fl0w

The HUD's velocity tape is highly inaccurate. It should not be regarded for landing whatsoever, as pilots used their AoA indexer and the variometer to determine the rate of vertical acceleration. The DLC (Direct Lift Control) is also very important to use. Having it on allows you to "fine tune" like an airbrake, except on the wings to help you speed up or slow down quicker giving you a sweet spot that you can dynamically move in.

Enough pressure on the wings from extreme lift forces would snap the internal wing structure, so in whatever position where you are able to go past its extreme point. You will be more likely to snap it when more swept because of less distribution of lift forces on the body of the wing, meaning less wing area.

I do not think when I speak for this on behalf of the people who enjoy the Tomcat, that nobody excludes the factor of realism from active input of an SME or real pilot of the aircraft. If we are going to use the duck typing for this situation, where it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, then it is a duck, on the F-14B itself, I would give them respect to speak for more complicated subjects and overall aesthetics to how it would be in average maintenance. I can perfectly understand the thought of HB may have been exaggerating some effects for reasons of marketing, but this is overall an iconic aircraft that was a fleet defense fighter that reigned in air-to-air superiority, I am pretty confident in my belief that people who fly this want it to be as authentic and accurate as possible. Of course, nobody is saying the F-14B Tomcat cockpit was never clean, but this is the cockpit you would see after years of service and/or out of the part factories. Considering the time and era of this aircraft, I would be almost certain to say that regardless of whoever maintained any F-14B, you will not see it being kept as 100% mint condition, or maybe even within 85%. It's going to wear, and tear, and build up grunge.

May I ask, were you a crew chief for naval-based operations aircraft, or land-based? A small explanation, from my view and behalf, from what I would "logically" see fit. 1. Since the "saltwater corrodes and chips paint" argument has been overused now, we'll also say that since if maintenance did apply new paint, it would only be a top layer effect applied onto already existent paint. Assuming if the argument still applies, that paint would then chip and cause a worse effect. Otherwise, the paint would thicken and make it more difficult to read, just not on a "grunge" level. On stuff like the knobs or switches where it may be some shiny metal, the oils from the fingers will excrete onto it and give it a dark-like shine as far as I have seen from images. 2. The cockpit was photo scanned from a Pacific Museum in the United States on the west coast, decades later after retirement. The cockpit is going to naturally get things like dust and people from all over will be touching parts, but the cockpit does have to be kept under restored conditions. So a factor of after service would not apply too well. 3. The cockpit itself is old. It may not have been taking care as properly as it would've been under modern times with the Superbugs and Vipers, but that would be excluding the environmental factor as well as who was taking care of it. I may be wrong on some of these points, but by my way of seeing it, I would declare it "realistic" solely on the environment and who is taking care of it.

There is a mod available in the ED user files section for a cleaner F-14B cockpit. The current cockpit is realistic.

I know that in the past, HB has stated that the Forrestal assets would be free to the F-14 module owner. But may I ask, just as a re-confirmation, that this is still being stood by in contrast to the DCS: Supercarrier we are seeing developed by ED? :D

I snooped around in the DCS CoreMods files for the F-14B and found the Forrestal to have some textures and code, but there is no 3D model for us to view. And there have been teasing of the ship by ralfidude and Jabbers from what I have been able to determine, but sadly nothing else in terms of a progress update. https://streamable.com/6d9jx

Bugs come first, we need more squashing than pretty things. Keep up your good work. :thumbup:

The developers have told us that the campaign for the Viggen is about complete. The Draken AI though, I am quite sad to not see stuff on. But they are busy with the Tomcat, so I do give them the benefit of the doubt like all 3rd parties.

I've been wanting to ask about this more and more for a while now. Ever since we have been getting more information form ED about their upcoming DCS: Supercarrier, I have been wanting to ask more about the Forrestal, Ranger, Saratoga and other ships that we would be getting for free with the Tomcat. I am very happy with the progress that the HB team has been making so far, and bugs have always been a high priority for a module before content, but is there any new information to come before us on this? I am very excited about this and being able to go under a deck, have animated deck crew, and etc. So far what we've seen: (USS Ranger Deck Crew) (USS Forrestal)

I'm so appalled by this that I am not sure by whether I should be respecting what was just said, or to even be annoyed. "Being deployed first in 1974, they probably didn't have such a worn cockpit in the 1980s." That is for the F-14A, and yes they were right off of the factory line. But cockpits don't become dirty overnight, that's not how time works. It was over a decade only until the F-14B came into service in the late 1980s, giving 13 years for the time to develop. There would have been plenty of lines for saltwater to corrode the metal and cause the paint to chip as well. "And HB probably scanned a cockpit [...] a decade later. No wonder it looks so filthy." HB did scan a cockpit over a decade later, and it was at the Pacific Museum. But that does not mean that the Museum did not clean the cockpit, they do have to keep it under restored conditions. The fact that it was photo scanned somewhere does not conclude the fact that the environment it was from during that time exactly caused the filth it has.

Oh man, I really wonder where you got this number from. :doh: What a topic to butcher that it has to be repeated from time to time again that this is realistic of a cockpit to be this worn and dirty because of where it is stationed. It's on a boat in the waters, you will see metal corrosion and paint chipping because of the saltwater splashing up against the sides of the hull and salt hailing in like a shot contest of who can jizz their way off a carrier catapult the fastest, as Crash Laobi had once said. The SME's that HB has, as well as F-14 pilots have also stated that there were even worse cockpits than this one where they had applied paint over already chipped paint and the effect would come much worse. I highly doubt this 80% of players that you mention are complaining about this. 80% of people are complaining about the bugs that keep coming that need to be addressed much more than the aesthetic appeal of the cockpit. There are mods publicly available in the ED user files section and the "Mods & Apps" sub-forum for you to make the cockpit look cleaner.

Refer to the "Beginners Guide to DCS Aircraft Mods" post by Redbeard2 in the How To subforum for Mods and Apps, along of the other stickied posts. You will also need: (for native/recommended support to DCS) - 3DS Max 2015-2017 - .EDM plugin for 3DS Max - paint.NET or GIMP - Notepad++ or other text editor Hope this helps.

Try using this code: dofile(LockOn_Options.script_path.."command_defs.lua") dofile(LockOn_Options.script_path.."devices.lua") local gear_system = GetSelf() local dev = GetSelf() local update_time_step = 0.01 local sensor_data = get_base_data() make_default_activity(update_time_step) local GEAR_COMMAND = 0 local GEAR_STATE = 0 local Gear = 68 --internal DCS ID local GearElem = 3001 -- clickable pointer element ID local GEAR_TIME_IN = update_time_step / 5 -- 5 reps sec. local GEAR_TIME_OUT = update_time_step / 3 -- 3 reps sec. local GEAR_TIME_PARAM = update_time_step / 2 -- 2 reps sec. local GEAR_WEIGHT = sensor_data:getWOW_LeftMainLandingGear() -- checks if gear suspension is in place, needed for ground check dev:listen_command(Gear) function post_initialize() if GEAR_WEIGHT > 0 then GEAR_STATE = 1 else GEAR_STATE = 0 end set_aircraft_draw_argument_value(0, GEAR_STATE) set_aircraft_draw_argument_value(3, GEAR_STATE) set_aircraft_draw_argument_value(5, GEAR_STATE) end function SetCommand(command,value) if GEAR_WEIGHT == 0 then if command == Gear or GearElem then if GEAR_COMMAND == 0 then GEAR_COMMAND = 1 else GEAR_COMMAND = 0 end end end end function update() if GEAR_WEIGHT == 0 then if (GEAR_COMMAND == 1 and GEAR_STATE > 0) then GEAR_STATE = GEAR_STATE - GEAR_TIME_IN end if (GEAR_COMMAND == 0 and GEAR_STATE < 1) then GEAR_STATE = GEAR_STATE + GEAR_TIME_OUT end end set_aircraft_draw_argument_value(0, GEAR_STATE) set_aircraft_draw_argument_value(3, GEAR_STATE) set_aircraft_draw_argument_value(5, GEAR_STATE) end need_to_be_closed = false This code will utilize the post_initialize() function more to determine before the mission starts where the gear is supposed to start. In your SetCommand() function, your code had indention block issues and I believe you forgot to close the function. (that or one of the IF statements) You were also checking in your SetCommand() for the gears to be able to move as long as gear weight was on, meaning only if you were on the ground. Hope this helps! :)

Don't sweat it, take your time! :) Just happy that bugs are being squashed.

I'm not sure if this has been reported already, but when the wing sweep handle is fully forward and locked down with the cover shut, regardless of the wing sweep position exterior-wise, the handle does not follow. I attempted this with the handle out at full forward, handle in, handle out at full backward, and with handle in. All times I tried this did involve a Master Reset.

Try this local gear_state = 1 local gear_weight = sensor_data:getWOW_LeftMainLandingGear() if gear_weight ~= 0 then gear_state = 1 else gear_state = 0 end Should incorporate a simple check of if you are on the ground or not and will set it to the correct position by default.

Refer to this: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3996875&postcount=1 The developer had to part his ways from the PolyChop-Simulations team for undisclosed reasons and formed MilTech-5, but was unable to keep programmer(s) unknown apart of the team for undisclosed reasons, and then attempted collaboration with another 3rd party, which is also undisclosed. The project is now on ice because of the lack of programmers involved in the Bo-105 project.

A lot of people underestimate how vital this could be as a base interceptor in our game against targets, especially high speed/alt targets. Could get this out to 50 nm quickly in a couple of minutes at angels 30, the climb rate is quite fascinating.

I think this is a quite rare bug for people to post about, that or HB may not be able to completely replicate the issue without them seeing some form of video or track to interact with. I will see if I can test this and send a track their ways. :P

SPAM WARNING! I have a lot of F-14B Tomcat shots, some popular and not popular across various flight sim communities for DCS.

There used to be a Gripen mod out from the 1.5 era along with the Viggen, but they no longer work now due to the new .EDM formatting and several internal changes in the aircraft Lua design.

As to what Victory said, the buffet seems to be correct when the cockpit shakes. The request is understandable for visual appeal, but if anyone would say (and not saying anyone has) that they can't fly the Tomcat without this feature would be dramatic as of all other past requests to HB. I have no issue with the shake because I want the real effects from the real aircraft and those real speeds. IMO, changing it decreases true immersion. But we all don't have nice latex gloves with pilot flight suits, helmets, a fully built home simulation cockpit with all of the F-14B parts, a moving cockpit based on the sim position, and etc. :P

Not a new issue, this is the same as from the past with the Viggen Mach 1.8+ bug. Tweaks of the flight model from HB has made it lower, but it still persists from likely the colder temperature by rising altitude increasing engine performance.

Looking good!