jojo

In ny test, AI do chaff when missile is fired, but they go evasive later.

There is another bug. Use B-scope instead of PPI. When you are in PPI, you have to place radar cursor on B-scope target's position to be able to lock. So directly in front it's the same, but when you try to lock off axis, there is a huge difference. It shouldn't be like that, it's a bug.

Yes, MiG-23 performed quite well Vs Mirage F1 CZ. MiG-23 engine is more powerful. But Mirage F1 CZ didn't have access to latest weapons like Magic 2 and Super 530F which was more dangerous than R530. But while turning with a MiG-23 in Mirage F1 may not be a good idea, Mirage 2000 is another thing. I wouldn't want to turn with a Mirage 2000 in a MiG-23.:smilewink:

You also have a yellow refuelling probe :huh:

In VR, move your head forward, hit numpad 5, return to normal position. Done :thumbup: Previously I to move my head forward in VR because I was in the seat head rest...

I saw in Tomcat thread that cockpit lighting has been impacted by latest DCS World patch. So we can assume that most modules will need adjustments. Moreover ED newsletter said lighting will see further tweaking. So not easy...

Check axis assignments. Maybe it was reseted by the update (like pitch axis on rudder or stuff like that). DCS has a bad tendency to populate all axis on each device, stating with pitch/ roll/ yaw...

Yes, you can find some pictures without the probe. But in the end, the probe does fit very well to Mirage 2000EG too :smartass: Dame thing with Indian Mirage 2000H So I think it's just about the country using air to air refueling or not. If they do, they would rather let it on the plane. Maybe some country weren't using AAR initially then adopted the technique.

Anyway, this is pointless to discuss missile with this guy. Any western technology is propaganda for him. AIM-54 guidance has to be corrected, maybe in next patch ? Kinematic seems in line with what we know of the missile. It isn't unbeatable by any mean if you know what you are doing. It was demonstrated even before module release (Jabber ?) But yes, it puts you on the defensive, like it should. So this is fine. Finally "mother Russia" designed a replica of the Phoenix with R-33 + PESA radar in the MiG-31, still in service today. So the concept is certainly not that bad. :music_whistling:

Oh yeah, I did encounter those cranes. Good news :thumbup:

Ever hear of Sputnik News or RT ? Keep the politic out this discussion, this is a technical matter.

Just try to understand what I write before answering. :lol: The F-15 picture is there to prove the Phoenix doesn’t fit well on others fighters. The QF-4 blast picture (not F-15 for anyone with a minimum of understanding) is there to illustrate the powerful warhead of AIM-54, not the turning capacity of the missile.

There is the airframe, and there is the missile. To handle such a weapon system with long legs and such big missile you need a big airframe. This is a complex airframe, with variable wing, lots of control surfaces and with the burden of aircraft carrier operations...inevitably, it was costly to sustain. It wasn't just about politics. And the great Tomcat pilot interview posted here tells that. They always had to plan spare aircraft because of regular no go. Even after youth problems solved. So yes, it was a capable airframe, but there is a reason for nobody designing variable wings airframe anymore. Then there is the wrong point about the missile: "If the missile was really capable, why did they withdraw it at the same time as the Tomcat in 2006 ?" Because it's a 1000lbs AA missile. It's the weight of 3 AIM-120 AMRAAM or one Mk-83. And the Tomcat could carry 4 Phoenix + 2 AIM-9 + 2 AIM-7 and land on the carrier with it. Bring back capacity is a serious issue for Navy fighters. You don't want to jettison such costly weapons each time you have to land on the carrier. No other plane could really perform as well as the Tomcat with AIM-54. The Tomcat was designed to carry it efficiently, especially with the "tunnel" between the engines. There was no point to keep the AIM-54 without the Tomcat, it wouldn't fit correctly on other airframe. Here on F-15 to be used as target. But the missile being big doesn't mean it can't perform well against fighters. To start with, this is a massive war head. We can see in the OP video that the missile can turn. Speed itself is great advantage.

By the way, it isn’t just about being being able to carry the missile under the wing. Being an AA weapon, how many G will you be able to pull with it. Being able to pull 9G with 350kg doesn’t mean that you can still do it with 450kg. That isn’t just +100kg, this is +900kg !

I had the same issue as you. And I followed a buddy piece of advice...just work the throttle and stick. You won't be perfectly trimmed, so work the throttle and stick, trim in the process to ease your work. It did work better for me, even if I still have lot of room for improvement :thumbup:

This made my day :lol: So the missile is shot at a target 110Nm away and travels 72.5Nm. First, many people would already be thrilled to be able to shoot at a target 72.5Nm. The flight time is almost 3mm. After 1’30” it’s still doing “only” M2.7.:music_whistling: The engine burns for about 30”...so yeah, really not that bad. In the first video here we have a missile doing U turn while in boost phase, and I didn’t expect to see that from such a missile.:thumbup: Because the AIM-54 is a 1000lbs missile. The launching pylons alone are heavier than AIM-120 missiles. So you won’t be able to fit 6 AIM-54 on F-15C/ F-16/ F/A-18. You need the big Tomcat to carry a significant load of AIM-54 in good conditions. Is it a perfect missile ? No. But it was certainly capable to do its job, long range fleet defence while still a significant threat Vs any fighter. And you can evade AIM-54 shot in DCS, it isn’t like it’s the perfect unbeatable missile which never looses track. Missile guidance logic isn’t what it should be. We know that, it’s acknowledged, they are working on it.

Yes, I did have the same problem. But I don’t think it’s specific to HB F-14, it’s a general DCS issue.

Great finding :thumbup: I would even say it’s scary to watch the missile make a U-turn :pilotfly:

Yep, the 3D guy is doing his job :thumbup: For the systems...no news :( Unfit for duty as far as I'm concerned. :cry:

From my understanding, HB did research on AIM-54, and they submitted the files for analysis to ED. And they did share some it here already in the past. So that work has already been done for AIM-54. SD-10 is another topic.

Mmmmmh, what you describe is weird. Do you have SRS or something similar with PTT option ? IRL the throttle has a 2 ways PTT. On PTT position for each radio (so 2). In game, you open a comms menu for each radio. If you set AWACS frequency on red radio, ATC frequency on green radio and you try to call AWACS on green radio, you will have AWACS menu, but he won't answer.

You probably have "easy comms" option checked in DCS menu. Unselect easy comms.

Ok thanks. Both are much needed improvements :thumbup:

Yep, but I would expect him to scan up/ down to sanitize the air space in front of the Tomcat From pilot cockpit, scan up/ low Jester command doesn’t tell me much about how high or low he is scanning.

Thanks, so US Navy got a specific variant of AIM-7 for Tomcat with a different hanging system ?