Callsign JoNay
-
Posts
733 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Callsign JoNay
-
-
20 hours ago, captain_dalan said:
I'd take the over the nose view rather then the VID view any days of the week. If you fly by the slip indicator rather then the yaw string, you'll be flying catchup the entire time, except in straight line flight.
Meh. I don't coordinate turns based off the needle or string, I learned to coordinate (as best I can) through muscle memory. I only use the needle to trim out slip from an asymmetrical load, and the needle is responsive enough for that. Your custom view is nice, but we still have to remove the HUD camera to see the string, which I'm not a fan of. The default head position still works best for me. I can see ahead of me, and no part of the analog gauges or displays are hidden from my LOS.
As to the OP's post, I would also welcome some increased range of motion in the mirrors. Not that I'm using them to look for bandits at my 6, but the current range of motion is so limited that the feature is basically just novelty at this point.
-
1 hour ago, cheezit said:
Sorry to dredge an old topic, but did all these episodes disappear from YouTube? I can't find anything at the moment.
Yep. I heard they will be transferred and re-uploaded to a new channel, The Fighter Pilot Podcast IIRC. Not sure when though.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Despayre said:
You can tell there's just about zero weapons onboard. So even assuming all the tanks are full, I think we can safely assume we're thousands of lbs under max trap in that demo.
I think you need to check your math. A Tomcat with full tanks is several thousands of pounds over max trap weight even without bringing back any stores.
Edit/Add: Yes the Tomcat could carry six Phoenix, but it can't trap with them. Max takeoff weight and max trap weight are not the same thing.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Hiob said:
Hmm, I don't see any advantages in the current default and no disadvantage in raising the head
If you raised the head 10-15cm the canopy bow would be directly in your line of sight. You wouldn't be able to see forward. I'd rather be able to see forward than over the nose. Also you wouldn't be able to see the heading tape/bug in the VDI. The only downside of the higher POV is you can't see the yaw string, but we have the slip indicator anyway. Default view also gives acceptable visibility over the nose for CVN recoveries.
-
Here's a video of a recent mission from our current Anvil Strike campaign:
Thirty players in F-14B, F-16C, F/A-18, AV-8B, A-10C II, AH-64D, F-15C, all coordinated by controllers on LotATC.
Join us at https://discord.gg/51stvfw
-
1 hour ago, eatthis said:
iv seen 30 miles mentioned but take that with a big pinch of salt as im not 100%
Should be 29 nm for most fighters.
23 nm for some blessed fighters, and most of the attackers.
12 nm for strategic bombers.
-
2
-
-
4 hours ago, coopercobra03 said:
Okay thanks for all your replies, I always put my ext lights on before I start moving, I didn't realize it's actually looking for the pressing of the binding press then the actual lighting state.
Watch some real life night ops youtube videos. They don't turn on lights until they are ready for the cat shot. And turning off the lights is the first thing they do when they trap, even before raising the hook and clearing the LA.
-
2
-
-
-
I flare my Tomcat sometimes. It's no big deal and not difficult to control in the rollout with that little extra bit of speed. You don't even need anti skid because it aerobrakes so well with the spoilers, flaps, and stabs deflected.
-
0.4s in a 60 frame/sec video should result in 24 frames where the RIO visibly ejected before the driver. In a 30 FPS video, it should be about 12 frames. I played the clip back in Sony Vegas. Sony Vegas uses a 30 frame per second counter, located in the bottom left of the attached images.
The first frame where the RIO's head goes missing from the cockpit is at 3 seconds and frame 13.
The first frame where the driver's head goes missing from the cockpit is at 3 seconds and frame 15.
So there's only a two frame delay between the RIO and driver's ejection sequence when it should be more like twelve frames if 0.4 seconds is desired.
-
1
-
-
On 4/29/2023 at 11:31 AM, Ddg1500 said:
Hello, recently I’ve been try to pick up both f14 variant’s case 1, I found the E bracket on the tomcat really hard to catch, I did trim the aircraft with careful throttle input.
In most cases the e bracket is too high to catch due to high speed, and by the time when E bracket is reachable, the aircraft would have nearly stalled, let alone for the banking before the final approach.
There is another problem at this state, the f14A’s engine would be highly susceptible to compressor stall and would stall every time when the e bracket is catchable making landing very, very difficult.
I would say it would be easier if I don’t try to catch the e bracket to land the aircraft.
Is there a solution to this problem?
Is there a bug to report here, or are you just commenting on how challenging it is to trim the Tomcat? Practice, get gud, etc.
Also, are you making sure to be under max trap weight, 54,000 lbs?
-
8 hours ago, The_Tau said:
Thats why I use that mod to map RIO controls, like HCU, NEXT LAUNCH, MLC, CAP NUMPAD for target data, CAP TRG DATA page and that one CAP button for DO NOT ATTACK. So I have control over all of those from front seat. And its awesome.
I'll have to check this out. What about when you have a human RIO? Does this mod override their controls like the HCU for example? Or does their presence in the backseat block these controls from functioning?
-
41 minutes ago, fat creason said:
Should have a fix for this in the next OB...
Thanks. Although it will almost surely nerf performance, it will be nice to finally need to factor pallets into the max trap weight.
-
8 hours ago, Chriz6662 said:
spotting airplanes is better, but rockets are so big and better to spot and track. When used in Multiplayer I see it as cheating, because i can see all rockets easily as a big dot.
I wouldn't call it cheating, because you are getting the same spotting ability that 1080 users and many VR users have had for years.
-
2
-
-
6 hours ago, bonesvf103 said:
Well, back to square one. I flew a mission and again no pipper. I checked everything including the G meter which was only pegged at +2 and -1 G.
I'll try again and post video.
v6,
boNes
Were you in manual delivery mode? You have to be in CMPTR PLT or TGT, I believe.
-
This is a formal bug report to let the team know that the phoenix pallets are not influencing aircraft performance. It is not just a bug of the weapon loadout screen in the mission editor, which seems to be the understanding of the HeatBlur team.
Two months ago a user on Reddit asked a question about the weight of the phoenix pallets, and whether or not the current flight model was accounting for them or not. @Cobra847 replied to the redditor and claimed that the Phoenix pallets have always been accounted for in the flight model, and that if there is something causing them to not influence the model it should be reported as bug. Cobra's reply garnered 67 up votes. I replied to Cobra stating that the users of the HB F-14 proved in 2021 that the Phoenix pallets were definitely not affecting the F-14 flight model performance, and I referenced the topic and pages where the data was provided. My reply garnered 10 down votes, go figure.
Here is a screen capture to the reddit conversation:
And here is a link to the old Performance/FM Discussion topic that I referenced in my reply to Cobra:
In pages 19-21 of the discussion topic we provided data to the team to prove that the FM was not correctly modelling the weight of the Phoenix pallets. Even Victory205 was involved in the discussion, and advised us how to properly test it. This was reported to the team in 2021, and nothing ever came from it.
At the time of this Reddit discussion I knew that there were more flight model updates on the horizon, scheduled for the beginning of 2023 as per Iron Mike, so I refrained from testing until after the most recent update just in case the Phoenix pallet weight issue would be solved by Fat Creason's newest update. Today I tested again, (in MT on the latest OB), and I can confirm that the Phoenix pallets are still not affecting the F-14B's in-game performance.
How I tested:
I tested three aircraft. The first aircraft is a clean F-14B, loaded with 10,000 lbs internal fuel (set to unlimited fuel in the settings so that the weight stayed consistent), no pallets or stores. The second aircraft was the same except it had four Phoenix pallets equipped. The weight of the pallets including the fairings, should total approximately 2,200 lbs of weight, according to public sources. The third aircraft was the same as the first except it was equipped with four AIM-7P in the tunnel instead of the pallets. Each Sparrow is approximately 500 lbs, so they should be a very close approximation of the weight/drag that should be created by equipping Phoenix pallets in the tunnel.
I tested all three aircraft at 800 feet, same weather conditions, same heading, gear, flaps, and hook down, DLC engaged in neutral position, trimmed until on-speed according to the AOA indexer and HUD staple. Then I paused the game to reference the IAS according to the F2 view.
Aircraft #1, clean loadout, trimmed on speed: 137 IAS:
Aircraft #2, 4x Phoenix pallets, trimmed on speed: 137 IAS:
Aircraft #3, 4x Sparrow in the tunnel, trimmed on-speed: 143 IAS:
Attached here is the miz file I used in case you want to test yourself.
-
9
-
-
I think they made this video in the patch/version that had the wing rock on steroids.
-
26 minutes ago, Delta302 said:
Why would you want to make sure the IC picks it up unless/until you guys have a solution?
Because if there's a way to modify the dots to what the OP has done, then there is a way to modify them even bigger and bolder which can be exploited. ED is right to lock it down in the IC, and hopefully they are implementing a new version of the contact dot similar to the OP's mod.
-
7
-
1
-
-
48 minutes ago, Harlikwin said:
Also as for IC, I think it would be nice if server owners could basically set the dot size to suit their player base in terms of what their community thinks spotting should be.
Well I think the "dot size" can only be one thing. It's already the smallest size it can be on 720/1080p, which is probably too large, but for the sake of consistency it's the only starting point we have, so you have to make an attempt to scale it up to a similar angular size for 2k and 4k so everyone is having a standardized experience.
What might be nice for server owners to be able to control is the ranges at which the dot becomes transparent/opaque.
-
1 hour ago, ClydeBigBird said:
I still think 18 miles is way too short of a distance for aircraft to become completely invisible however, as it's not realistic (doesn't match up with what fighter pilots report),
Really? We had a Viper pilot in my wing who told me that 2-10 miles is usually the max range for spotting another Viper, depending on aspect, lighting, etc. 18 miles is "way too short"? I mean, AMRAAMs are usually deployed between 10-30 nm, and they are BVR missiles. Can you share your sources?
1 hour ago, ClydeBigBird said:Another thing I want to add is that I hope ED realizes how it negatively affects the perception of their game when everyone streaming MP on Twitch is running the game at 1080p or lower. You guys have a beautiful game, let people actually enjoy it without being at a massive disadvantage!
Yes, this 100%. And don't forget everyone turning off their anti aliasing too.
-
2
-
-
39 minutes ago, pastranario3 said:
Not true, see my post above.
DISTANCE DETECT
4K 60KM
2D 1920X1080 60KM
2D 1366X768 16KM
VR (2228X2180 for eye) 16kmNone of your pictures say 2160. They all say 1080.
-
1 hour ago, Gryzor said:
Can we have other versions of your mod with other sizes to test please? (in VR I don´t notice many differences...)
VR already has godlike spotting. Some users can spot farther than their radar can see. Meanwhile pancake users in 2k and 4k are blind as bats.
-
2
-
-
4 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:
We do not agree it is broken,
I'm speechless.
-
17
-
-
I've never once touched this switch. What does it do?
-
3
-
Small(!) Problem with default seating position and mirror adjustment range
in Bugs and Problems
Posted
I dunno, I just do. You don't have time to think up there. If you think, you're dead.