Victory205

It's surprising to hear because it isn't true. Sideslip (beta) has been modeled since the beginning, and is used for a myriad of calculations that produce the detailed flight modeling. It's constantly being reviewed and tweaked throughout the flight envelope as it has a powerful impact on handling A jet isn't a light, prop driven aerobatic airplane that produces lift due to propellor flow over the fuselage and tail control surfaces. The real F14 with full rudder in knife edge (at zero G) would result in the nose slowly falling through the horizon. Don't forget, there is a rudder authority limiter that begins at 250 KIAS and is fully engaged at 400 KIAS (9.5º restriction).

Video from the TPS Gang on F14A departure/spin characteristics and recovery procedures that shows what we were dealing with. The video illustrates the severe problems that result from inertial coupling due to sideslip. These are valid for both AFCS F14 variants that we have in the sim, the only difference is that the B is less likely to generate engine stalls. As always, using rudder inputs only to roll at high alpha will help keep you out of trouble. Roll, then pull, and wake up those feet!

Our canopies were clean and polished, a matter of pride for the Plane Captain (I never flew without shaking the PC’s hand with a word of thanks). After a three second cat shot, the canopy was spattered with non-skid and oil.

This is what he’s referencing-

Fair point, but you’re going anyway.

Something that isn’t widely understood by simmers due to the restraints of modeling is that bullets (and rockets for that matter) don’t behave like a laser. When sideslip is present, the rounds aerodynamically fair into the free stream during the initial part of their travel. You can move the impact point, but it isn’t a 1:1 ratio when firing with a fixed sight. Most computer sights that I’m familiar with do not account for sideslip very well. The latest and greatest might. I’ve not performed a detailed analysis of bullet trajectories, but last time I paid attention, bullets in flight behaved more like a laser than a projectile that models intricate ballistic phenomena. Good enough for a game though.

Standing before the long green table, at attention, in front of a group of senior officers you just disrespected, trying to justify why you should keep your wings. It takes less talent to stay out of trouble than to talk your way out of it.

The TA-4J/F had the same NWS switch logic. Even with its narrow gear, taxi on straightaways was accomplished with rudder and differential braking. unless there was a crosswind, NWS was engaged only for turns. For takeoffs in the F-4E sim, I generally don’t use NWS unless at very slow speeds. Line up carefully, and if you need to engage it at high speed to correct a drift for some reason, then ensure that you center the rudder pedals before pressing the NWS button. If you have a pinky switch on your controller, then it’s not a big deal to use it as intended, pressing only when necessary. NWS should be used sparingly, with steering priority being aerodynamic rudder first, then differential braking, then NWS. Not sure why pressing and holding a little switch when necessary is causing drama. Don’t want you gents to get the wrong idea, and develop bad habits that put you into the weeds with a load of bombs, with a lot of explaining to do to the base commander.

You are not an idiot.

That would only be “check”. If Heatblur make the F-4E carrier compatible, then it would reduce the incentive to make a proper Naval F-4B, J, N, K or the FAA F-4K. The Naval versions have different radars, cockpit layouts, and flight models due to BLC and depending upon version selected, slats. It’s a considerable resource investment. Checkmate, would be an inability to recoup that investment because despite what people say, because when it comes time to pony up, far fewer customers would be willing pay because they already flying an F-4E off of the ship. The risk of producing Naval Phantom module is greater than a producing a different aircraft that would have a better return on investment. Nothing nefarious, it’s simple economics.. My opinion only, take it for what it’s worth. I have zero influence on Heatblur’s business plan.

This would ruin my immersion.

I had the reputation of having a “sunny disposition” until I got involved with flight simmers. It’s difficult to understand the contemptuous mindset.

Our F-4E doesn’t have BLC.

They were shot down by an SA-2, on one of the biggest days of the air war in Viet Nam. There were hundreds of F4’s airborne that day in multiple engagements across the north. Perhaps you can explain how your MiG theory applies?

Many pilots like to fly with a little nose down trim, requiring a very light pull while hand flying. It’s a common technique during formation flight to get rid of the deadband around the neutral point in pitch. It’s difficult to convey how one of these jets handles, but they require constant, coordinated trim, power and control inputs. You are never not “flying” the aircraft, especially in pitch. Throw in things like cg changes with fuel burn, coupled with normal atmospheric conditions of realistic turbulence and shear interactions, and no one would be worried about being unable to achieve hands off trim.

I’m using the same hardware and the response is easily flown according to my expectations from real world flying. Lots of variables, within a persons gaming rig, from springs, cams, extensions, refresh rates, arm geometry. Who knows what sort of hardware components variation may be lurking within the supply chain of PC flight control manufacturers?

Be careful of test cell data label “estimated thrust transient time”. Installed performance incorporates intake design limitations on what is achievable.

FWIW, the goal we had with the F14 module was to make the sim fly like the aircraft did, including its idiosyncrasies and challenges, and not succumb to making it fly the way we “wished” it would fly. For perspective, the A-4 series of jets that we all flew in training were very sensitive in pitch and roll, yet students earned their instrument ratings in them (no autopilot by the way). I don’t think that in two years, that I ever got an TA-4J completely trimmed for more than 30 seconds in smooth air during cruise. The F14 was more stable than the A-4, and much easier to fly on instruments, or during approaches or landings. I see a lot of comparisons here to the F14 module, understand that the F-4E should feel less stable than the Tomcat. Trimming and flight path corrections are part of a constant process. The pilot was constantly making tiny inputs, and “hands off” flight usually meant accepting a small deviation in vertical rates. Fighters and Attack aircraft would not pass FAA Certification Standards. I’ve emphasized this many times, you need to support your right forearm and fly with your fingers and wrist. You will be making small inputs in pitch at all times.

The “lack of a HUD” is the best feature of the F-4E, you mackerel slappers are finally going to learn to fly a proper approach. Couple of pointers that may help you get sorted- • Set up your configuration as clean with 3-4000lbs of fuel for starters. The max field landing weight is 46,000lbs, but it exacerbates the issues that you are having. • As per my “FAM-1 Survival Guide”, use a pattern altitude of 1500 feet AGL, target 180 Knots on downwind, don’t fly too fast, it will tend to make your decel to onspeed more difficult. You also need to add power during the approach turn, the lower your downwind, the more power as your descent rate will be lower. • Start by flying your approaches fast, 15 units, then target 17 when comfortable, then work your way down to 19.2 units. Note the power requirements (Fuel Flow) to generate the rate of descent that takes you around the approach turn under control. • Hell yes! Practice “slow flight”, which is simply practicing flying in the landing configuration. Do the same thing, start fast, work your speed down to 19.2 units while performing level turns, then 7-800 fpm descents in a 30ºAOB, followed by wings level. Note the power required. If you want to continue to flail, skip this step.

Watched Reflected’s video. It’s pretty good, but someone needs to let him know that he breaks like a pu**y. I’ve seen airliners roll faster and pull harder than that. Co-ordinated rudder and aileron for rolling in the landing pattern please. Don’t get caught up in absolute engine rpm for adjustments, most pilots use fuel flow in most jets, and consider whatever they do reference as ball park settings. Kidding aside, taking it easy as you build confidence in your abilities is a smart way to approach any new aircraft.

Believe it or not, the F14 did have a provision for the flaps and slats to automatically retract. If the flap handle was in the normal range (ie, not in emergency), then an overspeed that exceeded 225 KIAS would auto retract the main flap panels. However, this feature was removed in an airframe change (AYC 660P1). I am not sure of the actual timeframe of the change, but I never flew an aircraft that had the auto retract capability. Auto retract was originally confined to certain BuNo's, but was removed in all aircraft by the airframe change. I'm not 100% sure why it was removed, but if memory serves, it was likely due to inadvertent retractions occurring below the 225 KIAS trigger speed. Exceeding 225 KIAS with the landing flaps extended is one of the three states that activates the "Reduce Speed" warning light, so all F14 aircraft will show that warning. All F14's also have an AUX FLAPS blow back feature due to a bypass valve located within the aux flap control section of the combine hydraulic system. So technically, the F14 does have a blow back feature, but only for the AUX FLAPS.

Sea Level charts are not as useful because the Ps curves tend to get flat, even more so for high TW aircraft. The real charts are OK for comparing max speeds, but sea level charts make it difficult to ascertain targeted sustained turn velocities. FWIW, we typically used 15,000 for comparison, if you take a look, you’ll instantly see why. For an out of plane extension and reversal, perhaps the most important aspect is ensuring that your opponent’s energy state is bled down enough that a). He can’t follow, and b). He can’t get his nose on you to launch a weapon that can track. The latter is tough in today’s world of all aspect missiles, it wasn’t much of a problem when the F-4 was fighting MiG 17’s and 21’s. Randy Cunningham’s famous 1v1 against the mythical “Colonel Toon” (who didn’t exist) was an example of what happens when you initiate a vertical extension and your opponent has the energy and the capacity to follow. Duke knew that the MiG 17 had plenty of energy, but he went vertical anyway because he had never encountered a MiG pilot with the ability to use the vertical. One last tip. Don’t trim during BFM. It’s particularly bad in a simulator as it masks what little feedback you receive from your control stick. We don’t have the luxury of feeling G forces, at least until affordable home centrifuges become a thing.

The F14 was grossly over performing when it came out, which took a considerable amount of time to match to the performance charts. In due course, @fat creasonused an innovative technique to solve. Your perspective may be biased depending upon when you purchased the module, because we went from ridiculously high max speeds and maneuvering capabilities, to slightly underperforming, before @fat creason designed a brilliant method to solve a complex, tedious challenge. A significant challenge was solving the DCS modeling of external stores drag. The F-4E is matching the performance in the charted config that are accessible right now. Reading or watching videos and declaring a “feeling” that it’s on or off isn’t a valid method. If something is discovered, to be in error, then it will be checked and tuned. I think it performs better than my own (unsubstantiated) personal expectations, but I had to recalibrate to much higher corner velocities for max performance after studying the performance charts. Those higher speeds require fine control inputs for max performance.

LOL, that’s kind of cute, but using the white reference mark at the bottom of the VDI display is correct. The marks are there to aid in instrument flying, so 10, 20, 20, 45, and 60º are more useful than your interpretation.

Thank you, I watch the first couple of minutes and I’ll look at the rest of it a bit later. Quickly. The F14 has a couple of bobweights, springs and an Eddy Current Damper between the control stick and the flight control surfaces, all modified by the SAS computers. The F-4 has a bellows that loosely performs the function of the ECD by increasing pitch forces at high G. There is a lot going on under the surface in the Tomcat that most aren’t familiar with to produce it’s handling characteristics. Can you give us and idea of your real world flying experience for reference? What general types of aircraft and whether you’ve flow aerobatic maneuvers in the real world. It’s Memorial Day here and I’m leaving to attend a ceremony for our fallen brethren. Remember.