G.J.S

No idea chap, I don’t have Hind. But, if it’s something they have worked hard on, why would they basically give it to a competitor for nothing? Triggered?? Don’t make me laugh, it’s you who have been triggered into responding. I was stating a standard business fact.

Hehehehe.

Apologies, lack of sleep and not reading the several prior posts correctly resulted in a bad post. Ive had a couple hours kip now. (2hrs in the last 48!). Marconi ARI 18228(?), is the RWR gear - front and rear hemisphere. (Believe it’s same setup as was used in Vulcan). Its NOT an ECM gear (not too sure what I had smoked?). Going to go back under my stone now . . . .

Marconi RWR principally, but could have an ECM function also dependent on setting.

Who wouldn’t want their product to sell better! , but which competitor would offer help? Both in the same market, neither will team up or offer out their “greatest edge”, so why would they do it for free? Then you run into “who gets top billing” if they do miraculously join?

That would be like a Ford car using a BMW FLIR without paying BMW anything. Would you give your competitors something in demand, for nothing?

Why you should never share a curry with your crew in an armoured vehicle . . . .

Don't rely too much on the horizon line when airborne, the HUD isn't a primary device. The only thing i do with regards the horizon line is when on the pan before lift off, i use the HUD Trim dial to bring the horizon line up to match visible horizon and set it there whilst aircraft at rest. I'm guessing the OP is digital-gen slave, used to the see all and display all HUD's. Proper aircraft require pilots - laptops require displays.

I have had a scan through a few pages and not seen anything relating to this, so i will post it up. Would it be possible to enable section take-offs and maybe recoveries also (2 A/C on rwy simultaneously)? If the AI were able to see 'TWO runways' on one physical runway (left/right of centerline), then maybe it would be possible? Not actual two runways, just the AI can treat the left/right lengths of a runway as a side by side runway so as to land or take-off beside its immediate wing lead. I really don't have any idea of the 'how to'' for something like this as its far, far beyond me! Just an idea?

If it starts to change . . . . Fly the other way . . . .

True. Would love to see a FGR2 knocking around , but would like to see an “S” also, hell - any full blooded Phantom! TISEO “E” anyone?

Deep breath . . . . . . . . Keep calm . . . . . . . . Oh god I miss the best ride ever.

Alternately, post thanks (post1) for (post2) the (post3) info (post4) and you should be sweet. Or you can wait to gain access, only 3 more to go . . . .

I think you need a certain minimum number (5?) of posts to access all of the forum, posting “thanks for the info” in reply to THIS post will help get the numbers up!

Shouldn’t be too hard, used to group sweep up to 4 Tornado in a parade simultaneously, trimming isn’t that much of a headache if you are expecting it. Bit of a party piece given that one of Tornados nicknames was the “Flick-Knife”.

Syncrho’d wing sweeping? Maybe the simplest explanation - on call from 1, all sweep manually? Sweep rate will be same in all a/c anyway, only variable would be the start initiated by crews.

Sunrise and sunset times would be good tied in with this also.

Probably unlikely, but to me the leading edge of the wings - it looks like somewhere in the configuration file or whatever it is, for the F-14 the angles for port and stbd got swapped? A + & - kind of thing, a plus value on one side, minus on the other. Its kind of hard for me to put into words what I mean to say. The leading edge angle of the port wing would be accurate for starboard, and vice versa.

. . . . . . Deleted the directions to the references. . . . . .

I didn’t misunderstand anything, the link I provided was solely to show what loads are/can be carried and what can’t and why. An F-14D with ground mapping modes has little to do with AIM-120 compatibility, and as in the doc, the radar would be swapped out to gain AMRAAM capability, thus losing its -71 for the -73 which is essentially what comes out the Hornet, which was the cheaper option compared to making the -71 compatible with AMRAAM. The link was the first google result, but in the past I have seen many more docs relating to this, as at the time the RAF were looking on in interest due to changes within the service regarding acquisitions. And correct, it doesn’t say anything about AMRAAM’s in relation to the F-14A/B with the AWG-9, which was the whole point of my posting the link due to the running desire people have to integrate the AIM-120 onto the Tomcat in sim. So I believe you misunderstood me? Switches safe - out.

Yep, sometimes they can be a little . . . Strong! Basically the reflections are no different to if you drive your car on a sunny day, if the sunlight is illuminating the coaming over your dash, you can see it on your windscreen as you look at the road ahead.

Basically your idea is similar to the dry wipe cards carried by aircrew, but playing card sized is great for the PC environment. Kudos.

If what I’m seeing is what is your concern, then the lower part of the HUD and lower part of windscreen would show reflection of the cockpit coaming. The shroud that covers the back of the instrument panel that terminates right at the front edge where it meets the windscreen.

It was a Radar change that would have enabled carriage of the AIM-120 missile, and that radar (AN/APG-73) was only going to be available for the F-14D. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GAOREPORTS-NSIAD-95-12/html/GAOREPORTS-NSIAD-95-12.htm The link is to a GAO report compiled in 1994, detailing the requirements and anticipated benefits and issues, also the relevance given the other platforms capabilities.

Really good idea there, nice one.