LanceCriminal86

No clue, but it was implied they were doing a really early Tomcat in some form that potentially could also have the ALQ-100 only, but I don't work for them. Only Cobra or IronMike can talk to how they plan to approach it. In my mind, a combination of animation arguments and in-editor flags/options would allow for the most flexibility. Then you can tie the TCS housing to a skin, and use some kind of <disable TCS> option in the mission editor if for example you wanted to use an early ALQ-100 jet or even a later jet but with the bullet fairing. I'm not sure how deep they have explored the whole animation argument thing as far as model options, I know the C-101 thing heavily uses it for things like strakes, HUDs, all kinds of configurations that you can set with animation arguments. If the TCS and ALR-45/67, beaver tail, and fuel tank pylons could all somehow be controlled in the same manner along with pilot models (particularly helmets), it would be ideal for mixing and matching eras without having to make a switch in the game options between missions for example. Select skin, select flags in mission editor, and go.

Once the missile leaves the plane, it reverts to the ED core weapon texture. To do it ED would need to add the weapons as separate models/entries with separate skins for each, and then you have to decide early vs later to have white vs gray. That's 6 different missiles/schemes to handle, and then how do you decide which is used? The skin description file doesn't affect the actual weapon when it leaves the jet, so it has to be a hard coded function, so now you need more loadouts and entries to have early and late Phoenix. Then what about Sparrows? Sidewinders? How about the Navy versions of bombs with different colored ablative coatings? It's not a small thing.

Notice how the brace from the landing gear properly inserts into the black tombstone shaped cutout here, which is technically correct. But also notice the cutout and the panel to the lower left, which are technically where that needs to be. So, either the landing gear has to come slightly back and down, OR, the whole panel line needs to shift up and to the right, where the strut/brace itself is. Here's some closeups of the left gear, same thing but from different angles showing how that cutout aligns with the corner of that panel: A whole album of the F-14A / NF-14D at Patuxent River, only seems to have one of the external D model tells, the double vents on the right side above the Navy that may have been for the OBOGS, otherwise she was an A externally but with D model guts inside (And retained TF-30s), https://www.flickr.com/photos/108510743@N05/albums/72157637643948734/with/14461898269/ Bonus pics of that area, A model that was with VF-41 OEF/OIF It looks to be a combination of the process to create and skin the model that was missed, but then again it was noticed because they moved the black cutout texture to match the model. I'm not sure if shifting the UVWs would fix it or not because then everything has to shift, and it also brings various proportions into question as well.

I've tried to explain before the bump map is not misaligned, the entire nacelle texture is or the landing gear modeling is. This thing about mixed features too though is not authentic. There are distinct patterns and reasons for the differences, not because 2 different variants were scanned. The differences should be correctly matched to the blocks, upgrades, and versions of the jet. That's what we're helping work towards, identifying features that shouldn't be present.

The HGU-55 helmets are coming at some point with an improved pilot body. The ones in your screenshot are tweaks done by Isoko to imitate the -55 on the -33 shell we currently have. There's a helmet template available somewhere in the HEatblur template folder, but it's very DIY.

Myself and a few other have spent an absurd amount of time counting rivets and trying to get these skins right, so at this point it's second nature to go find stuff. The current model has A, B, and D features due to scans of different jets being combined, but thankfully at least some of it can all be "fixed" in the textures, roughmets, and diffuse. I'm trying to get mine done but every photo I look at and work with I find other things to change, so it has taken quite a while longer than just dropping the colors into the template and rolling with it. In addition, there were changes between the blocks of As, different Bs got different upgrade packages, and some Ds were A rebuilds and retained some A features. Long story short between about 3 of us hopefully a lot of the texture work is already done for the corrections to the A, and they can be combined into new base textures and a new template at some point. This way Ensamvarg, Cobra, etc. can spend more time on other projects like Forrestal and AI A-6, and actual model changes that can't be handled with a tweak to the roughmets. So far I think the model tweaks is limited to: - Fix to UVWs on right wing - Adjust the UVWs or entire nacelle texture so the panels and main gear brace leg thingy line up with the port - Remove outside NACA on right nacelle and move it to inside of right nacelle - Remove D model "vents" that are apparently related to Onboard Oxygen Generation System (OBOGS) exclusive to the D as of 2001 [https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/navy/ntsp/f-14-a_2002.pdf] - Add RWR humps around the intakes for the ALR-45, have the no-fairing versions for the early blocks (Maybe custom anim argument and in-game flags to select which RWR). - Apparently revise the insides of the GE engine nozzles to be more similar to the Viper's - Differing TCS options: full TCS, Bullet fairing, ALQ-100 nub only (and having them tied to maybe custom animation arguments, and an in-game flag to disable TCS as needed) - Gun vents, early vs late. - Dynamic modex? The rest of the things I've been seeing can be done in textures, stuff like: - the nacelle having a different panel layout on the A vs the B, - the A model's vents that are on the outside right and inside of left nacelles, - the little nub vents that are just below the above vents, - the leading edge reinforcement of the vertical stabilizers. After THAT, it's wishlist stuff like a D model TCS for AI usage (or pretending), removable refueling probe covers, things like that. Heck, maybe even start carts or huffers like the A-4E-C team added that appear and disappear based on your radio commands. Hopefully it will be beneficial to the community. Guys that don't care about it can continue to not care, guys that do hopefully will enjoy it. And hopefully it helps push skins to get better and better. There are some great skins in the contest, and I think they'd look even better dropped in with the revised textures whenever that's ready, but some tweaks will still have to be done by the individual skinners on the stencils themselves. And yes, I actually am doing stuff lol, need a proper roughmet and weathering pass now that I thiiiink I'm done doing B to A revisions. Shmoo42 and YaeSakura's versions of the roughmet and normal alterations are probably better, I'm just trying to get it done in time:

I'd love a static like this too, maybe with reduced polys and just using the LOD texture file:

The VF-103 Jolly Rogers had the Sparrowhawk upgrade and B Upgrades done in 2003-2004 for their last cruise. That HUD was an extremely late addition, just as the Tomcat and Bs were sunsetting. The Digital bus and PTID stuff though it seems should have been present for our LANTIRN birds, but alas they just don't have enough paperwork for it. A few jets, for a time, did have LANTIRN working with the old display apparently but it's one of those narrow windows where we can have a LANTIRN without the full PTID and digital back seat. I'm happy with what we have. Sure, I'd love to have the whole enchilada, but we've got a great thing going. If we had a proper Afghanistan and Iraq map then maybe the push to have the upgraded jets would be stronger. For now though, we've got some good 80s-90s action and hopefully will have more as the A-7, A-6, and some of the various AI assets come online, the Forrestal, etc. Hopefully some more REDFOR like the SU-22 or MiG-23 will help balance that out as well, would love to see missing Russian bombers, updated TU-95 models, all kinds of stuff to fill the cold war out. And of course the S-3 and SH-60 getting reworked, if that ever happens with that Supercarrier many of us bought and have seen very little from since.

HB_F14_REFUELING_PROBE.dds Look under F14 > Textures > Diffuse_Roughmet You'll also need to dig up the correct material string for the LUA file, early on in the thread there should have been a full listing of all of them. Alternately in the modelviewer2 window there should be a button to generate a livery file, it may include it in there.

Because some of the photographers make a living off their photos, put them in books, etc. and they've gotten really edgy about people grabbing photos and heading off with them, then using them in articles, publications, etc. without any credits. I know of at least 2-3 that are extrememly strict and you have to attribute any photos you post or they won't allow the post, they block photos from airfighters, airliners.net, etc. because they think they will get sued. The photo in question is actually of Vance Moon at VX-4 and was posted just the other day in the Tomcat Association.

It's among the model fixes submitted to them a while back including the NACA duct change, some UVW map tweaks, and a few other things that were already addressed. With them working on further early A and late A, plus Iran A changes I expect we will see the fixes rolled in when those model updates are complete. Temporary water based camo, usually used for adversary stuff at NAS Fallon, sometimes for TARPS stuff like the Reconnaissance Air Meet, might have been used in the Gulf War as well. There's pics around, VF-24 had a few jets that way, VF-211 has, VF-124, and a few other squadrons as well. You can see a second jet waaaay back there in brown. Also I guess that pic didn't take long to get scraped from the Tomcat Association group, I know some folks frown on that. One group threatens to ban anyone for reposting them on Pinterest etc. if they find out who did it.

BC7 is what Heatblur used, I usually use Linear BC7 myself.

As I churn through VF-201 and VF-202, I might could take a look at it. Got a lot on my plate but I may also drop this in the DCS Livery group Discord and see if anyone is interested.

I think the Tomcat being heavily analog really nails down the need for headtracking or VR in DCS, because you need to be able to look at a few things all at the same time. I especially notice this on carrier approaches, I'm still pretty bad at getting the timings of the turns, altitude, and speed on point because I don't have a good consistent head tracker solution nor the horsepower for VR, but being able to monitor speed, altitude, and sink rate while rapidly looking over your shoulder to check where you are near the boat seems like an absolute must, and Hat switches just aren't cutting it.

There are some oddities in the actual UVW mapping that might have led to this. Typically, the EXT 1 and 3 textures, which represent the Starboard side of the jet (jet's right from the cockpit). In the textures, these sides are "mirrored" or reversed in terms of text, numbers, etc. The EXT 1 and 4 representing the Port side are regular in the textures. HOWEVER For whatever reason, the leading edges where the glove vanes are are somehow flipped. On the EXT 3 you have to put the text regular, and on EXT 4 you have to reverse the text! So, I have a feeling that if those antenna are in the same portion of the model's UVWs as the glove vanes, that's probably why those are backwards. Or, rather the EXT 3 portion of the texture was not "flipped" like the rest of the Starboard side of the jet, and when @ensamvarg or his team did the stencils backwards as they normally would have on that side, they stayed backwards because the UVWs were not flipped. But somehow the UVWs for the wing vanes got reversed, or are drawing from the wrong sides of the jet, I don't know. Further back there was an issue with the UVWs of one of those areas being incorrectly mirrored for both sides, so maybe this got caught up in that fix.

@Victory205 does it perhaps involve an airshow?

Because, depending on what details you want, a Pilot and RIO have different patches, firstly the Pilot and NFO patches/wings are different, and quite often the ones on their suits were as well. For the 99% of users here, totally irrelevant. But for folks looking to put together specific jets and crews, or recreating specific photos, it can matter. Not every pilot might have a Top Gun Patch, or their RIO might not. Sometimes pilots flying with HGU-55 helmet but RIO using an HGU-33, weird stuff like that. Even RIOs from a different squadron, I believe "Bio" has mentioned pilots and RIOs sometimes flying their sister squadron's jets. Recently he mentioned in a photo he posted that the CAG riding backseat in the photo had his helmet taped half VF-1 and half VF-2! I'd post some pics but many were nabbed from closed Facebook groups so not sure I really have permission to share them. But, here's an example of VF-201's final flight crew as they took their last Tomcat "JIMBOB EXPRESS" to AMARG: A separate photo shows LCDR Burns on the left not wearing a Top Gun patch, while the RIO/CO CDR Paine does. This is also relevant if you want to include ranks for pilot/RIO, as often they were not the same. Again not important for folks just here flying jets. But most folks in the skinning groups/threads are into details, so putting it out there.

*Sigh* You can have separate Pilot and RIO helmets. You cannot have separate Pilot and RIO bodies at this time. The LOD only has one helmet slot and it will apply it to both helmets. There are no "implications", we've been able to have the separate helmets since the beginning. Heatblur has to actually define a separate area for the RIO helmet in the LOD, and they would need to do the same with the pilot body to the RIO body and give it a separate reference ID for the LUA so it can use a separate file. Heatblur is in the process of redoing the pilot bodies to include the HGU-55 helmets, I'd expect when that is done and the new pilot bodies implemented, we might see the split between pilot and RIO bodies and they may re-address the LOD files.

The file does not allow for separate helmets, nor is the Tomcat currently set up for separate Pilot and RIO bodies.

Somewhere in the mix there will be a TCS bullet fairing for when the housing is there but no TCS inside. And they also have mentioned doing the TCS-less style with just the ECM ALQ-100 nub under there, like the Iranian cats and jets that lacked the housing entirely. The question will be can we use those options on each A model separately because there were even later As that had no TCS but all the other later features.

I saw that, and saw something of that when I was getting the paint template for the EA-6B. DCS could really use a F9F Panther, and with ED adding that little change so we can make anything carrier capable, that might actually be almost possible now. Add that to the EFM work that the A-4E-C team have done and perhaps a "template" of sorts could be created for WW2 and Korea era jets to get more of them in game. If only we actually had a Korea map, yet constantly crickets from ED whenever asked why we have 2 Korea jets and no map.

A quick heads up to those working on submissions: The B model stencils as provided in the skinning templates are not exactly right for A models. A number of changes need to be made to correctly represent the A model, most glaringly the intake stencils and fire punch-ins on the engine nacelles. Some of the various warning stencils as well are in locations different from the B models we have as well as the actual wording in some cases.

I love these kinds of things, perfect excuse to do a Santa escort mission in the Tomcat! What's his top speed? I think realistically he needs to be going fast enough that the heat and sonic boom would destroy the planet but I don't think DCS currently models that.

As a Tomcat guy I'd love to see the Viggen dudes get their love too!

To be fair, I'm usually only counting rivets when I'm trying to align a stencil so it matches a photo. Sometimes counting the rivets past a panel line is the best method. But it's also that process where I picked up on a few things that just seemed out of place, and that opened up a rabbit hole.