fat creason

Looks within reason to me. Read this post (or the entire thread) if you want more info, no need for this topic to be discussed again. https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4405788&postcount=52 Also I'd take those tacview calculations with a grain of salt, those are calculated by tacview and do not come from the DCS equations of motion.

You can, but there are associated consequences. It will just be a keybind for now, we may add clickable CBs at some point but don't hold your breath on that (this CB is in a hard to reach place that you can't really see). I'd take some of those Snort stories with a grain of salt. Okie (2nd most flight hours in the Tomcat behind Snort) tells us that no one really pulled that CB. Never let the truth get in the way of a good story!

It vents some air from the compressor section into the bypass duct to increase stall margin during certain flight conditions. It’s an attempt to address the stability issues of the TF30 that unfortunately results in about 20% less core thrust. Many of the situations when it’s active are also situations when you need thrust the most.

We will start sending Ironmike to anyone's address who over Gs the jet....we know where you live. :)

Are you in MP when this crash happens? These external effects happen regardless of what view you're in and are supposed to be synced over the network so other players can see them too, but they don't always work in my experience. Really hard to tell what the cause of the issue is.

I've been doing a lot of testing with compressor stalls and have still not encountered this crash. Looked at the log that was posted here and didn't see anything obvious. It's definitely caused by something in the new external compressor stall sounds and visual effects but I can't get this crash to happen on my machine.

I run an OCed 6700k @ 4.8 GHz and a Strix 1080 with 32GB of 3200MHz RAM. It works okay in VR (Rift S), but probably going to do a full rebuild soon with a 3080 or whatever AMD comes out with.

Upgrade your CPU and RAM (and therefore probably motherboard) if anything. Keep the 1060 unless you want to fly in VR.

Are you looking at total CPU usage or single core?

Unfortunately, the age and speed of your CPU means that the Tomcat is really stressing your CPU even with the radar off. The radar uses very CPU intensive processes that are likely pushing your CPU beyond 100% of its computing power. This issue is compounded by fairly slow DDR3 RAM @ 800Mhz. Running the Tomcat graphically is like running two highly detailed cockpits at the same time, meaning lots of VRAM needed. I'd recommend at least 4GB but really 8GB of VRAM on your GPU.

Never experienced this in testing, but I found an error in the code that could possibly cause this. That fix will be in the next update.

Really hard to say without more info. You're probably pulling neg G or have some other type of fuel supply issue to the engine.

There's not really enough information here to know exactly what's going on, but you need to maintain about 450 KIAS to affect a windmill start. Sounds like it could have been a fuel supply issue, that is really the only reason an F110 would just flame out.

Not sure, maybe not a full trailer but perhaps a short video or something. Not my call to make though. Someone’s gotta remake the Sidra and Top Gun intro videos with the proper Tomcat model :)

That’s our goal, the nozzles are the last remaining major item. I’m not an art guy but sounds like it’s a pain to do the animations for them but they should be compete in the next couple days and then we will send the A out to testers.

Yeah, I'd classify that as a bug. Windmilling speed references aircraft airspeed but doesn't take direction into account.

The issue is that you're trying to frame the A we are giving you (and advertised) as "A-ish", not an "actual A model", and a "B with TF30s". Lack of glove vanes makes it none of those things. The A you are getting is what you would find in the fleet throughout nearly all the Tomcat's service life, in addition to an Iranian version. We never advertised glove vanes so expecting them now and saying our product is a fraud is frankly BS. I realize all these extra items have not been released yet (a few are coming very soon), but saying that we are misleading customers is just not true. If you don't want to appreciate the value you're getting from this module when compared to other $80 modules, that's your prerogative. The F-16 costs $80 and you're not getting an F-16A or any other F-16C blocks besides block 50, despite ED not even mentioning which block version you're getting on the Viper store page! Also keep in mind that currently $80 only gets you a fraction of the features mentioned on said store page. Even just creating and testing an additional engine type for the F-14A has not been not a trivial task. How many other $80 modules are doing things like that? You're also very welcome to complain all day about a lack of glove vanes. Maybe we'll add them cosmetically later but that's not my choice to make. Saying that we are not delivering an "actual A model" (and therefore implying the F-14 is a fraudulent product) is patently false and where I have to take issue.

The primary point is that lack of functioning glove vanes does not make it "A-ish", in fact, I'd argue the opposite. If you look at what you get for $80 and compare it to what you get from other $80 modules, it is effectively a free addon.

Well, there are currently several $70-80 modules on the store that are just a single flyable aircraft (with lots of missing features I might add). For the same price you're getting A LOT more.

We alternatively could've just released the F-14B and called it quits. How many other modules give you an extra (two) flyables, two campaigns, more than 50 missions, an AI aircraft, AND a carrier? We've always stated that working glove vanes would not be implemented. A vast majority of models with glove vanes had the glove vanes welded closed and they never worked, even leaving the factory. We're giving you an Iranian A and the definitive late 80s A model, is that not enough extra free stuff?

Be nice guys. No developers can make a complete module without at least a couple (educated) guesses. A lot of details needed to make good modules are not in manuals.

I'll take a look at this in the debugger, you may be onto something with how the pitch trim is implemented in relation to a spring stick. I think it currently acts as a stab pos offset that may wash out the stick when trim is at the extreme ends of its travel.

Neither of those are likely. We don't have and can't get the documentation needed for the F-14D. Based on the number of times we've said this, maybe it's time for a sticky or banner at the top saying that we cannot make an F-14D

Essentially this. We did not ever plan to do the DFCS for the cat since it's not the version we modeled.

Not quite sure what you mean by this? You always will need to worry about trim in the F-14. Right now the FFB stick pos corresponds directly with the physical position you see in game.