly the same unit of angle on every landing and always have the correct angle of attack for whatever your aircraft weight.

I could be wrong, but I think this implies that you're flying directly at your target... You might want to turn after firing to reduce the liklihood of this happening.

off topic, but on first glance, I thought those were photographs of the real thing...

The DCS community, like any online community, can be toxic as hell, and the DDCS server is no exception, but your experience is likely about timing. There are some really great regulars on there. It's by far the best pervasive, campaign-like server there is.

On the latest OB patch, which all the MP servers are running... Cruising with my F-18 buddy last night headed to do some air-refueling, and we're up at 35k ft. I have to be in afterburner to keep up with him at mach .8, and forget about keeping up when he lights the burners. Maybe the F-18 has too much thrust... I have no idea, but I could not even get past mach 1 at full burners until i emergency dumped stores just to see what happnes. I'll post track tonight when I get home. I had 4x AIM-54Amk60, 2x AIM-7, 2x AIM-9M. F-18 buddy had 3 bags.