Naquaii

It's just a scale to help the RIO visually make out were on the screen the target is. None of them are dedicated to a single task, just think of them as marking a percentage of the whole screen height.

Not saying yes or no on that as it's not my decision, just that it's not currently possible. But I'd imagine we might eventually get to it, no promises!

That's not it at all though, it's just the system not being used in the modelled era and that it was in general just shit tbh. That wouldn't change even if it could be used for air to ground. Our goal will always be an accurate simulation regardless of how effective it is in the simulator. And in this case the effort to simulate it is out of proportion to the actual use it would be for anything even if you completely disregard that it's not realistic on this era F-14.

Not currently, he has no ability to control the TCS manually yet.

The thing is that the numbers are a remainder from older DDD versions when you couldn't change the rate scale on the DDD. As you can do that in the version modelled the numbers can't be used. While the WCS will put the generated symbology at certain position on the screen you always have to manually read out what they mean using the set scale at the DDD. And by that I mean that if you have the DDD set to 20 nm and the target is 4/10th up the screen it is 8 nm out. The scale marks remain to help the RIO estimate this.

As this thread has resurfaced I feel like clarifying a little bit! :-) There was a big difference between the two different IR systems, the -D IRST was a much, much more capable system. Being digital and capable of generating an IR picture. The -A IR could not generate an IR picture at all and was more akin to a more advanced IR-missile seekerhead. The screen display was much more like an oscilloscope screen or a basic radar screen where the RIO had to find a heat spike and lock onto that. Apart from that, which made the system difficult to use, the performance wasn't at all up to any usable standard. This is the reason for the early IR system being dropped very early and while we do in fact have detailed information on it it would be at the bottom of our list of stuff to add. Mostly due to the fact that the selected era for our -A is later and that the Irani F-14 never had them. Not saying it won't happen but it's ahistorical for our modelled -A and it would be much work to add for a system that wouldn't be very useful.

The behaviour is correct. As been mentioned the reticle (cross) represents the AIM-9 seekerhead line of sight while the diamond represents sensor line of sight. If STT is present that is the diamond, if not the diamond represents the TCS if that is present. The reason for the reticle remaining after having the target outside of the HUD is likely, as been said here, that the TCS is limited to ~15 degrees off boresight while the AIM-9M, being a SEAM capable Sidewinder can track out to 40 degrees.

It is described in detail in the natops, the problem is it is worded in a way were it can be read as both disabling the SAS permanently and not when in the air. We're currently trying to see if our SMEs remember.

PLM has to be held until lockon occurs, VSL and PAL does not, they continue until they find something. As for VSL it should be the last one selected, by either crewman. In regards to the altitude return, that's not a symbol, it's a radar artifact created by radar returns in the sidelobes which might be present when at low altitude. This is currently not modelled in DCS though. The scale on the DDD is the same regardless of where on the screen you look, the vertical lines are there to help with reference which azimuth is where. The scales in the vertical axises depends entirely on what range or rate scale is selected and are the same regardless of which you use on the screen. So if set to 10 nm as an example you have to manually work out which of them means what. The exception is in the STT modes were the WCS generates extra rate and range symbols and displays them, in that case both rate and range can coexist but they still correspond to the scales set in rate and range.

Currently not modelled, we're currently investigating this as our manuals are somewhat ambiguous about behaviour related to the paddle.

Hi! Firstly, the transition between P and PD for STT is not a guaranteed thing, this is as it should be as the radar still needs to find the target in the other mode as well. As for transitioning from P to PD it's a bit of a hazzle as PD has blind zones which the P modes doesn't. When at high angles it's more likely that the target will be in one of the deadzones but it should not be an automatic track loss. Having the aircraft maneuvering during the transition also increases the risk of track loss. I'll have a look at this and see if I can reproduce it, currently not sure if it is a bug or not.

I'm always happy to see new material so if you happen to be able to provide it feel free to. Our material is quite detailed but early so it's possible this changed later on.

Unfortunately that's incorrect, according to our material that switch only works pre-launch. As far as we know there's no way to manually command a missile to go active. As for the WCS continuing to guide a Phoenix on a reaquired target it depends on if the WCS sees it as the same target, i.e. that it has not maneuvered too far away from where it's expected to be.

In TWS it would need to be the same track, in STT yes, theoretically. But it depends a bit on how it goes with our testing of our implementation so no promises.

Correct, as long as the WCS has a track, even if it's lost, it will continue towards that target. The track hold function is supposed to automatically enable when you launch a phoenix.

The AWG-9 guides the AIM-54 Phoenix using semi-active illumination as well as data-link commands also transmitted by the AWG-9. For TWS it guides the missiles semi-actively until 16 secs time to impact at which time it sends an active command to the missile telling it to go active. In TWS the missiles continues sweeping the search volume and when sweeping past the missiles it injects data-link commands as well. For PD-STT it never sends the active command as it can illuminate the target until impact and the missile will continue semi-active all the way to the target. For short range shots (<10nm) the missile will be commanded to go active at launch. This also happens if the missile is fired in a radar mode that cannot send commands to the missile, i.e. all the pulse modes and ACM modes. As for launch warnings you'd not get one until the missile goes active in TWS mode while in STT mode you'll get one at launch as the AWG-9 will be directly locked onto you and transmitting missile data-link commands continuously. We have declassified manuals describing this in detail for the AIM-54A. It's entirely possible that this changed for the -C but as we do not have the same data for that missile we're modelling it the same way until better information is available. Currently this is not correct in DCS as we've had to limit it to the same logic as the AIM-120. This is going to change though as we're currently testing changes ED has helped us with, giving us command of missile loft and if and when the missile goes active. Edit: Losing a track will not immediately trash the missile as the WCS will still guide it towards the last calculated position and send the active command when at calculated 16 secs TTI.

The fuze settings all depend on what fuzes are set on the munitions loaded on the aircraft. As DCS doesn't currently allow for different fuzes on the same weapons this is currently simplified. The EFUZE setting only affects the GBUs currently, the other weapons only use the mechanical fuze settings.

Unfortunately what you're trying to do is more or less the reason for the implementation of the LANTIRN pod, the basic INS in the F-14 isn't exact enough to do what you want even if it could display it on the HUD.

The F-14B currently in DCS is incapable of in-flight alignment due to the lack of a GPS and the fact that the INS is quite a bit older than the F/A-18C and AV-8B. The updated F-14 with the CDNU and EGI has this ability as those add GPS and a more modern ring-laser gyro. The reason for this limitation is that the computer controlling the gyro needs to be aware of the attitude and motion of the platform for the alignment to proceed. The earlier F-14 solves this by either being stationary, hence no movement, on a known position or by using the carrier's INS via the link. In a modern system with in-flight alignment the computer uses the GPS for this information and due to the low rate of attitude data from the gps this usually requires the aircraft to fly straight for it to work.

It will work as with a normal radar acquisition were the antenna is locked to the TCS and the HCU controlling only range or rate. This is WIP though and does not yet work.

It's a way to use the TCS to acquire the radar onto a target. When in this position the radar will be slaved to the TCS elevation and azimuth but the hand control can still be used to acquire the target in range or rate. This could as an example be useful against certain kinds of radar jammers however the implementation of this in DCS is still WIP and it's still unclear how much of this we can implement given the current limited DCS ECM.

The logic in the real aircraft seems to be less along the lines of retraction and extension and more along the lines of how it affects the aircrafts lift. That's why pushing the switch forwards in the real aircraft retracts the maneuvre flaps and extends the DLC spoilers, both actions reducing lift. The opposite is true of pulling the switch backwards, maneuvre flaps extends and DLC spoilers retract, both increasing lift. When you as a pilot get used to thinking in terms of lift or glidepath instead of retraction or extension it makes more sense. At list it did to me! :-)

Correct, if you set the wheel to high drag delivery and then don't fuze the bombs to actually use the retarded mode they will miss.

The AWG-9 while silent, either via the stby position on the WCS switch or via the WoW (Weight On Wheels) switch will still scan around the selected search volume but will not emit anything via the antenna. It's a quirk of the system and because of that it looks like the antenna is operational when in fact it's just doing the motions without transmitting.

That should not be the case, we have been having problems with the carrier and INS alignments leading to erroneous results in systems relying on it. It should be improved as of latest patch but we'll have a look ofc.