jojyrocks

The flight modeling...FCS could use some tweaking... Doesn't DCS pride itself having almost accurate FM? or should this be ignored? I suppose...you're right, who care about FM accuracy?

Clearly they are ABLE to do it and hold the nose up after the mains touch. They have the following as per the video I posted. FULL flaps down, SPEED BRAKES, Spoilers all deployed to full. Clean load. Watch from 3:06 Can DCS F-14 model do it or not? and no I am not talking of the US SOP format as the users are Naval pilots. OFF TOPIC on the Naval legacy hornet...but still related as the following does not seem to follow NATOPS landing procedure as these are flown by land based pilots and not used to carrier landings. Skip to 4:35 on the first vid.

So, I am guessing that you had the full flaps, SPOILERS and the Speed brakes deployed with clean configuration, correct? The Iranians had Spoilers out, Speed brakes deployed, flaps fully down and clean load. And no, the vid shows the Iranians touch the main gear first and keep the nose up for the aerobraking. Yes I understand this isn't the procedure with accordance of SOP. But Iranians do it. My question has always been can it do or not?

So...does the FM need some TWEAKING on the FCS? I get that its not the NATOPS procedure. But obviously, land based non Navy pilots do the flare and nose up aerobraking and its is clearly ABLE to do it. In DCS its impossible with full flaps. With Half setting, its very easy. Same with the F-14. There are Iranian vids of F-14 landing with the nose high kind of aerobraking and they have full flaps down, speedbrake plus the spoilers too.

It appears, you did NOT watch the full video. I even gave the "timestamps". Yes they do touch and go...but they also land at the end too... There are two vids. Watch the end parts...Time stamp on first vid is 4:35 Time stamp on 2nd is :0:45

Certainly. AI does need improvement. If not, playing campaigns is pointless. I think most need to put a pause on campaigns, especially, campaigns for OLDER planes. Ai needs to be tweaked.

Yes, I did mention, that I HAVE TRIED it with FLAPS off and FLAPS down. You can clearly see the Iranian pilots have full flaps down and full spoilers as well and they can keep the nose up to a considerable time. They also don't seem to be carrying external stores. But in DCS F-14, TRYING to land above on speed, is VERY DIFFICULT if you, FULL FLAPS, 20-40 percent of fuel, clean load. So soon as the main gear touches the spoiler along with the stabs also act as brakes and begins the immense braking, and with SPEED BRAKES deployed as well. Its seems more easier to land on short runways with F-14. Maybe the DCS ground friction plays as well. You certainly CANNOT keep the nose high like those Iranians did in DCS F-14. And my observation on the Iranians is that they also had the SPEED BRAKES deployed along with Spoilers and full flaps. It is POSSIBLE to land and keep the nose high WITHOUT flaps down, to some degree. I did mention all this in the previous post. Without spoilers, its even easier.

Yes, may not be SOP....But as the Iranians do, It CAN be done. As you say, it seems to be good on saving brakes. In DCS, It is almost impossible to come in fast (tried this), when you have around 25-40 percent fuel approx, clean load, FULL flaps and spoilers set, acting when the mains touch, inducing an Immense braking effect along with the stabilizers in full aft also acting as aero-brakes. Pretty easy to stop in short runways in DCS. Without flaps, its possible to hold the nose high to some degree...With full, no. While not SOP procedure, that was a smooth landing from the Iranians.

I was not talking of following SOP...and you said something about following SOP. I was asking, if the F-14 can Aerobrake or not? Like, keeping the nose high after the mains touch the ground , that kind of aerobraking like what those land based pilots do.

But, when you have FULL flaps on and clean load, you will be forced to land with lower speed in DCS, and as soon as the main gear touches, the nose will come down hard as the spoilers also act along with the giant stabilizers. The plane comes to a halt VERY fast. Its almost impossible to keep the nose up...like the Iranians did. They also seem to have clean load. Also, with full flaps on and clean load...It is hard to land fast.

Sigh....I am not talking of NATOPS procedure and its rules. The vids clearly show NON Navy pilots doing the aerobraking format landing. They aren't Navy pilots, and obviously they seem to be able to do it. Those were NOT Super Hornets. Its in the video...even with full flaps on, they can keep the nose high for a while after the main gears touch the ground. The thing I am pointing out is, In DCS you cannot do with full flaps and hold the nose high kind of aerobraking. But IRL...It is shown that IT CAN.

What I had meant was keeping the nose up...you know that aerobraking. I did post the vid of Iranian air force pilots ( They are not Navy pilots so they may not follow USN SOP). You know when you land and touch with the main gear and the ability to hold the nose up aerobraking.Yes, thats why I posted the video of the IRAF doing it, you can see them holding the nose up for a while typical of of how non carrier pilots. And they seem to have full flaps on and Spoilers as well. They also seem to able to keep the nose up for a while (that aerobraking). I am not talking of using its giant stabs that also does its role in it. In DCS, F-14B, with full flaps and spoilers on. The airplane, as soon as the mains touch, the nose comes down, the breaking effect together with the spoiler is IMMENSE...its almost like the F-14 can do the shortest landing. Yes, I do have the stick full aft and make the Stabs/elevators do its role in the aerobraking till the plane comes to a halt almost. Also, F-14 is not supposed to take of in full burner, I believe its part of the manual rules on safety concern. But...still I see vids of F-14 clearly taking off from carrier using full burner. Vids shows F-14 taking off in FULL BURNER.

I am not talking of the CORRECT landing procedure... My question was, can it aerobrake or not? and if the landing FM needs a bit more tweaking. You don't need to bring in the obvious hate coz its an Iranian pilot doing it...But it does not change the OBVIOUS FACT that he is able to do it. Even Finnish pilots aerobrake on their hornets. But whatever SOP procedure says on the hornet is that its not recommended for aerobraking...still, the land based pilots do it. There are even US Navy pilots disregarding procedure on F-14, TAKING OFF in MAX burner. There pics and vids of it too.

Is it possible to aerobrake land the F-14? I've seen Iranian F-14 landing with aerobraking with nose up, and with full flaps plus spoilers deployed. As it is now, it is almost impossible to do aerobraking on land bases with an F-14. Does the FM need more tweaking on this? See the aerobraking on link below and skip to 3:10.

Its very easy to aerobrake on the Hornet with HALF flaps and keep the nose up. But with full flaps, its almost impossible. But, I see in airshows that they do aerobrake the landing with full flaps, especially those Finnish and Canadian pilots doing it in some airshows. Skip to 4:35

They are TRYING to work on Mig 29A. Its not confirmed, yet... Brain melting would be the something like the Early Su-30 version...or even the Su-27 Full fidelity. But since they hinted for a FF Mig 29A then...we cant be choosy LOL... I dont think we'll be seeing MODERN flankers like the Su-35 or even the current Su-30 versions for a LOOOOONG TIME.

True. I was only implying the T-45 can have fun both ways, carrier landing and maybe land based training too. Its got modern cockpit too...although not to the level of T-2. Yes, I do understand Hawk T-2 is a bit more modern and would be good to train for the planes like Eurofighter, Hornet, F-15 Strike Eagle etc... Yes, I'd like to see this (Hawk T2) module come to fruition...Voted yes.:thumbup:

The exotic missile with tiny wings look. It also had seen combat, More with the PAF and some with USAF. The plane was also used by NASA and has set many records. Got good sales than the "Hun" too. That exotic engine howl and the lovely chance to see how it lands. You can't deny the plane is exotic, shaped like a missile. The other interesting Cold war plane that comes to mind is the F-105 Thunderchief, if anyone loves ground pounding and early era SAM hunting. But no Vietnam map....

Oh, and just for clarifications...I had included the F-104S with the cannon option variant...forgot to add that in. All the options you see are cannon capable. We all like flexibility in case our old school missiles fail.

They did HINT interest in the F-104...just not the others. So you just typed in to say...nope? :noexpression: Why even reply at all? This is a wish-list section, is it not?

Regarding the Interview done by Grim Reapers with ED. They did say they don't have much plans of any COLD WAR centric jets. Still, they did note the fame of planes like F-104. But did not seem keen on F-100 or F-101 Voodoo. So, there is a CHANCE for F-104 to be at least considered by third party given its fame with setting records, favoured by NASA, seen some conflicts etc... So here, I'd be setting a short poll to see what POSSIBLE F-104 versions would we all like to see and are more interested in.

T-45 WILL have even better market and it can play BOTH ways like the land based Hawk T series's. With T-45, carrier fun is there as well. Then again, since its T2 that has more chance to be planned here, well, that is good too...

It seems to me for some reason the F-4 Phantom module has been pushed to a more later date, at around 2022 for some reason. But this plane, as we all know has seen a lot of conflicts and service with many and I do believe it is among the most AWAITED planes. Since there is a lot of delay. I was hoping if ED could possible add in some of that NAVAL F-4 Phantom as well. I'm sure it will sell well. Also we are finally going to see a somewhat modern Redforce Mig 29A. Well, its only hopeful, not confirmed one. Was hoping for the baseline super early Su-30 or 27 FF module. But at the very least, I hope they update the current 3D Ai Assets of the Su-30.

-Multi+Threathing and engine overhaul on 2021. Clarification needed on this. - ED posiblity doing a Mig-29A Fulcrum A module at DCS level. Other russian modules has not permitted (probability to modern / on service) - Is there ANY news of of current Russian 3D AI assets to be remodeled as the Su-30 looks out of place with its outdated model? Also what will happen to the FC3 Mig 29A which we already have if the clickable version is planned? - RTX has planned to DCS engine - Do you mean ray-tracing?

T-45 being a derivative of Hawk series for carrier ops. I believe there is more fun and flexibility factor for T-45 than Hawk t2. Carrier ops will be added bonus among other training missions we could do on land bases.