F1GHTS-ON

J versus S. Smokeless engines is well known, but with the outer wing slats can anyone confirm that the S had much better instantaneous and sustained turn rates? 'Cos if so then the S has to be the preferred choice for DCS. I assume the early versus late F-4E will have a similar difference? Shame, because the skins for B/N's look so much better, but with the pulse only versus pulse doppler, I'm hoping for the J/S

Using this topic to continue discussion on what we might expect from Heatblur. The following link ARC modellers forum - A6E SWIP & TRAM - takes you to a North American Modeller's Forum (google search ARC + A-6E + SWIP) that goes into some good detail about the cockpit/RWR differences in late model A-6Es. Conscious of the ED forum rules ref posting images from another site, this link FLICKR A-6E cockpit, was posted by someone to illustrate that even with the SWIP versions entering service in early 90's, some still had "old gunsight" rather than modern HUD. Whereas this image (SWIP & HUD) shows the ultimate A-6E SWIP cockpit. That last picture also shows a 1990's style MFD in B/N's cockpit which is in contrast to 1970's style gauges elsewhere. I would assume that if Heatblur were to give us that MFD, we would have access to many more option for weapons etc than a "vanilla" early 1980's A-6E. (Am I being greedy in my expectations?) I hope that this post might prompt someone with the "know" to respond with some knowledge as to what the 1990's HUD could provide for the pilot rather than us having to bomb with an A-4 style gunsight glass in DCS.......

Does the A-6E HUD have a CCIP style bomb line or (like the F-4) are we going to have to use a manual sight with rads dialed in? I assume "Jester" will be able to enter a waypoint for auto bombing (and I guess the clever bit with the real A-6 was the skill of the B/N to read the radar to accurately enter this waypoint/target/offset point?). So whilst flying down low in the fjords of the new South Atlantic Map in IMC conditions will add spice to the challenge, getting that AI B/N to do all this is where the real challenge to Heatblur lies? Having seen how well they have delivered on the Lantrin/AI Jester in recent months, it's clearly possible, but I fully understand just how long this might take to turn into reality for us so desperately wanting an A-6 now.

What does Jester mean by "Barnacle"? I am convinced it is his only comment during LGB attacks?

Having seen how often Jester opts to eject out of a perfectly serviceable aircraft on those rare(?!?) occasions that I have left my pullout from a ground straff on the sporty side, then "no", I would rather have Jester sit back and just think about what he wants for his lunch when we recover back at base (and he'll probably get that wrong anyway.

Despite USN F-4s not carrying gunpods (although as mentioned in another post the UK 's 4th branch of the military did on their -J's), any DCS short nosed F-4 is clearly going to get covered F-4C/D skins by a very sizeable number of players. So whilst not historically accurate in USN service, I would hope expect a gunpod option. (Historical accuracy...... you ALL know you're going to try and land the -E on the carrier whilst we wait for the naval phantom.)

I had same issue (but no problem with aircraft MODs). Solution was to create additional folder called "tech" inside mods folder. user/name/dcs.openbeta/mods/tech

Jester's frequency to Eject at any excuse (Slightest hit from Ground Fire, pilot pointing aircraft at the ground below 5000ft, encountering wake turbulence from a passing seagull) is acknowledged and does add another dynamic to the game. However can HB include adding a new Jester(RIO) and canopy to the REPAIR function please? Even better would be a message to state that the previous Jester has been captured and is now having his fingernails pulled out or a car battery connected to his..... by Red forces, if only to ease my dissatisfaction at his Lack of Moral Fibre....... And Jester, if you are reading this topic from your prison cell, Yes, I can land the plane perfectly well without your help! thank you

Using this thread to ask another NWS question. (Keeps NWS questions together?) If by accident you taxi a couple of feet too far forward on Stennis or Forrestal, I have found the bow area (FLY 1) too narrow to turn around in, even with what I believe to be full left/right lock. External view seems to show my F14 only showing approx 45degrees of turn. Is this right? There is no NWS HIGH option like on AV-8B, but surely the nose wheel can turn further? Thank you

And a good advert for good housekeeping. I.e.if playing in Multiplayer and other players have used the same naming conventions for their targets (T01 etc) then your case page will pick these up. The reference to good housekeeping is to take the time and delete your entries from the F10 map after you've loaded up into CASpage......encouraging others to do the same.

yes, and since posting I have seen on other threads that the meatball is set up for the F/A-18, so Heatblurs F-14 is already off to a lower profile. Someone else has pointed out that NATOPS procedure was just as you describe with a mandatory disengage at approx 1 - 1 & 1/2 miles due to no guarantees with ACLS to do that last bit. Although fast forward 10 years and the new UAVs must be using ACLS (??) to get aboard. (Mind you did I read that the UAV's hooks keep hitting the same sweet spot on the deck thus causing damage...?.)

I have experienced the same issue's as readwing describes. But got it to work on the 4YA multiplayer server today with Forrestal (flying F-14A 1/2 fuel load and 1 AIM-54). I was previously convinced that I was flying exactly on the needles, but with hindsight I was flying with backpressure on stick ( not trimmed correctly ) AND I have since tweaked my dead zone on the stick in settings. Today's success saw the ACLS lock on at approx 2 miles, at 1st attempt with absolutely no axis input from me on stick. However, aircraft subsequently flew a low ball with a 1 wire trap (barely missed ramp). Engine temp setting left at default "medium" (Caucasus map). It's possible that I was caught by bubble?

I've just got back into flying the AV-8B after 6 months +. So have relearnt how to use the JDAMs. I am lazy, and rarely use the terminal phase options (direction/angle that bomb arrives at etc) and cheat by just loading up positions from the F10 map (when the Multiplayer shows where the targets are). I ONLY drop when the numbers are > 70%. So I offer the following as an observation, When I attack targets within 5 - 10 mins of re-spawning, I am hitting 90+ % of the time. Yesterday, I had managed to remain "alive" for 90 mins +, several landings, refuels etc (plus SAM evasion) and my hit rate seemed to drop right down. I just assumed I was making errors, but reading Gunnar81's comment above, I wonder if I had INS drift? Except don't GBU-38s & 54s take their "update" from GPS rather than INS? So even if my INS was out by several meters, this should NOT effect target accuracy?? Awaiting incoming to correct my naivety..

My brain is of an age that regularly flying anything more than one module in a 3 month window completely fries it! However I am being told to get the Raven 1 campaign so as to get back into the F/A-18 that I've not flown for more than a year.......mind you as the F-14 is still my favourite the above recommendation for the zone 5 campaign is also looking like a certain buy.....

I've been playing for 2+ years. Due to space issues on my SSD I had to choose Stable or Beta - I went for Stable. My argument is that when I get to play, (a brief 30 mins or the luxury of a couple of hours!) I am guaranteed it will all work as I expect. This week's current Beta launch of 2.7 is probably the best illustration of the differences. As much as I am really excited by 2.7, I can wait a couple of weeks for the inevitable bugs to get ironed out. Just look at the 2.7 topics running on this forum today to get a flavour of some of the issues. Again, some people are clearly having no issues with 2.7, but again IMHO, I just want something I can log onto in the evening and either shoot a couple of approaches, AAR or a longer multiplayer game without the frustrations of the game crashing randomly. Finally, to illustrate just how much the choice is truly 50/50, my brother is a die hard Beta only fan! - I'm sure he could put a post on this thread to completely justify the Beta argument! If you have the space for both on your hard drive, then that is clearly best option. This 2 versions of DCS gives you the advantage of allowing your PC the chance to "try" updates like 2.7 and if your system can't handle the FPS drop that is being reported, then you still have the stable version as a backup..... Looking at the Multiplayer server pages seems to suggest an almost 50/50 mix of stable/Beta to choose from - so at end of day, really doesn't matter.

I didn't think you could get a MOD E-2 to land due to it being an SFM model not EFM? (if I've got my letters right!)

Thanks for the heads up. I've bookmarked them to watch as I am about to get back into my Harrier after an absence of several months AND RAZBAM have been busy bringing us loads of updates & changes . So the exam question is : do these videos capture the latest changes and SOPs? Historically I really struggled with the Mavericks and the TPOD and would hate to try & learn some really complex series of switchology from online videos only to discover that they've changed again...

Pretty sure when I visited South Georgia in a Castle Class in the mid 1980's the weather was NEVER that nice - perhaps waiting for ED's new cloud MOD, complete with force 10 winds just to add that realistic touch? Of course with no airfields, apart from bombing old abandoned whaling stations, not sure what value adding South Georgia brings to DCS?

I have the DLC switch mapped with the Flare dispenser (which is correct?) however, once I've used DLC once (works with gear/flaps down) after re launching, I can't get the flare dispenser to now work. What am I doing wrong?

If it's the Kinetic produced version, then my money's on Madmaxter

Sadly no - broken flaps join the long list of un repairable items in DCS - great shame when you have pulled off the most amazing aircraft save in Multiplayer, flown hundreds of miles to recover and only had the Ground Crew wash the bugs off the windscreen and touch up some of the paint. The list I've so far identified: If emergency Gear (& hook) used - cannot be reset (includes NWS) - Jester decides to eject - no new Jester or canopy on repair Engine FIre - flames seem to remain "glowing" after repair Flaps

Thank you to all the above answers. I had a play today in instant mission (using the F/A-18 JTAC/AGM-65 training mission). By setting up the target as a waypoint, and using the HSD (Horizontal Situation Display Indicator) to give me steers and distance to run, I ran a series of runs @ 500KIAS (Full Burner!) at ground level. (Having set the bombing mode to Computer Target Mode and placed (designated) the HUD marker on the general target area from altitude/distance earlier). After some trial & error, (you need to make a guess at which moment to pitch up) I found: GBU-16 (1000lb) needed to be inside 5 miles at moment of pitch up GBU - 12 (500lb) 6-8 miles GBU 24 - just inside 10. I could "loft" at a shallower angle (20 degrees) and I found the -12 & -24 guided like a missile because (like @Skarp pointed out) I panicked and asked the JTAC to Laser On almost straight away. Summary: probably useful in airfield attach in Caucasus or Iran (Gulf Map) where you could toss the "good news" over a mountain inside 10 miles and either remain or quickly get back behind terrain. Otherwise dropping from upper Block 2 or Block 3 (20-30,000ft) from distance is the answer. Computer Target Mode with a JFAC under the cloud layer is the other method that this is probably worth practicing for. @Skysurfer Your info on the GBU-24 has captured my interest - maybe with this weapon being available to ED's favourite child (F/A-18) we might see some work on this.......

It is so long since I did Maths at School, but assuming a 45 degree pitch up (= max range for throw?) and same speed, which of the 4 LGBs available to F-14 goes further? Is it a question of momentum or air resistance? GBU-12 is only a 500lb weapon (slim design) GBU-16 is 1000lb weapon GBU -10 is 2000lb but looks "fat" but great for delivering serious "hurt" on target. GBU-24 2000lb, but relatively slim. Of all the DCS aircraft that can toss in an LGB, the sheer speed available to the F-14 down low makes this an obvious candidate for trying this attack method against heavily defended targets. (4YA multiplayer server uses Predator UAVs over Red airfields with laser designation - an ideal scenario to practice with). Thank you all you budding Math genius's for your answers !

I think (? - someone correct me if I am wrong) that in a situation where you have jammed the flaps, it is another item (like nose gear steering & AI Jester ejecting) that cannot be fixed by the "request repair" back at base.

Alexsandr - I think we all share your excitement and enthusiasm for this aircraft and are eagerly looking forward to it's release. I suspect you probably have loads more questions, most of the answers are in the 9 pages of this thread and others will be answered when the release comes out. So I am guessing the answer to your exact question is "yes" - the real winner for us all will be whether ED will share some of their structures so as to allow things like radios etc to integrate really well rather than the developer of the T-45 having to always chaise & modify their aircraft to play catch up every time ED updates it's software.