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

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

@Blacklion: Strawman and you know it.

 

Said the pot. :music_whistling:

[M460]

for all I care it could carry beanie babies for payload and still would be a first day buy for me. Cant wait to get my hands on it.

 

Back to cryogenics now... See you on release day. July 1st please its ma B/day.

[mattebubben]

for all I care it could carry beanie babies for payload and still would be a first day buy for me. Cant wait to get my hands on it.

 

Back to cryogenics now... See you on release day. July 1st please its ma B/day.

 

The F-14 is much further away then that

(only word ive seen so far has said either late this year or "early" next year)

[M460]

The F-14 is much further away then that

(only word ive seen so far has said either late this year or "early" next year)

 

Resetting timer :thumbup:

[=DECOY=]

Resetting timer :thumbup:

 

 

I'm hoping for Xmas. That would be a nice awesome present lol. Although I would be equally happily.next year ;)

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

Resetting timer :thumbup:

 

Keep your birthday super low key, then say it's your birthday when F-14 is about to drop! Bam!

[bC3660]

No it does not, it has to do with disposable income. It makes no financial sense for me to waste money on a supersonic trainer, since the percentage of my income that goes into my entertainment, is vastly more affected by a purchase of a module than yours is. It is impossible to justify purchasing something that will give me objectively less enjoyment because it lacks a great deal of capability. I have minimum thresholds of what I expect my entertainment to provide, and for 60 USD, the F-5 does not meet those thresholds.

 

So dont buy it!:pilotfly:

[BlackLion213]

@Blacklion: Strawman and you know it. The F-18C has an AA/AG radar, TGP, long range radar guided missiles, anti shipping missiles, MITL weapons, anti radiation missiles, GBUs, LGBs, in addition to its dumb bomb armament.

 

Also known as a joke... :)

 

However, all the things you mentioned (excluding the A-G radar) are technology that was not available when the F-5E was developed. It is also worth noting that the F/A-18 was derived from the F-5E via the Northrup N300 (a modified F-5E).

 

If you built the F/A-18 in 1972, it would look just like the F-5E.

 

So would you make the same deriding comments towards the F-86F, since it is not even supersonic and has even fewer available weapons?

 

What actually makes the F/A-18 less of a trainer than the F-5E? Honestly? Excluding the advancements in weapons and sensors - they are effectively the same concept executed at different times. This is not Strawman, this is an honest question.

 

The F/A-18 is easier to fly, it actually makes a better trainer for new pilots anyway.

 

Wow, we drifted far off topic...:)

 

-Nick

[Dudikoff]

What actually makes the F/A-18 less of a trainer than the F-5E? Honestly? Excluding the advancements in weapons and sensors - they are effectively the same concept executed at different times. This is not Strawman, this is an honest question.

 

I think he's arguing that the F-5E DCS features do not justify its cost compared to e.g. getting the F/A-18C module for the same or similar price. Technically, it's a valid point.

 

But, I guess it's all very subjective. For instance, I can't understand people saying they'd get F-5E over the F-14A (e.g. a Bombcat just to have the A/G capability out of the comparison). Please, no offense, but in my reasoning this does not compute and the big part of it has to be just going against the grain. :)

 

I'd be interested to hear the arguments to the contrary because I can understand someone not finding the F-14 that appealing for whatever reason, but then the same person finding the F-5E appealing in comparison? How does that happen? Just to be clear, I pre-purchased the F-5E (partly because I don't think I'd pay the full asking price for it), but IMHO the F-14A/B package is easily worth at least twice as much.

Edited June 18, 2016 by Dudikoff

[BlackLion213]

I think he's arguing that the F-5E DCS features do not justify its cost compared to e.g. getting the F/A-18C module for the same or similar price. Technically, it's a valid point.

 

I agree and that makes great sense to me. The part that has me scratching my head is the "trainer" part. The WWII modules are also about the same price, as are the Korean war era modules. Why not just say "I prefer modern weapons" instead of calling an airplanes something that it is not?

 

-Nick

 

PS -

But, I guess it's all very subjective. For instance, I can't understand people saying they'd get F-5E over the F-14A (e.g. a Bombcat just to have the A/G capability out of the comparison). Please, no offense, but in my reasoning this does not compute and the big part of it has to be just going against the grain.

 

I feel the same way, but I am really biased on the topic. :)

[Dudikoff]

The part that has me scratching my head is the "trainer" part. The WWII modules are also about the same price, as are the Korean war era modules. Why not just say "I prefer modern weapons" instead of calling an airplanes something that it is not?

 

That's stretching it a bit far if you concentrate on the wording itself, but from the context of available weapon and system features or capabilities in general, it's not that far off. The major difference is that it does have a radar unlike trainers, but it's rather weak and doesn't really bring much extra capability (except e.g. all weather interception). Just because those trainers are sold at the full price (when there's no other modules available), doesn't necessarily mean most people are buying them at those prices. :)

 

Given a roughly similar purpose, it's interesting how many more features the F-16A brings to the table only about a half a decade later.

Edited June 18, 2016 by Dudikoff

[mattebubben]

That's stretching it a bit far if you concentrate on the wording itself, but from the context of available weapon and system features or capabilities in general, it's not that far off. The major difference is that it does have a radar unlike trainers, but it's rather weak and doesn't really bring much extra capability (except e.g. all weather interception). Just because those trainers are sold at the full price (when there's no other modules available), doesn't mean people are buying them at those prices.

 

Given a roughly similar purpose, it's interesting how many more features the F-16A brings to the table only about a half a decade later.

 

But then again the F-16A was much more expensive.

 

And many customers kept getting the F-5E even after the F-16A was available .

 

the F-16 in the 80s cost around 5-6 times that of a F-5E.

 

And what would you rather have as an airforce?

 

10 F-16As or 50+ F-5Es?

 

the F-5E was from the outset designed as a cheap affordable export fighter and was never designed to be top of the line

(just good enough to get the job done while keeping a low price tag and being very cheap and easy to maintain etc)

 

while the F-16A was a Top of the line aircraft.

 

I could try to make you guys more familiar with the systems of the F-5E and its Pros and cons but we really should bring that discussion over to the F-5E Threads.

[mattebubben]

I think he's arguing that the F-5E DCS features do not justify its cost compared to e.g. getting the F/A-18C module for the same or similar price. Technically, it's a valid point.

 

But, I guess it's all very subjective. For instance, I can't understand people saying they'd get F-5E over the F-14A (e.g. a Bombcat just to have the A/G capability out of the comparison). Please, no offense, but in my reasoning this does not compute and the big part of it has to be just going against the grain. :)

 

I'd be interested to hear the arguments to the contrary because I can understand someone not finding the F-14 that appealing for whatever reason, but then the same person finding the F-5E appealing in comparison? How does that happen? Just to be clear, I pre-purchased the F-5E (partly because I don't think I'd pay the full asking price for it), but IMHO the F-14A/B package is easily worth at least twice as much.

 

 

Well its simply down to Preference why im not that interested in the F-14 and reasons why i like the F-5E.

 

First.

 

I dont really like large / heavy fighters but prefer small and nimble fighters.

 

F-5E - F-14

1 - 0

 

I dont really like / want a Two seat fighter but prefer a single seat one.

 

F-5E - F-14

2 - 0

 

I want a 1970s fighter that would make for a good opponent for the mig-21Bis

 

F-5E - F-14

3 - 0

 

I prefer a land based aircraft over a Carrier Based one.

 

F-5E - F-14

4 - 0

 

and some more points.

 

And also there is the Fact that the F-5E is my Favorite Jet aircraft ever made by the US so its an aircraft ive always liked.

 

I understand the ppl that do want the F-14 (and many of my friends are amongst them)

And i certainly wont try to tell anybody not to get the F-14 if they want it.

 

Its just not a fighter for me and thats the simple reason why im not sure i will get it.

 

And If i were to get the F-14 it would only be if my friends wanted me to be a RIO for them and then i would get it in order to play with my friends and not to fly it alone.

 

But the F-5E is something i will buy for me to enjoy and not for my friends sake.

 

And i foresee a large number of F-5E vs Mig-21 Servers will appear in MP when the F-5E comes out which will allow for good fun with old school fighters

(and is where both of those fighters will be the most enjoyable in the fighter role atleast)

 

If you want to go Head to Head with the FC-3 Fighters on the 104th server then yes the F-14 is better suited.

 

But if you want to do som dogfighting in 1970s jets the F-5E will be tons of fun.

 

And if you want to do light strikes with the F-5E the 104th will still be enjoyable (since with some training and learning the operational procedures and range/dive angle calculations bombing with the F-5E should be pretty accurate since accurate bombing existed long before CCIP and CCRP bombing came around.

 

 

And the F-5E will still be a very deadly fighter up close even against more modern fighters.

(as the US Navy F-5E/N aggressor aircraft have proven for many many years)

[WinterH]

Yeah I agree majority of mattebubben's points above.

 

If F-16A was made, it would be a shame really and I wouldn't even get it. Contrarily, F-5 was a first day buy for me. If a Viper is made, I'd prefer it to be a C or at least A MLU, which is anything but a few years later than F-5.

 

I am more interested in more 3rd and late 2nd gen fighters added to sim than 4th gen personally. Also there is no issue regarding module price vs aircraft capabilities for me. Modules cost what cost to develop and sell. My enjoyment from a module isn't measured in how many kills per sortie I can get, or how easy to get them, or can it work in airquake or not. If anything, less automated, better for me.

 

F-5 has always been an aircraft I wondered about how would it be to fly and operate. It is also a good counter part to my favorite module, the MiG-21. F-14, for me, is neither of these things.

 

Again, I am not creating a virtual airforce to defeat things. I am creating a virtual hangar to fly things I like, simple as that :). Oh and impact of a module on my income? I would be surprised if it is not bigger on mine than yours Tirak, as I have been unemployed for a few months now, and living on my melting savings .

 

I am not trying to bash the Tomcat at all, more power to it and Tomcat fans. I just really prefer aircraft like F-5 and Viggen myself, and when you look at this in context of reasons mattebubben and I have listed, it isn't really shocking at all ;).

Edited June 19, 2016 by WinterH
because the wonders of on screen keyboards...

[Chrinik]

Why are we even argueing this? He doesn´t like the F-5 due to his lack of funds and calculates in "BucksPerAmraam", if he doesn´t like it, he doesn´t like it, end of friggin story.

 

But Tirak, why are YOU mouthing off against people who want to have it? Who are you to tell them they are wrong for liking something you can´t afford? I don´t understand how people can like the A-10C, slow, unweildy POS tub of lard mudmover....but the people that like it, like it.

 

And that´s none of my buisness to interfere with.

The F-5 is an awesome enemy against the MiG-21, an aircraft that needed a counterpart for a long time.

 

The F-5 vs. MiG-21 servers will be very popular.

[Dudikoff]

Well its simply down to Preference why im not that interested in the F-14 and reasons why i like the F-5E.

 

But if you want to do som dogfighting in 1970s jets the F-5E will be tons of fun.

 

The last two reasons are kind of stretched. The F-14 can be operated from the land (e.g. IRIAF) and the MiG-21bis is its contemporary so the Cat is also a good opponent for it (the technological difference could be offset by numbers, tactics, etc. and provide very immersive missions as well).

 

And if you want to do light strikes with the F-5E the 104th will still be enjoyable (since with some training and learning the operational procedures and range/dive angle calculations bombing with the F-5E should be pretty accurate since accurate bombing existed long before CCIP and CCRP bombing came around.

 

Yeah, but that's up to the pilot training and has little to do with the F-5E per se except perhaps for its high wing loading. Was such bombing actually characterized as "accurate"? I'd expect that for a given pilot to reach the required level of proficiency and maintain it was pretty expensive and the numbers would probably take a further hit in the actual combat situations. Do you have some resources on the matter perhaps?

 

And the F-5E will still be a very deadly fighter up close even against more modern fighters.

(as the US Navy F-5E/N aggressor aircraft have proven for many many years)

 

I wouldn't draw the same conclusion as those are specific training scenarios and more down to the specific mission tactics and pilots involved on both sides; the F-5E airframe is light and decent, but underpowered and its systems don't really help here much so it's useful only to simulate some aspects of e.g. the MiG-21 and similar smaller fighters. The skilled pilots on it can surprise novice opposition even with more capable airframes, but probably get regularly slaughtered against proficient pilots and this is exactly their job.

Edited June 19, 2016 by Dudikoff

[Dudikoff]

If F-16A was made, it would be a shame really and I wouldn't even get it. Contrarily, F-5 was a first day buy for me. If a Viper is made, I'd prefer it to be a C or at least A MLU, which is anything but a few years later than F-5.

I am more interested in more 3rd and late 2nd gen fighters added to sim than 4th gen personally.

 

Interesting as I'd expect the F-16A to be more up your alley then given the reasoning above rather than the F-16C which is in some ways offering a similar user interface to e.g. the upcoming Hornet.

 

Also there is no issue regarding module price vs aircraft capabilities for me. Modules cost what cost to develop and sell.

 

Yeah, but that's the point Tirak is trying to make here IMHO. It's impossible that the development of the F-5E and F-14 cost nearly the same as the F-5E has very few systems compared to the Cat, but there is also the expected sales volume factor to offset those prices, I guess.

 

But please tell me this, if both F-5E and F-14A were available for e.g. the same price of $60 right now, you would still purchase the F-5E instead and consider that you got a good deal on it or you might wait for some discount on it?

Edited June 19, 2016 by Dudikoff

[WinterH]

You have asked me the same on Viggen too. Viggen and F-5 over F-14 for me any day. And I believe I have made my point that it is so for me, as well as why :).

 

 

Edit : and I consider eventually getting Tomcat in a sale possibly.

[Manuel_108]

How could you possibly not want the F-14? Two cockpits with massive ammounts of switches, radar modes etc....AIM-9s, AIM-7s, Phoenix missiles... hot damn. All the F-5 has are two sidewinders and a few dumb bombs.

[Cobra847]

We're getting very offtopic now gents. :)

 

Hopefully you'll all get all three!

The MiG-28 will undoubtedly be much fun to opfor with against the F-14 over NTTR. Highly recommended and much fun.

[Hummingbird]

I simply try to buy most aircraft so I can fly what I'm in the moot for.

 

This is my DCS wishlist though:

 

F-14...............Check!

F-16.................???

F-18...............Check!

F-4...................???

F-8...................???

EF2000...........Check!

Me262............Check!

Spitfire XIV.....Check!

EE Lightning......???

Ta 152..............???

F4U-4...............???

AH-64...............???

Mi-24................???

Harrier............Check!

Edited June 19, 2016 by Hummingbird

[X93355]

We're getting very offtopic now gents. :)

 

Hopefully you'll all get all three!

The MiG-28 will undoubtedly be much fun to opfor with against the F-14 over NTTR. Highly recommended and much fun.

 

Without a doubt Cobra - at this point in time, I'd like to just say RIP Goose, it's been 30 years since you passed but we will never forget you - Lest We Forget.

[Drag0nWIng]

if you don't want this module and don't like f14, why you click this subforum?

you can check other subforum of euro made fighter and f5e for more fun.

and honestly most of your guys will buy every module which released, but only play the one which you like(or love), face the fact and just pay the bill. that will save many words.

[Tirak]

Why are we even argueing this? He doesn´t like the F-5 due to his lack of funds and calculates in "BucksPerAmraam", if he doesn´t like it, he doesn´t like it, end of friggin story.

 

But Tirak, why are YOU mouthing off against people who want to have it? Who are you to tell them they are wrong for liking something you can´t afford? I don´t understand how people can like the A-10C, slow, unweildy POS tub of lard mudmover....but the people that like it, like it.

 

And that´s none of my buisness to interfere with.

The F-5 is an awesome enemy against the MiG-21, an aircraft that needed a counterpart for a long time.

 

The F-5 vs. MiG-21 servers will be very popular.

 

Lol, mouthing off? Mate, Davison asked if the module was worth it. I don't think it is so I said so and I said why. If opinions are asked for, I'll give mine, even if it's not the popular one. :lol:

[Sierra99]

However, all the things you mentioned (excluding the A-G radar) are technology that was not available when the F-5E was developed. It is also worth noting that the F/A-18 was derived from the F-5E via the Northrup N300 (a modified F-5E).

 

If you built the F/A-18 in 1972, it would look just like the F-5E.

 

Actually an F/A-18 built in 1972 would look like the YF-17, not an F-5E.

 

The F-5E and YF-17 were developed in parallel with each other at approximately the same time. However, they were developed for completely different markets. The F-5E was always touted as an inexpensive alternative to the Front line fighters being developed during that time. (F-4, F-14, A-6, A-7, F-8 etc.). It was never ment to be compared to the F-18. The YF-17 competed for the light weight fighter contract and lost. However, it was such a well designed aircraft the Navy adapted it to meet its requirements. (Prolly one of the few times in history a procurement process worked really well.)

 

Sierra

Edited June 20, 2016 by Sierra99