*Aquila*

Are you sure you ask Jester to do a fine INS alignment when you start the plane up?

There's a lot to be said about the AIM-7M, but I often had and heard some bad feelings about the AIM-9M on the F-14B. So I decided to do some testing with three planes using this missile: the Tomcat, ED's Hornet and Razbam's Harrier. The conditions were: on Caucasus, own plane flying northward. F/A-18C target (AI excellent, set to evade fire, weapons hold) flying westward. Time of the day: 08:00 local. 21 june, temp 20°C Solid lock acquired via boresight (Hornet) or SEAM (Tomcat, Harrier), so no radar fire control involved. Fox-2 launch at 2.5 nm. In those conditions, the splash happens just after the missile has reached its maximum speed and the rocket engine stopped. For each plane, I recorded 30 successive shots, registered in chronological order. Each shot has its Tacview file (see attachment below). And I did some statistics. First, the Tomcat. The Hornet. The Harrier. Hope it helps. How relevant is the sample is always a subject of debate. When you realize 30 shots for each plane, get the same success ratio with two planes and 6,67% less with a third one, is the difference (2 more missiles eating flares out of 30) noticeable? I also noticed that with each plane, I had 1 time 4 flare eaters in a row. 3 flare eaters in a row happened 1 time with the Harrier, 1 time with the Hornet and 3 times with the Tomcat. When you get such a 3 or 4 failures chain, it really feels like the missile is useless. But stats say otherwise. 43 to 50% PK against a target maneuvering and launching flares is far from rubbish. DCS-AIM-9M.zip

You need to work this in three phases: 1) practice. 2) practice again. 3) practice more. :joystick: The same goes for aerial refueling, IFR, carrier landings, etc.

Something else I noticed, and which is visible in Tacview: shot at angels 10 at a target closing face to face at the same altitude, the HB AIM-7M reaches +/- Mach 2.14. In the very same conditions, the AIM-7M shot from a Hornet reaches +/- Mach 2.34.

Which parameters? Great! Thanks!

Because you don't wait to have built an energy advantage over him before pulling :)

I made another statistically irrelevant test with the Hornet, same conditions as above. Five times I shot one AIM-7M, scoring 5 hits and 5 kills. Tacview files in the attached archive. Fox-1-test-Hornet.zip

I need to explain, for those not using Tacview, that during my tests, I never lost the lock. I just pushed my nose down after firing to avoid ground clutter being a problem.

Nothing. I don't care about it being steady. I'm never in his 6: it's very difficult to realize and makes him such a small target. I almost always shoot him from above. Not to bleed out your energy, just keep him above your front canopy frame. He just needs to spend one second in your HUD: the very last one.

Combat stats don't say all about the missile itself, as conditions are often very different from one launch to another, including human mistakes. I thought that Tacview files would help make sense of what has been written here. So I tried two different things. Creating conditions similar as the OP's, I STT locked on an AI F-15C set as "excellent" and "evade fire" from the F-14B's RIO seat, while in pulse search mode (at Angels 10 for both planes, ground clutter isn't the problem but beaming is, that's why I avoided using PD search). ACM cover was unflipped. So: - Case #1: 5 times, I shot one AIM-7M from the RIO's seat at 9 nm. - Case #2: 5 times, I shot one AIM-7M from the RIO's seat at 9 nm and then let the AI F-15C maneuver to evade before firing a second AIM-7M from the pilot's seat. Case #1: I fired 5 times 1 missile and scored 0 hit. Case #2: I fired 5 times 2 missiles and scored 4 hits, 3 kills. Interestingly, in case #2, 2 of the hits were scored by the first missile I fired, and in one case the second one also went on target. 1 of the hits (and kills) was scored by the second missile alone. Attached archives : as a matter of fact, 01 contains case #1 files while 02 contains case #2 files. [Edit] Corrected a mistake about hit counts Fox-1-test01.zip Fox-1-test02.zip

You, Sir, found the exact words! :thumbup:

Welcome aboard, OP :) UH-1H first.

Two different worlds... I've been flying the F-16 a huge lot with another simulator, "It Which Cannot Be Named Here". While being different, a bit less aseptic, the Hornet in DCS was an easy one for me. I've been flying warbirds as well, so even if I had to work, I felt good with the Tomcat. And now, believe it or not: I'm able to refuel a Tomcat or a Harrier without any problem, whatever the tanker, by night and day. But I became strictly unable to catch the freaking basket with the Hornet! :doh:

Same. In combat, while constantly looking outside, sound is good enough to play between mil power and PC.

I agree. One should compare the feelings of the F-16 & F/A-18 with the one of the Mirage 2000. FBW planes are to be compared with FBW planes. Same. Even when things come to a knife fight in a telephone booth. Which shouldn't happen but hell, let's have fun.

You can take advantage of the maneuver flaps by using them manually and that's why there's a HOTAS command wheel for this on the real plane. But of course, the use of the landing flaps for maneuvering is nonsense.

That said and assuming you endorse GGTharos's good advice, the question is now : what can your aircraft do better than the MiG-23? The answer is : turning. And the higher the AoA, the worse the MiG behaves. This assuming that you both have energy. Which is, IMHO, where you did bad. Your original post is all about leaking out and wasting energy: idle, high G turn ant then climb. In such conditions, even a human F-5 owns you. Try this little training mission: you're face to face with a Flogger set to 'excellent', both angels 10, both having guns only. Keep him a bit on your right or left side until you merge, so he doesn't snipe you with his gun. Switch roll SAS off. Merge at Mach 0.9 and after crossing, turn hard to him. Just avoid blackout, which means you'll have to play between mil power and PC. Just do what you can to keep the bandit as long as possible just above your front canopy frame. You'll see how the MiG-23 leaks out its energy while turning, and how your F-14 doesn't. At a moment, you'll just need to put him in your HUD and shoot him down to avoid boredom :) Caucasus-AA-test-Flogger.zip

AFAIK, the Hornet's auto throttle only keeps an air speed. Its AoA conservation is not yet functional in DCS. That's what CTDs with the F-14B.

The main use of the paddle is to disable roll & pitch SAS before a combat.

I own a few modules I'd strongly advise not to buy if you ask the question in their subforum ;)

Go buy it. You are already wasting time!

For me, the autopilot works as advertised. How do you de-activate it pls?

There is still work before approaching perfection but it becomes almost correct. And above all, it's a simmer's nirvana ! Here, a landing at night with rain and haze after four T&Gs. There are a few blunders: a little delay to the descent compensated in an inelegant way with the DLC, some inattentions in terms of axis conservation, and an arrival a little to the right of the median axis of the runway...

It works. Check : A/G mode selected on the pilot's display control panel. Master arms on. Weapon type, desired ATTK mode, delivery mode, delivery options set as desired, and weapon stations activated in the RIO's armament panel. Oh, and the INS must be in a good enough alignment condition for the bombing to be possible. "Coarse" setting shall not do the job.

After a few hours flying the cat, one knows approximately the wing sweep angle that the automatism will chose according to flight settings. What I do is manually settle the sweep angle step by step while trimming accordingly. When the cat is correctly trimmed and has approximately the right wing sweep angle, you can go automatic without rearing like a mad horse.