LanceCriminal86

There was an upload mixup, hopefully we get a hotfix soon-ish. Ultimately there should end up just being the one version of '114'. As to Iceman, I'd really like to get back to some historical stuff but I'm trying to work something to at least get a version of Iceman's jet. I went with the TOPGUN school portion for Maverick so I'd like for his to be the same period as well, but it's not as high of a priority versus getting VF-11 counterparts from 1991 and getting some more gaps filled in as we wait for the early model and some general external updates.

I'd say there's a decent chance. VX-4 and PMTC are definitely on the list, @_YaeSakura_has mastery of the old Hi-Vis schemes and I know he wants to have all the initial squadrons represented as well as redoing his prototype and test jet skins. I won't let him not do the PMTC jets because I have a helmet that probably rode along in these cats. I can't remember the order of "possession" but some of those Ferris painted jets went through VX-4, PMTC, VF-1 and VF-2.

ALQ-126 was first added to F-14 161168 which hit its first squadron in April 1984, and continued to be added to all later blocks including the last ones built or rebuilt through '86-'87 [Block 60/65 jets were rebuilt to -135 during this time including the DECM]. And the A+ were equipped as well with them in '87-'88 or so when those started hitting squadrons. Not necessarily 90s tech. The ALR-67 on the other hand didn't get added to most As until the 00s, most of those being later block jets that had the ALQ-126 and LANTIRN. The one exception I have found so far in terms of old jets that didn't have ALQ-126 originally but got it later {excluding the 60/65 to 135 rebuilds} was 159824, VF-211's CAG jet around 200-2002 timeframe. It went to VF-101 from VF-202 and 201 around 19916, without the upgrades, and was photographed at Pt Mugu in 1998 with ALQ-126 (and later LANTIRN). Why it got the upgrades and no other older jets, I have no idea other than what was suggested being low hours. But that jet was one of the second batches, a -75 jet from VF-14 in '74. Maybe it was to test feasibility, maybe to try and get more LANTIRN/updated jets for RAG use, I just don't know and no solid answers from the Tomcat Assn folks either. Would have to track down the Grumman St. Augustine folks or some Oceana guys from '96 or so, maybe they can remember.

I had tried it at one point without success, was trying to make it be a Sparrow in a Hawk meatsuit but couldn't figure the lua side to have it use the Sparrow guidance, or even to make it use the existing Hawk's missile performance data. I think most data on the Hawk is based on surface launches so curious to see if it actually changes when fired from the air, or if it just flies like a Sparrow?

I recall that story, I think it was a DS or Southern Watch TARPS run and the TARPS jet just straight walked away from their "escort" Tomcat. I think they stated they had always wondered why and it turned out it had the compressor section from the F-111 variant or something along those lines. All ties into what Victory205 and others reiterated during the great FM chart wars, is that every jet was different in some way. While they would fly about the same some airframes, engines, etc. performed slightly different. I'd love to see some of that modeled, have % baked in to available thrust, turn rates, fuel economy, likelihood of system failures.

I've had those in works/planned for a while if/when we get Saratoga.

I suppose it's worth asking as well: What gamma setting are folks using? A while back Cobra stated that they calibrate at a Gamma setting of 2.2 for DCS. Gamma, brightness/contrast settings on your monitor could be making it tougher to see as well. I haven't seen Victory205 in a bit but perhaps this would be something to check with him as well in terms of the HUD and windscreen tinting.

I experienced it but didn't have to restart the whole of DCS. Crashed the jet, and either did the shift-tab for a new jet or hit re-fly and as mentioned the right engine wouldn't start after moving the throttle up. Exited the mission back to mission editor, and hitting fly again worked.

Again, you're not reading what I wrote: The Forrestal had fresh painted decks in February before she left on the 1988 cruise in late April. Within 2 months, her decks looked about like they currently do in DCS. Hell, the fresh deck photo was February, so it's entirely possible that by the time they were done with pre-cruise workups if those were done Feb-April, then the decks already looked worn and grimy by the time she left. If you REALLY feel like you only want the ship to look like it just left port then cool, go grab one of the texture mods. At this point to me the textures themselves are spot on for a carrier that's actually on cruise, at least from the era that the Forrestal operated in. Also, cherry picking random photos with fresh decks isn't a convincing argument at all. I went through and showed photos across a cruise roughly from start to finish. The one YOU posted was from FLEET WEEK where they pretty the ships up (and those weren't even her usual squadrons aboard), and the second you didn't provide a date or cruise. Y'all keep "feeling" one way, but the evidence appears to say something else. And that something else may be that the paint wasn't relied on as heavily as YOU think, or the reality is that lighting in DCS falls short and makes the ship seem darker than her decks actually should appear under daylight. Remember that even if the pilots on the 1988 cruise were on their first cruise with the squadron, they were still carrier qual'd aviators and had done traps in workups, and of course all the flightops as the decks got dirtier and dirtier. It would seem clear to me that by then, and moreso for the experienced pilots, the deck lines were not critical. Following their gauges, timing, and the FLOLS it would seem were more important. EDIT: This sounds EXACTLY like the cockpit texture debate all over again

And despite clear photos of carriers, on and returning from cruise with the decks in exactly the shape presented, I guess they are so cavalier. The issues instead may be the DCS lighting engine which sucks in terms of indirect and diffused lighting, LODs, and other factors that simply can't be easily remedied between reality and a sim. Human eyeballs can't 'zoom in', we can focus our eyes and your eyesight will determine how clear and sharp the object appears. But Legolas eyes zooming in and out, not so much. Discussing Forrestal's '88 cruise again, she left port late April '88. From the cruise book, she went through Suez twice, once in May, then returned 3 months later in August below. Looking at the cruise book, she spent February '88 in New Orleans with a clearly fresh deck. https://www.navysite.de/cruisebooks/cv59-88/048.htm Underway replenishment during 16 July of 88, before the below in the Suez canal, so that's just under 2 months at sea and I believe a month after their initial transit into the Arabian Sea: https://nara.getarchive.net/media/a-bow-view-of-the-aircraft-carrier-uss-forrestal-cv-59-refueling-from-the-replenishment-b846ca?zoom=true Here again is part of the Forrestal's '88 cruise, while return transiting the Suez [6/8/88] to the Med. This was still before they were on the intensive North Atlantic exercise TEAM WORK '88. Crew were spelling out 108 on the bow for 108 days at sea. https://nara.getarchive.net/media/an-aerial-port-beam-view-of-the-aircraft-carrier-uss-forrestal-cv-59-transiting-accee4?zoom=true This is part of the landing area during Team Work '88 during September https://nara.getarchive.net/media/helicopter-combat-support-squadron-6-hc-6-ch-46-sea-knight-helicopters-pick-1880e4 TGIF photo was October '88, on the way home to Mayport: https://nara.getarchive.net/media/a-port-beam-view-of-the-aircraft-carrier-uss-forrestal-cv-59-with-a-formation-9701ba?zoom=true I think it shows pretty clearly that within a month or two of the cruise you're going to see heavy wear and obscuring of deck markings. Yes, decks are hosed down/scrubbed but it seems quite clear to me that IRL, you should not expect clear deck markings for lineup. Now, if they are completely unreadable in DCS again I'd point to trying to simulate how our eyes see, and how things are lit. Looking at it in model viewer I'd point my finger at the lighting engine.

Let's not get too carried away here, @Shmoo42 @VFlipand @_YaeSakura_ do all the lifting around these parts! While there was also a more screen-style jet made I've gotten a lot of references from some of the other talented skinners around, so at the least I'd like to say that a screen-style Maverick and Goose "114" skin is coming. It wasn't purposely not included or anything, there were just a lot of moving parts and it was a very short timeframe, plus lots of people in different countries all trying to make some stuff happen. And yes, I am eyeing an Iceman/Slider jet as well. A "final battle" pair or trio will have to be a while because there are some historic skins that I would really like to get ready for next patch if I can, and there's also some VF-114 and VF-213 photos that caught my eye as well from 1990. That, and I've got some reserve skins of VF-201 and VF-202 that I need to just stop sitting on and get pushed out.

I think I like hearing more about why things work the way they do and from actual F-4C/D/E pilots about the differences of how the hard wing and slatted jets flew than pointing at performance charts.

This was the only close photo I had found of the tails: This is the one I just got the scale wrong from, then realized the tail logo we whipped up needed to be altered because the bottom banner was not patch style but just had a straight "ribbon" shape unlike the VFA-25: I've been trying to go through the film and behind the scenes shots, there's just not great references. I'm just working/finishing this because I started it, not trying to steal any thunder especially if someone's been working on one for a long time. If anything it was a fun exercise to see how quickly I could do it and the weathering but a "default" style weathering was also requested and ultimately used instead. I'm using the process to fine-tune doing roughmets that match the corrosion control paint but the reference material is frustrating. One 114 jet seemed to have the style of tactical paint like I did while another shows that but also with a faded standard TPS nose under it. I think you captured that somewhat in your version. I haven't even started trying to get the nose MODEX sorted out, they were painted over and one set looks like no font I can seem to find. I would also like to do a final scene version with Merlin in back. Really we need to get some VF-51, 111, 114, and 213 line birds done, I think some of the other longstanding "passion project" skins are starting to be more finalized. If the early jet and other features are in the pipe soon maybe something can be done up to go with it. We'll have to go back and re-do stuff though as some of our "duct tape" early style jet mods might be negated as the features are modeled in.

It's all part of the plan. There's fixes and stuff slowly trickling in on the external model and with those plus the additions and potential early external model, a lot will need to be re-worked. Not to mention the entire mountain of existing pilots and helmets, retrofitting the corrections to those skins, and then trying to also keep adding new stuff. Research is also a big part of it, and quite a bear. Trying to get whole squadrons from a single cruise with crew names is damn near impossible, usually lucky to get a good handful. Even with cruise books there's no guarantee you will find photos of canopy rails and gear doors, plus some squadrons did callsigns while others didn't. Some cruises they never even showed names. Sometimes they were one one side only and the only photo you have is from the other. I like when we can do times that match historical events but sometimes it's dictated by how much reference material there is. Helmets is another tough part, while F-14 squadrons enjoy a lot more coverage there, I've had a lot of instances where we had no closeups at all and had to go with best guesses. Especially during transitional years. The goal is definitely to get every squadron represented with some different eras, but there's also the concern about hard drive space as *good* liveries with custom roughmets and pilots and all easily are 300+ MB zipped. And there's the issue of waiting for the right helmet models and externals for later squadrons versus releasing now and having to go back around and fix them later.

Not to mention sailing right over the "done in 3 days and weren't originally told it would be released anywhere" comment but hey. I was already working fixes after the deadline because my original reference pic made the logo seem huge but was from far away, not to mention I also had an unseen version that actually was made to match the film jet, but it's always a wonderful wet blanket to stop in the forums sometimes so thanks for that. I was working on some neat 1991 VF-11 skins and paused all that to try and help out, plus reworking the 1988 ones after losing a whole PSD during a crash. And even many modeling guides don't exactly match the singular photo I found that shows the tail up close, not to mention the tail logo was simplified from the fancier versions of the bird out there and the positioning inside the circle. Then there's trying to work out the size and position of the logo with almost no reference points visible and the shot being from a low and not side-on angle of the tail, so can't exactly make out the tail reinforcements or how close to the front edges it is. There are surprisingly few shots of the actual tails from Maverick's jet, and add the fact they had to use multiple jets so each could be different and different jets are in each shot even within a single scene. Sometimes it's one of the Iceman jets, sometimes it's the one with the big VF-213 logo on it. Good luck finding a solid reference shot of Maverick's tail. And to add to that, one of the "VF-1" jets the bird is the same on both sides, one it's always facing forwards. Tons of shots are either in the forced night/evening lighting during the intro or the tails are completely cut out of the frame. In the process of making them and watching the movie about 5 times back to back, I also noticed when Iceman's engine is "hit" the bullet holes are by the rescue arrow, which is on the nose/forward fuselage. And then the smoke as they're shutting it down, is actually the gun so it looks like they used footage of a live gun shoot. I don't know if I should post it yet but there is a version of 114 as close to the movie's patchy corrosion control, funky anti-skid panels, missing MODEX, and all that jazz. I added a VF-1 on the ventral strakes but at this point I don't know if the jets even had that, if they had the original VF-111/51, or blank strakes.

Already fixed internally, did not know this was getting released so you gave me a bit of a surprise when you posted the screenshot. I've been paranoid for about 2-3 days now. I will see if the fixed LOD DDS file can be posted or shared somehow until the next patch.

The sudden inclusion of the Top Gun skins was as much a surprise to the people that made them. It hadn't been supplied anywhere else and suddenly I see a screenshot in the livery thread thinking someone either had made the exact same jet, or somehow had mine. They were a combined effort though of 5 or 6 folks, with one knocking out Maverick and Goose's helmets in about 2 days time, 2 of us doing the actual jets, and others helping with the art vectors to use for tails and patches etc. And there may even be more to come. Squadrons will keep coming, the F-14 externals are going to be getting some love, fixes, and additions it looks like so the other squadrons should start flowing. The skins that had been added so far were all passion projects rather than just churning out something for each squadron real fast. We're also hoping for a better solution to handle and distribute skins officially that servers and players can use, because it's not looking sustainable to do 4x skins per squadron/timeframe just based on drive space.

*cough*

I've seen a lot of y'alls work on the Tomcat Assn FB group, glad to see you here! I'd love to get down and see both the Deland and Valiant Tomcats some day, got a friend out that way so what better excuse? I need to crawl around them and get some panel and reference photos as I've got some thoughts to check out on the engine nacelle differences between the A and B vs the D that was also scanned in making the DCS module. Technically I have 5 Tomcats in 3-5 hour driving distance but you guys seem to work really hard on that one and I'd love to see her. One thing on the engine nacelles, I've seen these little "trap door" looking ports or access holes. Look to be only on the left side of the engine, but some pics it looks like there's 2, sometimes just 1.

External features of the F-14A really had 3 main groups. The first being the prototype and initial production jets with different beaver tails and 7 gun vents, then the main production lots from around 75/80 GR onwards, and then after the end of 110-GR where the upgrades to the jammers were introduced through the final 140-GR jets around 86/87. There were some minor changes within those times but the big splits were from the initial production batches to the ultimate "Standard" and then the late blocks that adopted close to what was in the F-14A+ minus the actual ALR-67 RWR (but apparently set up to be able to receive it, which they did late 90s-early 00s). 90 or 95-GR introduced the probe on the tip of the radome but that's less noticeable than the ALQ-126 humps and new beaver tail, or the 7-hole gun vents.

They change to gray on firing. The solution there is that the 54A needed to become a separate missile model in the core sim which is what should be happening here.

As Cobra's least favorite rivet counter I totally get it, that's where I'm hoping they can eventually get the deets for using the LUA ordnance switch framework that ED has. It's doubtful that we'd get 20 different iterations but an alternate white C shouldn't be too bad a stretch, but would probably come down the road. Right now I think we're ramping up towards some of the big visual updates and additions with the external fixes and tweaks that are coming this next patch. Those lay the groundwork to add the missing bits on the B and late A, make some fixes, and start working towards the "early" features.

I wouldn't rule it out in the future, right now separating out the AIM-54A is the short term solution. Eventually they may be able to leverage EDs own ordnance skin flags like bombs can for the AF/Navy with ablative. And remember too there were some mixmaster missile photos, part gray and part white. I tried but couldn't see any AIM-54A in gray, I'm guessing that they didn't repaint them and just expended them for live fire shoots.

Tyndall AFB should be TD, which operates or operated QF-4s. Since the pic is 1997 I'd assume they did "heritage" liveries of the different F-4 schemes, with the one you pointed out in Euro One. And since I've been focused on Texas Tomcats I'll probably end up doing that one.