Below Average

https://www.cnatra.navy.mil/local/docs/pat-pubs/P-825.pdf Here is the basic principles. However your not going to get real life timelines and tactics. Those sir are not public.

I need an IRAF skinned F-14A in my life.

While the brake accumulator works and you can pump the probe out, the gauges are INOP.

If your looking for a kneeboard card to use regular checkout my checklist/reference guide.

I have gone back and forth with the hud trim a few time and what I now do it trim the watermark W to the 0 degree pitch ladder on deck so longs I am not parked on a incline or decline (never seen it in DCS). The Hud in the Hornet is the primary instrument and not in the Tomcat.

Never heard anything good about it. Sounds great in theory.

Would be nice.... Interesting fact, the Blue Angels are having trouble with the Echo as it is purely electronic and has no mechanical connections between the flight controls and the stick exist. It delaying the transition. Something to do with not having the same fidelity for the extremely small inputs the make to fly their tight form.

Same thing with Hornets. Greater than 360 degrees can lead to a departure. Also you really never roll beyond 360 and if you did your like making a BFM error. Unlimited rolls are for airshows. Fighter jets are designed to be unstable so they can be more maneuverable. Because of that attention must be paid to where the limits begins and you must absolutely adhere to them.

Another lingo thing. If someone says Gate it’s means Max.

Could you share some more recent yet pre DFCS Natops. Thanks.

Attached image from non-DFCS tomcat natops.

In real life engine IR signature is not as straight forward as you might think. Smaller sized engines that produce less total trust doesn't mean cooler IR signature. You called the Hornet smaller and weaker but do you know how hot its IR signature really is? Just food for thought.

The FM flys pretty close to the EM diagrams. The Cat is a rate fighter and it has decent turn performance and a very good thrust to weight ratio.

My understanding from Natops (F-14B, 2001) is the AFCS switch are spring loaded and once paddled off should and do shutoff. The SAS switches shouldn't move unless manual moved. The SAS roll and pitch stability is off when depressing the paddle switch but once released the system comes back, however the switches do stay in the on position the entire time. This is what I gathered from both the F-14B 2001 manual (which is inappropriate as it has the upgraded DFCS) and an earlier Natops from an A (non plus) model. As for the engine modes both sec and manual mode, WonW and WoffW I cannot get the paddle switch to do anything. Now I am basic my research of the F-14B, 2001 manual and would imagine the F-14A+ manual says the same. Unfortunately I cant find that manual. The wing sweep numbers are what the cat does in DCS and not what the manual says it should. For the first part of part 10, as per the Aatops: Note: Failure of the engine to relight above 59-percent rpm indicates a failure of the N2 deceleration auto-relight logic. The issue is the relight is occurring at about 42% which is 17% lower then the allowable limit in Natops. When quickly going to cutoff then idle, the engine flames out and the deceleration auto-relight logic should catch this and start firing the igniters. Normal Engine idle is 62%-78% and in DCS I have normally seen 71% which gives about 12% above the normal start logic (10%-59% with the throttle in idle the ignition will operate). When going quickly to cutoff then idle the engine has 12% to spool down before the normal start logic begins firing, however during the decel the N2 deceleration auto-relight logic should start the igniters and fire them for 20 seconds and stop the engine from decaying below 59% and effectively relighting the engine. So the Airstart switch currently modeled has no effect and will be removed? Id imaging the airstart switch is for the TF-30. Will we get the ignition button on the side of the throttle for the B or atleast an effective binding? The system is supposed to keep the engines at mil while the aircraft is at higher speeds (1.1+ IMN) to prevent inlet buzz and pop stalls. Natops doesn't talk about much besides the AFTC controlling the idle lockup in Pri mode and sourcing the IMN from CADC.

BLUF: Ran the pilot FCF-A Checks and found numerous systems that are either improperly modeled, modeled partials or just not modeled. Background: While tanking in a popular server the AI took a cheap shot, I broke away and took some damage. The damage was mainly to my combined system and wing sweep actuator and I ended up loosing all combined hyds. I emergency extend the gear and landing with my wings swept to 55 degrees with no flaps. Before I got it on deck I broke out my PCL and through the appropriate EPs. Not everything worked according to the book and became curious on how accurate the HB F-14B really is. I jumped into the FCF-A (Functional Check Flight Alpha profile in chapter 10 of Natops 01-F14AAP-1 1 AUG 2001) checklist as that is the best way for a pilot to check and see if a system is working or in this case modeled properly. The testing: 1) Park and Aux accumulators do not rise with combine pressure and have no indication in-flight. Emergency brakes work however and do appear to run out. 2) Egen works with 0 psi combine pressure, transfer pump off and flight hyd pressure. Zero combine hyd pressure14 should result in no Egen. 3) Egen test... Inop I believe this is a known and in the Heatblur manual. Same goes with the OBC. 4) Paddle switch disengages roll n pitch aug switches and does not switch to engine to manual mode and sec modes. As far back as the 1972 preliminary Natops the roll n pitch should only be disengaged momentary when holding the AFCS emergency disconnect paddle. The SAS switches should not move. 5) No speed brake stab shift. The gauge indication nor the stab move. The speed break interconnect is not working, not sure if the flight mode part works but the visuals don’t. 6) Trim doesn’t go to 9 degrees TED. Not sure why but I am not getting full throw as per the manual. 7) DLC trim not accurate and inboard spoiler gauge has an animation issue. 8) WRS and DTFO inop (LSXC). I believe the Tomcat we have is a very early B that did not incorporate the Digital Flight Controls that most B’s had later. This is evident by the SAS panel being similar to old As. 9) Asymmetrical switch guard doesn’t reset asymmetrical switch back to on when guard secured. 10) Auto-relight logic lights of at 42% during on deck checks. Failure or lack of of N2 deceleration logic. NFM 2.8.1: At rpm above 59 percent, ignition is provided if N2 deceleration exceeds a 5 percent rpm per second rate. Ignition continues for 20 seconds after N2 deceleration falls below the 5-percent per second rate. and... Spool down relight fails (airstart switch not effective, staying above 300 IAS has no effect). Engine indicates a relight witha rise in temps and fuel flows for a half a second then immediately falls off. Only way to restart is with a crossbleed. 11) At 35k wing sweep program inaccurate. ..8 IMN = 37 degrees... .9 = 56 .93 = 65. Doesn’t match up with natops. 12) No idle lockup. At 1.1+ IMN idle lock prevents rpm decay greater then 2% below mil, when less then mil is selected. Not modeled, important feature on most a supersonic aircraft. 13) ECS not properly modeled. Ecs off and dump fail to work, gauge just sits at old position. However when ECS is on normal the cabin pressure tracks properly. ECS has to be on for the cabin altimeter to work. Example: Climb to 15k, shut off ECS, try to dump pressure and the indication will still be 8K. Blow the canopy and it will still be 8K. Turn the ECS back on and now it indicates 15k. Must be a bug. More testing to come..

Are there plans to incorporate DFCS on the B and leave the A to be more of the raw original product? Things like DTFO, LSRI (THIS!), WRS and LSXC would really makes the B feel complete (IMO). Currently running the FCF checks things just don't match up with the NATOPS, I planned on releasing a full report with all the mismatches and bugs I have compiled but without know exactly what NATOPS the DCS F-14B is based on I cant complete my checks. Either-way shithot (<-- This is a compliment) work!

It’s generic for an aircraft with some type of metal frame or wing box. Aluminum, Titanium and composites have different properties from each other which is beyond the scope of the conversation.

I am confused about what version of the F-14 is in DCS... It is lacking DTFO described in the F-14B natops from 1991. Some of the systems match the A but at the same time it lacks the vain glove, etc making it a B. The EM diagram should work well as the engines are the same. I have tested the A plus EM diagrams and they work well enough.

Just a tid-bit on airframe stress from a guy who fly’s military aircraft and went to aviation safety school. Here is the simple part. All aircraft are rated to 150% load limit symmetrically and after that are expected or designed to fail. This is the ultimate structural load limit. Between 125% and 150% we have the range where your causing plastic-deformation where the metal is permanently yielding and becoming less ductile by becoming harder (bad). Between 100%-125% you are yielding abit but the damage is far less severe and the service life is not impacted as much. An overstress that last .1 sec or 3 secs has the same result during that cycle. Less load = more cycles, higher load = less cycles. Here is the thing about over-stresses,they are almost always asymmetrical. Because of this we have bent aircraft. I don’t want to hop in a Jet in DCS and have it stall at different air speeds and AOAs and roll off in different directions or depart unexpectedly. Also consider your going to have to trim more often and also use the roll and yaw trim on a symmetrically loaded jet. Not thanks, to much realism.

The attached checklist was made using a template I have used to fly with in real life. The flow was generated from a mix of NATOPS and Heatblur manual data and logic. It also contains a lot of reference data that can help if you haven't flown the Cat for a bit or switch between TMS (type, model, series) frequently. If something doesn't make sense or you would like to see something added/changed please let me know. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hMS9UmKIl4bn1q1L76AVZdFsAkEy03wn/view?usp=drivesdk Notes: My timeline tactics are broken up into three flows. Flow 1: Long range shots. Max R to 40 NM using high altitude, high airspeed and proper loft mechanics to increase kinetics and bring Pk above 0. Pk maybe low but its worth shooting one missile to put your adversary on the defense, if they choose to not defend then Pk goes up drastically. Flow 2: Medium range or reattacks. 40 NM to 16NM. Shooting from pure (nose on) or a crank. This is based on whether your outside 30nm when you turn hot. When turning out at 16nm (MSE) be 180s out by 16 NMs. Flow 3: 16NMs to the merge. Shot something, notch to the merge, use PAL and make the merge with 400-450 KCAS with a good game plan. Threat missile is the R-27ER. I am aware of the Probably of kill study that was done recently, it is great stuff. However I believe you can get more out of the AIM-54 if you get the kinetics right. Shout out to Carterlulay who helped me create this guide.

https://discord.gg/Jt5F6S Due to popular request the group buy is back open! Head over to the discord for more information. Payment is now open for the next 24 hours. After payment closes keys will be bought and distributed. Last Chance on the amazing summer group buy!

If you used 350 KTS and intercept .82 nm you will be ok.

I have heard a few things. One: no simulated GPS system exists in DCD. Two: there is no INS drift, so no actual alignment exists.

To clarify. The hud in the Hornet is the primary flight instrument and without it at the boat is a straight in.

1) In theory your correct. However in my experience, outside the hornet there was always some trimming to be done. 2) Hud is the primary (Hornet). Without it, it’s an emergency at the boat resulting in a straight in. 3) I agree. 4) MIDs plus head mounted cueing system... Not sure that can be beat by the Tomcat. 5) Fact, but I talking about cockpit simplicity. It’s laidout nicely from my experience. If Jester works like a real RIO, then yea it may be easy. This remains to be determined.