Scrape

A paint kit would be awesomely cool. We know skins from several groups would be aplenty as this is a highly anticipated release. We are looking forward to the next era of DCS. Thanks.

Fantastic artwork. Right on the money.

It's worth seeing that again. A perfect match.

I think accepting the level of detail that has been shown thus far looking when reading updates and watching the videos that have been posted means also that its certain that the system you're looking for is present. If you have read the updates in particular the systems used when landing and how the F-14 is controlled during that phase, you'll note that your questions have been answered indirectly. The spoilers are there and they will work.

I'm not sure what your background is, but I'll offer mine. I've served in SEAD units for 10 of 17 years of service maintaining weapons systems. I've deployed. I've watched HUD tapes and T-Pod footage from downrange, I've loaded HARMs and fixed the video wires in the wings when they've gone bad. What I do is directly tied into the function of SEAD and I've had a lot of time to learn about it.

The Gazelle has had SRS compatible multi-crew since release. It's only gotten better.

I'll say it. For US forces, SEAD is done with AGM-88s among other weapons, but oh yes 88s are in there each and every time, and F-16s or F-18s are the only aircraft that do it. When it's done, it's not to scare, it's to destroy. Give the enemy a chance to kill you tomorrow, that ain't how it's done.

The rumble is simulated. Just need the right interface to experience it. Search Simshaker, or the more popular Buttkicker.

This is not a detail that would have been overlooked. No DCS aircraft is ever missing a flight control surface.

Perhaps the Belgians do it differently, but there is a thing called over g. Going to 10gees in any airframe constitutes an over g inspection. There is a high chance that something important could or did break. The over g rate is counted in video frames from the HUD cam. How many frames the jet stayed over the g limit is what determines which inspection is performed. This is always reported and a severe over g can down an aircraft for a while. This disturbs the phase inspection cycle and flying hours that the jet needs to fly to stay on schedule. Pilots are NOT congratulated for this. Disrupting the maintenance flow for an ego maneuver might seem fun, but later when pilots can't get qual'd because someone hard broke a jet there is a different tune. Mistakes happen, especially during BFM or against Red Air, but this isn't something a pilot does haphazardly. Not saying it's never happened mind you, just painting the full picture.

No problem at all. Happy it helped.

Alt in radar mode is fine. Using auto is also fine. Assuming all other flight factors are stable, this is a good method of release. Did you set the laser code on the TPOD before firing the laser? Sounds like you might have missed that (best guess). What altitude are you typically dropping from? How long does the bomb have to find the laser? With that said, when in the sequence are you activating the laser? Before release? If after pickle, how long after and from what altitude? Yes wind can affect laser bombs, particularly if the bomb does not have enough energy or altitude to compensate for it. The counter for this would be on the aircraft to deliver the proper release que for optimal release point. The A-10 has this functionality the Harrier is still too EA for proper steering cues.

Your first thought is more correct. A collaboration is not a friendship. These are still businesses. 3rd party developers are directly or indirectly competing with each other. While it makes the most sense that everything is on the table and shared, it isn't prudent to do so with open flood gates with someone whom might later accidentally or on purpose take all of your customers. It's good to remember that not all potential 3rd party aircraft have passed ED's muster. The following is purely hypothetical for the sake of argument. 3rd party developers Alpha and Bravo are two different entities, each with their own employees and bills to pay. Let's say Alpha develop system X that they use on their next aircraft. Bravo also need system X on their next aircraft. Is it Alpha's responsibility to take care of another company? Is that how business works? Not usually. Going further into the example let's say that Bravo does not develop system X and their planned aircraft has stalled suffering delays, or has to be shelved altogether. At this point Alpha is the only new aircraft in rotation, and their profit increases. We can also flip the result and say that Alpha was feeling generous and shared system X with Bravo. Now that system X is in the new Bravo aircraft it works, and the rest of the aircraft is so amazing that people forget all about Alpha. Furthermore Bravo would get the credit for developing system X better than Alpha and be regarded as the better company. Customers typically care more about the result than the origin. There can be other examples of why keeping information close to the chest is prudent business, but I think you might see how things can become complicated quickly. This isn't to say that some sharing has never happened, but there is a careful cost vs benefit that is weighed when making these types of decisions. It's not done as a matter of course, but usually as an agreement of mutual support, and often involves some sort of compensation to keep everyone honest and animosity low.

Is the only factor lift? Are other attributes considered? Most importantly, how would you employ the Tomcat vs how should you employ the Tomcat?

I see, the Viggen comes to mind then.

The first Hornet flight video on the caucus map shows a new hi-res oil platform as Wags passes low over the water.

I agree, but its a logical assumption that the animated deck crew will be part of the the hi-res carriers purchase. That said, would not the program code be proprietary to some degree? Otherwise RAZBAM would have the TPOD from the A-10 and be done with it. It seems to me that each company is responsible for themselves and their modules, unless a specific partnership is arranged. Such as the case with the F-18.

Generation numbers are a misnomer when in relation to aircraft upgrades. While most use the term gen to refer to when an initial design was put into service its not a good measuring stick for capability. Upgrades happen constantly, and they are not done in respect to gen 4 or 5 or X. System are upgraded in and of themselves and can be but certainly not limited to block upgrades.

The F-14 can change speed rapidly and wing sweep is a part of that. Its the reason the F-111 was faster than the F-4 with lessor engines. While oddities in the sim might occur, its likely that there will not be a net benefit to interrupting the auto wing sweep. One factor may be increased, but only for a moment and probably at the detriment of another factor that overall would decrease effectivness.

That's my take as well, but I don't know if that's the case.

Any good pilot would leave the wings alone and let the computer do its thing.

That's often the case, but only with certain files, it can't be helped. Skins for example won't compromise integrity, adding a tacan will.

DCS has a very strong mod community. From assets to sounds.

DCS aircraft only going forward.

The next video from Wags will show some carrier updates. Both RAZBAM and Heatblur are contributing. Updates are coming often nowadays, so you already know what the appropriate answer is.