DCS: F-14A/A+/B by Heatblur Simulations coming to DCS World!

[Stratos]

The AIM-54C is in game now and will most likely be the same Phoenix we'll have when the F-14 comes out. Load up a mission against an AI F-14 with AIM-54Cs and see it for yourself. Put the missile on your 3-9 line and pull max G and you'll trash it every single time.

 

Excuse my ignorance, but shouldn't be this way? PHoenix are created to down big, fat bombers. Any plane with proper EWR should be able to defeat it. Or I'm wrong?

[xaoslaad]

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/an-elite-f-14-airman-explains-why-the-tomcat-was-so-imp-1610043625

 

Scroll down to, "The idea was to make at least one of the enemy fighters blow up in front of his wingman's face, thus making him think twice about pursuing us... " and read his take on it. Particularly interesting is the part about the drone.

[westr]

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/an-elite-f-14-airman-explains-why-the-tomcat-was-so-imp-1610043625

 

Scroll down to, "The idea was to make at least one of the enemy fighters blow up in front of his wingman's face, thus making him think twice about pursuing us... " and read his take on it. Particularly interesting is the part about the drone.

 

Good article thanks for the link.

[Yurgon]

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/an-elite-f-14-airman-explains-why-the-tomcat-was-so-imp-1610043625

 

Wow, great read! :thumbup:

[Revelation]

Excuse my ignorance, but shouldn't be this way? PHoenix are created to down big, fat bombers. Any plane with proper EWR should be able to defeat it. Or I'm wrong?

 

Often times a Phoenix is launched between 40-50NM and the enemy fighter has no clue they have been fired on. The Phoenix receives periodic updates from the F-14's radar. It doesn't go active until it is within 5-10NM. By this time it is traveling at Mach 3.5-5.

 

If I pilot is aware of a launch or sees the missile early enough, then yea a fighter can evade the missile. The problem with seeing the missile ahead of time is it usually hits from above. So while the pilot is scanning the horizon, death comes from above.

 

 

With that said the Phoenix was never a fire and forget guaranteed kill every time. The Phoenix could actually be launched at around 120NM, but that is the edge of its envelope and a low probability of a kill. The target would have to never change course or altitude at the range to be effective.

Edited March 5, 2015 by Revelation

[Mike Busutil]

:D

 

Edited March 5, 2015 by Mike Busutil

[Shein]

I'd hit that.

like an AMRAAM.

[Kaktus29]

okei, when F-14 is done, who would like to see Tom Cruise play it against "Ice" against Mig-21 over lan?)) lol.. who would play the mig21?

 

i can already see Tom being over-enthusiastic as he likes to do his own stunts in his movies and Val Kilmer ammm, yeah i think he'd be the one trying to figure out what direction is he heading.. lol.. and top gun music in the back.. oh i'd love to see that..

[GGTharos]

okei, when F-14 is done, who would like to see Tom Cruise play it against "Ice" against Mig-21 over lan?)) lol.. who would play the mig21?

 

Not Ice. He wouldn't make that mistake.

[Kelevra9987]

"But you remember one thing! You screw up just this much, you'll be flying a Cargo Plane full of rubber dog shit out of Hong Kong!"

 

I screamed like a little Child when I heard that the F-14 is in LNS's oven...

 

:)

[GGTharos]

Cobra, you guys are doing the HK theatre with cargo plane and rubber uh, things add-on, right? ;)

[Grim_Smiles]

Often times a Phoenix is launched between 40-50NM and the enemy fighter has no clue they have been fired on. The Phoenix receives periodic updates from the F-14's radar. It doesn't go active until it is within 5-10NM. By this time it is traveling at Mach 3.5-5.

 

If I pilot is aware of a launch or sees the missile early enough, then yea a fighter can evade the missile. The problem with seeing the missile ahead of time is it usually hits from above. So while the pilot is scanning the horizon, death comes from above.

 

 

With that said the Phoenix was never a fire and forget guaranteed kill every time. The Phoenix could actually be launched at around 120NM, but that is the edge of its envelope and a low probability of a kill. The target would have to never change course or altitude at the range to be effective.

 

Agreed, I think that's how things will generally go with 54Cs. Took me a moment to dig up two of Ralfi's vids where they put AIM-54Cs on their F-15s to try them out. In the first video Ralfi is shooting them pretty close and yeah a fighter can easily evade if they don't make a mistake - this of course is the standard 54C flight model we have now, who knows how they will fly when LN puts in their updated flight model. This was done at pretty close range just to try them out, on a multiplayer server at that range I can't imagine anyone would engage with 54s. I would suspect any AIM-54Cs would have already been used up before then. If not I would think it wise to jettison them (I'm assuming they can be kicked off the rails without firing like any other ordnance).

 

On the second video Line and Ralfi are on a server and Line fires a 54 from about 60 miles. He downs the enemy player, who IIRC explained he at first thought someone shot an AIM-120 at him from 30 miles out and dismissed it as a ridiculous shot, five seconds later he was dead. So if someone is caught off guard from long range it is certainly possible to down them. I have to wonder how easy it is to tell if you have an F-14 shooting an AIM-54C at you in a Russian jet?

 

Since there was apparently an issue before I'll give the warning that there is some swearing in the videos and they are NSFW.

 

 

[captain_dalan]

Cobra, you guys are doing the HK theatre with cargo plane and rubber uh, things add-on, right? ;)

Dude, you killed me! :megalol:

[FSKRipper]

Agreed, I think that's how things will generally go with 54Cs. Took me a moment to dig up two of Ralfi's vids where they put AIM-54Cs on their F-15s to try them out. In the first video Ralfi is shooting them pretty close and yeah a fighter can easily evade if they don't make a mistake - this of course is the standard 54C flight model we have now, who knows how they will fly when LN puts in their updated flight model. This was done at pretty close range just to try them out, on a multiplayer server at that range I can't imagine anyone would engage with 54s. I would suspect any AIM-54Cs would have already been used up before then. If not I would think it wise to jettison them (I'm assuming they can be kicked off the rails without firing like any other ordnance).

 

On the second video Line and Ralfi are on a server and Line fires a 54 from about 60 miles. He downs the enemy player, who IIRC explained he at first thought someone shot an AIM-120 at him from 30 miles out and dismissed it as a ridiculous shot, five seconds later he was dead. So if someone is caught off guard from long range it is certainly possible to down them. I have to wonder how easy it is to tell if you have an F-14 shooting an AIM-54C at you in a Russian jet?

 

Since there was apparently an issue before I'll give the warning that there is some swearing in the videos and they are NSFW.

 

 

Have seen these videos some time ago but I would not expect the AIM-54 has such performance. Even Wiki is quite conservative giving an operational range of 100nm. Against a Bear, maybe but according to the Iranian pilots (http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=140083) they assumed a max range of 110km. They attacked fighter size targets around 40-50 km which would be 25-30 nm. I have no clue how powerful the AWG-9 really was but now, 40 years later current fighter radars still struggle with detecting "small" targets at more than 70nm.

Edited March 5, 2015 by FSKRipper

[SUBS17]

F-14 will rock it would be good at some point if there was a Iran/Iraq war theatre because the F-14 had some action in that theatre.:thumbup:

[captain_dalan]

Have seen these videos some time ago but I would not expect the AIM-54 has such performance. Even Wiki is quite conservative giving an operational range of 100nm. Against a Bear, maybe but according to the Iranian pilots (http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=140083) they assumed a max range of 110km. They attacked fighter size targets around 40-50 km which would be 25-30 nm. I have no clue how powerful the AWG-9 really was but now, 40 years later current fighter radars still struggle with detecting "small" targets at more than 70nm.

 

I don't think any engagement of fighter sized targets above 50nm is realistic. Both from detection/tracking point of view and the kinetic point of view (if the target decides to go defensive)

 

 

 

I have to wonder how easy it is to tell if you have an F-14 shooting an AIM-54C at you in a Russian jet?

 

 

It is generally hard to tell if you had been fired upon or not, unless you have an AWACS giving you the warning.

I had a talk with a former Tomcat driver 2 months ago, as to why the AMRAAM wasn't easy to implement on the F-14, when it already had the TWS capability and a powerful enough radar. He said, the entire semi active part (with mid course guidance updates) of the missile flight was actually very AWG-9/Phoenix specific. Namely, the data packs required for the guidance system were "piggy backed" in the radar signal itself. More so, recovering of this data was only possible with the proper hardware in the missile guidance system. The implications of this are twofold:

1. The use of AMRAAM would require major systems update in the AWG-9;

2. There is no telling if radar that is tracking you is guiding a Phoenix or merely illuminating you. You will know only after it's terminal phase has been achieved and the missile has gone from semi active to active internal guidance.

Edited March 5, 2015 by captain_dalan

[lunaticfringe]

I had a talk with a former Tomcat driven 2 months ago, as to why the AMRAAM wasn't easy to implement on the F-14, when it already had the TWS capability and a powerful enough radar. He said, the entire semi active part (with mid course guidance updates) of the missile flight was actually very AWG-9/Phoenix specific. Namely, the data packs required for the guidance system were "piggy backed" in the radar signal itself.

 

What was interesting was that the issues were solved, and the software was loaded up to the fleet B and Ds (if my NAVAIR guy was online I'd tell you the revision), 1997 if I remember correctly. Operationally, it wasn't put into practice because the squadrons weren't provided the matching LAU. By the time the testing was done, and the software made available, budgets for continued F-14 updates were being further limited.

 

Now get yourself into a near-peer hot war, and you might find a Greyhound bringing resupply with the new toys, but you weren't going to get it otherwise.

[GGTharos]

Namely, the data packs required for the guidance system were "piggy backed" in the radar signal itself. More so, recovering of this data was only possible with the proper hardware in the missile guidance system.

 

That's how it's done with most missiles that employ an M-Link, this one just happened to be very specific and without common hardware.

 

The implications of this are twofold:

1. The use of AMRAAM would require major systems update in the AWG-9;

Yep, which is why they got a new radar anyway - the AWG-9 was getting old in the tooth.

 

2. There is no telling if radar that is tracking you is guiding a Phoenix or merely illuminating you. You will know only after it's terminal phase has been achieved and the missile has gone from semi active to active internal guidance.

Really depends on how far you are from the launcher and what the pilot is trying to accomplish. If you're further than a certain distance, it is no longer possible to use TWS mode for guidance and the 14 can only attack that target via STT.

[KingKenny04]

F-14 will rock it would be good at some point if there was a Iran/Iraq war theatre because the F-14 had some action in that theatre.:thumbup:

 

Actually that upcoming Strait of Hormuz map might make a pretty perfect F-14-centric fictional scenario map. There were a few times in the mid to late 80s that the US Navy and Iran faced off over shipping lanes in and out of the Persian Gulf. It wouldn't be the most 100% realistic thing ever, but one could definitely make a semi-plausible US F-14s vs IRIAF F-14s scenario on that map.

 

Imagine: IRIAF MiG-21s launching to sink the US carrier, with IRIAF F-14s as escorts. Meanwhile, the US carrier launches its own F-14s to intercept and defend the fleet. Maybe the carriers launch their own A7 Corsair IIs or A6 Intruders (if we ever get either of those) to take out Iranian SSM sites and naval assets that might threaten the fleet during transit of the strait of Hormuz, with US F-14s as escorts, and the IRIAF scrambles its own F-14s to intercept.

 

There's a lot of really fun stuff you could do with that map and late 80s/early 90s naval aircraft :D

[Flycat]

after they post this thread and told us they will release f-14, i don't know what i want to see on the forum.

and only waiting the date of beta test.

[terence44]

One Free Theatre bundled with the Aircraft

Very Nice !

[luckyfortune]

I can't wait!

[Dudikoff]

What was interesting was that the issues were solved, and the software was loaded up to the fleet B and Ds (if my NAVAIR guy was online I'd tell you the revision), 1997 if I remember correctly.

 

AMRAAM integration on an F-14D could seem possible with just a simple software upgrade (I'm not aware what updates needed to be done on the F-15E for AMRAAM integration), but I'm not convinced that it's a simple software upgrade for the AWG-9. Do you have any info to back that claim?

 

Operationally, it wasn't put into practice because the squadrons weren't provided the matching LAU. By the time the testing was done, and the software made available, budgets for continued F-14 updates were being further limited.

 

One recent article involving some Tomcat people claimed that they had to choose between AMRAAM integration and LANTIRN and chose the latter based on the expected future mission types (A2G rather than air-superiority). If anything, it wasn't an expensive upgrade and it could be done fleet wide (A/B/D) unlike (I presume) the AMRAAM support.

Edited March 6, 2015 by Dudikoff

[captain_dalan]

What was interesting was that the issues were solved, and the software was loaded up to the fleet B and Ds (if my NAVAIR guy was online I'd tell you the revision), 1997 if I remember correctly. Operationally, it wasn't put into practice because the squadrons weren't provided the matching LAU. By the time the testing was done, and the software made available, budgets for continued F-14 updates were being further limited.

 

Now get yourself into a near-peer hot war, and you might find a Greyhound bringing resupply with the new toys, but you weren't going to get it otherwise.

 

I never knew they actually went with the upgrade fleet wide. I always assumed the thing was botched altogether...

 

...1..That's how it's done with most missiles that employ an M-Link, this one just happened to be very specific and without common hardware.

 

.......

 

...2...Really depends on how far you are from the launcher and what the pilot is trying to accomplish. If you're further than a certain distance, it is no longer possible to use TWS mode for guidance and the 14 can only attack that target via STT.

 

1. It appears not even the D's radar could handle it without modifications. I found his answer in my archive, he was a RIO actually. Quoting

"Main difference been Phoenix and AMRAAM TWS is Tomcat was designed as an integrated weapon system (missile and radar developed by Hughes) with TWS missile messages imbedded in the radar pulses whereas AMRAAM was a missile designed for use on a variety of radars and therefore in need of a separate datalink to direct the missile to a point in space where the seeker went active.

 

The APG-71 was well down the road when AMRAAM reached IOC with USAF in late 91 (Navy was several years later in later block Hornets) so the APG-71 and moreover the Tomcat would have to have significant nonrecurring investment to match capability of the F-15, F-16 or F/A-18. I personally liked the idea because you could have hung dual AMRAAMs on stations 1B and 8B and carry boobs as well as 2 Heaters on 1A and 8A"

 

2. There was one thing i've always wanted to ask you guys (concerning STT launches). When an enemy "locks you up" in STT, you RWR starts beeping and flashing (at least it did in Falcon). How do you know when and if the launch has actually occurred? Is there a way of telling? And is it different for beam riders then it is for classical SARHs?

Edited March 6, 2015 by captain_dalan

[Dudikoff]

. There was one thing i've always wanted to ask you guys (concerning STT launches). When an enemy "locks you up" in STT, you RWR starts beeping and flashing (at least it did in Falcon). How do you know when and if the launch has actually occurred? Is there a way of telling? And is it different for beam riders then it is for classical SARHs?

 

It depends on the specific RWR and the launching radar/missile type and the data on how specific RWR's are programmed are (naturally) classified (and they are constantly updated anyway).

 

For instance, for an older semi-active radar guided missile, a separate CW transmitter would have to paint the target for the missile to guide and this CW transmission would be picked up by the RWR. For the newer ones with monopulse seekers, the (if monopulse) radar might need to switch to a high PRF mode to provide guidance to the missile's SARH seeker and an RWR might be programmed to consider that switch as a launch. And if midcourse guidance updates are in play till the target is in the missile seeker's range, these updates could e.g. be sent towards the missile through the radar antenna side lobes and thus could perhaps be picked up by some RWR's which would trigger a warning. Etc.

 

There were threads on the topic already; e.g.:

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=137224

Edited March 6, 2015 by Dudikoff