fat creason

Yeah, that's the bug. Will be fixed in the next patch.

Any time the flaps are full up, no spoilers will deploy on the ground without lateral stick movement. There's a microswitch inside the flap lever assembly. This changes with full flaps or man flaps.

I'm not the most knowledgable person about the missiles, but as I understand it, we can control things like drag and CCM values and some guidance gains, etc. More or less things that affect flight performance. There isn't a ton of documentation on how any of this is implemented in-game and ED has been changing things recently, requiring us to play catch-up. Anything related to tracking and the actual guidance logic itself (180 deg turns, "magic" INS, other weird issues) we have no control over.

Ground spoiler operation is currently correct for flaps full up/down, I think the bug is that inboards don't pop up with man flap deployments while on ground at idle.

All the asymmetric AB light is intentional, it take 3-5 seconds to fully light the TF30 AB to zone 5. AB operation starts at 80% of total travel if that helps for your throttle curves.

The flap jamming model is not like what you described at all. It's not possible to jam flaps at 200 knots, its not even possible to jam them at 235 knots, and they don't jam right as you hit any particular speed. They will also not jam at low flap angles seen during maneuver flap deployments. That's what non-boolean logic means in this case. The possibility of jamming increases the more you overspeed the flaps, as well as increasing chance the more you over-G the flaps. They don't just immediately jam when speed > 221 KIAS or G load > 2.5. A 2G turn is equivalent to a 60 deg bank to give you some perspective. The chance also increases if you try to actuate them while overspeeding or over-Ging. As the flaps deploy further, the possibly also increases (high forces/larger incidence angle to the oncoming wind). If you realize you're going too fast, slow down first before you retract them. Fixed in a certain position they can handle higher loads. Remember that the flaps on the Tomcat are very large, and at full deployment the forces they can generate grow rapidly with airspeed, even 10-20 knots more. The flaps were never intended for combat use, they should only be used in takeoff or landing type situations. It has nothing to do with air-quake.

Sorry, missed the winky face! There's another guy on another thread insisting that Snort is the sole arbiter of all Tomcat knowledge and that all of our SMEs are wrong. Arguing on the internet is a silly business.

Snort has a reputation among maintainers that is...not great. He's known for wrecking airframes just to prove a point or to stroke an ego.

Agreed 100%.

So his embellished story for an audience vs multiple pilots and maintainers all saying the opposite?

We have plenty of contacts that all disagree with these embellished stories, and he didn't pull the CB before takeoff (or likely at all). Sorry to disappoint you. Not going to discuss this further and the flap model is not going to change.

He also says that he pulled a circuit breaker that's behind the RIOs head somewhere, take these stories with a grain a salt. Flap jamming will not be changing, learn to fly without full flaps when faster than 225 knots.

Well the F-14B used to be called the F-14A+, so who is the better student now? hmmmm

Exactly how we modeled it!

If you can tell what airspeed (or G) they're at from a 3 second clip with no context, you are a very talented individual! We should hire you as a SME. You're right, in the process of working with our SMEs (who have a combined 6000 hours in the jet, but what do they know?) I guess we forgot to think about how the jet actually behaves. We won't make that mistake again. :thumbup:

Do you have a better proposal besides asking SMEs with a combined 6000 hours in the jet?

It won't always work in cases where there's too much damage or the conditions aren't right (we mentioned this is the dev update). The buttons are behind the fuel shutoff handles so you can't see them. We're working on a way to make them clickable despite not being able to see them.

Did you send said track to ED instead of complaining about it here? To reiterate for the millionth time: we have no control over behaviors like that! We dislike this behavior as much as you do.

I think the maintenance techs used old chewing gum when they were done with it. Just jammed it right in there and it held the string in place.

You must be new here :)

We intended to make flap jamming more realistic, which is what we did. You cannot go 100 knots over the rated speed with no consequences.

The MCB breaker will probably go away in the next patch. Its use was questionable in the first place.

I'm sorry that you got used to something and then it changed. We try to get everything right on the first attempt but we're all human here. Many times we will implement something because it's urgently needed (like people abusing flaps in BFM) and our SME has not had the time give his input yet. We try to minimize events like this but it happens. It's also difficult to anticipate the myriad ways people will operate this jet in ways it was never flown in real life.

It's impossible for the flaps to jam at 200 knots. 250 knots? Very possible. The rated flap speed is 225 knots. Also if you go over 2.5G at any speed, you're entering the flaps danger zone. Moving them while under load is another no-no. Keep is mind this isn't some pure boolean logic either, each time you overspeed the flaps it will be slightly different. Increase your discipline regarding when to use flaps.

This was the original intention of the first flap jamming implementation, it just didn't work as intended the first time. The flaps are very sensitive to G and airspeed according to our SME.