Jump to content

F-14A


Wizard_03

Recommended Posts

The thrust curves between the models are different.

 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

 

I was looking for the real FF figures when I found this:

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=209260&stc=1&d=1556128564

 

(FLIGHT International, 30 March 1985)

 

Seems the TF-30s are doing better economy without reheat though.

 

I was looking for some numbers because I have the impression that the reheat FF might be a bit too high, getting ~1350-1400 lb/min down low and 400 lb/min at 48k ft - per engine, the ratio to MIL always being around 7-8:1. When calculating the FFs for the given numbers, I end up at 210.67 lb/min for dry thust (which is ~12.6 on the FF gauge, pretty much what I see in DCS) and 893.64 lb/min for reheat, which is a ratio of 4.24:1. Thinking of the fact, that ram effect at higher speeds increase the thrust and therefor the FF as well, I deliberately failed at trying to take numbers at zero speed, since we neither have working chocks nor does the cat stay in the deck wires for more than just 3-4 seconds when hooking her up and pushing the throttle (did I already mention somewhere that it's utterly weird to have her start rolling after a perfect 3 wire while doing the standard 4 seconds full throttle thing just in case without even touching the wheel brakes or hook lever?)... and because of that, I didn't open up a thread about this yet... twi-notbad.png

tomcat-engines.jpg.677ddebafb1ac4c0f7f810d687db0564.jpg

dcsdashie-hb-ed.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't say it better.

 

Besides, from the F-15 onwards (including the F-14D, F-16, F/A-18, etc...) every fighter's HUD got those generally same modern / similar presentation / similar looking symbols.

 

Whereas the F-14A and B HUD symbols while archaic, were something of their own.

 

I want the F14A. Partly for the challenge of flying it, mainly because you can wear classy schemes like this and be historically authentic.

 

...

 

I dont get the fixation on the D. They didnt make that many, they didnt stay in service that long, and they didnt do anything significant but drop bombs. Yes, in an ideal world, it would be nice. Would I pay money for something that doesnt really do anything more significant than a B? No.

 

Well there is the historical aspect of having the A version along with the fact that the Iranians have the A model and that in itself makes it interesting to have the jet in a historical context for typically the red force.

 

As for the D, would be nice, but yeah the B is where it's at, and the mixture of being one of the most capable airframes in all of its verging between analogue and digital world goodness just makes it all the more compelling.


Edited by Top Jockey

Hangar
FC3 | F-14A/B | F-16C | F/A-18C | MiG-21bis | Mirage 2000C ... ... JA 37 | Kfir | MiG-23 | Mirage IIIE
Mi-8 MTV2

system
i7-4790 K , 16 GB DDR3 , GTX 1660 Ti 6GB , Samsung 860 QVO 1TB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO HB need to focus and correct/fix the main issues with the F-14B (which is what I assume that's what they are doing) before they even release the F-14A, it's not even a month out yet (F14B) and your asking for the F-14A lol ... when does it end this need for putting pressure on the Devs to release aircraft before they are really ready, plus the Viggen still needs to be completed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think they even said they'd want to get the B as close as possible in regards of performance so they can just swap the engines not having to mess with all the other parameters again just to get the A right as well.

dcsdashie-hb-ed.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO HB need to focus and correct/fix the main issues with the F-14B (which is what I assume that's what they are doing) before they even release the F-14A, it's not even a month out yet (F14B) and your asking for the F-14A lol ... when does it end this need for putting pressure on the Devs to release aircraft before they are really ready, plus the Viggen still needs to be completed.

 

 

No everyone is 'putting pressure on the Devs' - personally I would be more than happy for HB to not bother with the A model at all, and just get the B model properly sorted/finished and have a decent carrier to fly it off. :thumbup:

Asus Maximus VIII Hero Alpha| i7-6700K @ 4.60GHz | nVidia GTX 1080ti Strix OC 11GB @ 2075MHz| 16GB G.Skill Trident Z RGB 3200Mhz DDR4 CL14 |

Samsung 950 PRO 512GB M.2 SSD | Corsair Force LE 480GB SSD | Windows 10 64-Bit | TM Warthog with FSSB R3 Lighting Base | VKB Gunfighter Pro + MCG | TM MFD's | Oculus Rift S | Jetseat FSE

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No everyone is 'putting pressure on the Devs' - personally I would be more than happy for HB to not bother with the A model at all, and just get the B model properly sorted/finished and have a decent carrier to fly it off. :thumbup:

 

I just asked a question lol I’d hardly call that putting on pressure. Besides they said we’d get a roadmap for all this stuff around two weeks after release, once the hysteria dies down.


Edited by Wizard_03

DCS F/A-18C :sorcerer:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just asked a question lol I’d hardly call that putting on pressure. Besides they said we’d get a roadmap for all this stuff around two weeks after release, once the hysteria dies down.

 

 

I hear ya, didn't call out anyone but look at the old F-14 thread, many players getting impatient for a release and now sky is falling because players assumed it would not be released by the end of March... All I am saying its starts as a small snowball but as it rolls down the hill get what happens... same crap goes on there, players get impatient and the pitchforks� come out demanding they get their F-14A, as for roadmaps/timelines they are useless if the Dev's don't follow them, HB have not been perfect in this area and all it does is puts them in a corner, I'm sure they are well aware of what they need to do. I'd like one just as much as you but if I was them I would not put one out, updates here every few months should be enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect it is more about the engine stalls. There was an interview with an F-14 crew who'd spent most of their time in the F-14B model. The pilot had only about twenty or so hours flight time in the F-14A yet, he joked, he'd still occasionally have nightmares about double compressor stalls in the F-14A,and could still rattle off the whole restart process.

 

It sounded like it made an impression...

 

This is the problem with stories. According to Keith "Okie" Nance in his Q&A (you find it on Youtube) he had never issues with it and it happened only once in his career to him, by a mistake from his side. Solving this issue was no problem at all.

i9 9900K @ 5,0GHz | 1080GTX | 32GB RAM | 256GB, 512GB & 1TB Samsung SSDs | TIR5 w/ Track Clip | Virpil T-50 Stick with extension + Warthog Throttle | MFG Crosswind pedals | Gametrix 908 Jetseat

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The F-14A is needed so you can compare it to the Viggen and see two aircraft that entered operational service within about a year of each other, but are almost polar opposites. Aside from the fact that one of them is for killing ships and the other is for preventing just that, they make for a very interesting contrast in how the designers approached certain problems that the two had in common.

 

For example:

- Both aircraft needed good supersonic performance but neither could accept an excessively high approach speed. The F-14 got swing wings, and while that solution was also considered for the Viggen, it was rejected in favor of the close-coupled canard configuration.

 

- Both aircraft faced challenges with a significant increase in weapon system complexity and an unacceptably high pilot workload. The F-14 chose a second crew member, while the Viggen made the (quite controversial at the time) decision to go with limited complexity, more assistance from the new and unproven onboard computer and therefore also full integration of basically all onboard systems with that computer.

 

- Both aircraft faced challenges with regards to the reliability of first generation afterburning turbofans, and especially when it came to compressor stalls. For the Viggen this was less of a problem due to its role as a strike aircraft, but it was still considered a problem and the engine was only considered "acceptable with hesitation".

 

Of course, the Viggen could get away with cutting a lot of corners because its mission scope was extremely tightly focused - it was made for one type of mission in a very specific operational area, and so (for example) it was possible to omit a real INS system in exchange for faster cold starts (because you don't need to wait for alignment).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm looking forward to the F-14A. Until 1988 it was the only Tomcat game in town. It still lead in many of the F-14's firsts. The first F-14 to drop a bomb in anger was an F-14A from VF-41. The COIN, CAS, and SCAR procedures for the F-14 were developed by VF-41 in the F-14A. First air wing on scene in the NAG after 9/11 was CVW-8 with VF-14 and VF-41's (seeing a pattern here) F-14As. The A was still the only Tomcat operationally launched from the carrier in the quad bomber configuration. VF-154 detached 5 of their F-14As to Al Udeid AB to support CAS efforts in OIF. And 100% of the F-14's 5 air-to-air victories in US service were by F-14As. It's also the only variant that got exported. The only thing the Tomcat did that the A model didn't do is drop GPS weapons, and the F-14B we got can't do that either.

 

Sure, I'd love to have all of the F-14 variants, but if I had to choose between the D or the A, I'd choose the A for its historical significance, livery options, and longevity of service. I'd be exceptionally happy if the A we get is a contemporary of the B we are got.

DCSF-14AOK3A.jpg

DCSF14AOK3B.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its nice that they are including the A, but i think most would have been more than content if Heatblur had only planned the B

 

 

Going from it to the Asthma Cat with its atrocious Tf30 engines is literal handicap request. would just be like an athelete asking to have someone beat them with a bat become a paraplegic, put in a wheelchair and play basketball ( or insert other preferred sport) against fully able bodied athlete.

 

But i no doubt historically accurate version to have on the Redforce team in the Persian Gulf Theater, and of course still a pretty sweet deal for you buck buying 2 aircraft variations for the price of one.

 

I suspect it is more about the engine stalls. There was an interview with an F-14 crew who'd spent most of their time in the F-14B model. The pilot had only about twenty or so hours flight time in the F-14A yet, he joked, he'd still occasionally have nightmares about double compressor stalls in the F-14A,and could still rattle off the whole restart process.

 

It sounded like it made an impression...

 

All due respect to Heatblur, but I’ve gotta agree with some other folks - if the F-14D wasn’t an option, I think more content for the F-14B would make more sense than doing the F-14A

 

Reading all of this, i get a feeling that is disturbingly similar to all those threads lamenting the lack airspeed indicator on the HUD. Or a Sparrowhawk HUD for that matter......

 

Some of us signed up for the F-14A you know, the B was just a bonus..... :thumbup:

 

EDIT: what's more important then dropping bombs in the War on Terror? How about protecting the fleet from potential threats for 20 years? We got lucky the Cold War never turned hot, but if it had....... And maybe having those 14A's were part of the reason why we were so lucky.


Edited by captain_dalan

Modules: FC3, Mirage 2000C, Harrier AV-8B NA, F-5, AJS-37 Viggen, F-14B, F-14A, Combined Arms, F/A-18C, F-16C, MiG-19P, F-86, MiG-15, FW-190A, Spitfire Mk IX, UH-1 Huey, Su-25, P-51PD, Caucasus map, Nevada map, Persian Gulf map, Marianas map, Syria Map, Super Carrier, Sinai map, Mosquito, P-51, AH-64 Apache

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reading all of this, i get a feeling that is disturbingly similar to all those threads lamenting the lack airspeed indicator on the HUD. Or a Sparrowhawk HUD for that matter......

 

Some of us signed up for the F-14A you know, the B was just a bonus..... :thumbup:

 

EDIT: what's more important then dropping bombs in the War on Terror? How about protecting the fleet from potential threats for 20 years? We got lucky the Cold War never turned hot, but if it had....... And maybe having those 14A's were part of the reason why we were so lucky.

 

That's true, to each his own.

 

Speaking for myself, I also prefer the Cold-War fleet-defender atributes of the Tomcat.


Edited by Top Jockey

Hangar
FC3 | F-14A/B | F-16C | F/A-18C | MiG-21bis | Mirage 2000C ... ... JA 37 | Kfir | MiG-23 | Mirage IIIE
Mi-8 MTV2

system
i7-4790 K , 16 GB DDR3 , GTX 1660 Ti 6GB , Samsung 860 QVO 1TB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reading all of this, i get a feeling that is disturbingly similar to all those threads lamenting the lack airspeed indicator on the HUD. Or a Sparrowhawk HUD for that matter......

 

Some of us signed up for the F-14A you know, the B was just a bonus..... :thumbup:

 

EDIT: what's more important then dropping bombs in the War on Terror? How about protecting the fleet from potential threats for 20 years? We got lucky the Cold War never turned hot, but if it had....... And maybe having those 14A's were part of the reason why we were so lucky.

 

Oh boy how much I respect this! This is exactly my sentiment with the Tomcat, my fantasy is for a Iceland map with a Red Storm Rising campaign. I want 1980's scenarios where the Tomcat was king of the Naval arena. But people cry to have the Sparrowhawk so it makes it easier for them, god know's how Tomcat pilots put up with the A/B's avionics before the upgrades, must of been impossible to fly with a HUD that didn't show altitude and speed. It's really not hard in game to glance at the wheel and get a rough idea how many knots you're doing.

"I'm just a dude, playing a dude, disguised as another dude."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm an "A" guy too. It's not about what is 'best', because if that were true i wouldn't even want to fly any Tomcat. It's all about the era and relative technology to fight against, the chance to simulate some interesting old conflicts that happened or could have happened prior to that explosion of technology that changed the face of combat machines. Also I'd prefer a closer to Iranian A version so we could have some realistic opposing faction for the US planes, and make some Iranian scenarios (hello still escorting Backfires to Syria!).

It's not about "limitations", people need to throw that word away, it's about simulation and the depth that DCS can do it to is the only way to get closer to having an idea what the pilots had to cope with.

In DCS you can transcend half a century of flight in 20 mins. Even jumping from Hornet to Tomcat is a mind blowing experience. Is it weird that I prefer to fly a machine that is older? Why do so many fight jockeys like having a little prop at an airfield? I'd like to know about the A too please.

___________________________________________________________________________

SIMPLE SCENERY SAVING * SIMPLE GROUP SAVING * SIMPLE STATIC SAVING *

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you wind it back to about 220knots, the B is pretty good on fuel consumption. If only guzzles it when you want to go anywhere fast, which is fair enough. Thats what tankers are for. :)

 

 

It would be nice to have more multiplayer servers for period aircraft. I tend to find it a bit irritating ot have to fight against F18's all the time. When its just sidewinders, its no problem, but Aim120's just change the whole picture. I dont find the Phoenix a match for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think some of you understand how to look at a Psub chart..

 

 

You can see at lower altitudes say less than 10,000 the difference between the engines aren't much however as you go up higher in altitude you can see a dramatic differences.

 

if you were to plot the thrust curve between each engine as you go up in altitude you can see the strengths and weaknesses. The power excess chart clearly shows this. if I waa look at my old DVDs from my old flight model for both of these engines you can see the difference. I recall from memory, I believe somewhere around Mach 5 at 5000 ft there was something between 8 to 10,000 lb differences in thrust

 

 

Particularly at the lower speeds of tf30 does not have enough thrust. Looking at the Mach 90 regiin you can see that the climb rates are substantially different.

 

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In other words a lot less range. Does anyone know the thrust difference at full AB?

 

Also I'm interested to see how it handles the pattern and WOs right up to max trap weight. I'm wondering if the lower spoil up times on the engines will be very noticeable.


Edited by Wizard_03

DCS F/A-18C :sorcerer:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yup totally want an A... Bought it for the A in fact.

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And, probably, like a twentieth of it's range. At least that's what it is at the moment in DCS since it literally stalls out of the sky if you throttle back past 90% RPM and it needs 80% RPM to get rolling if it has stores on it (the real thing does this at 29% when you just release the wheel brakes, it's even mentioned as advisory in the NATOPS). Flying that thing literally is like flying the Tomcat in reheat exclusively if you don't wanna be overtaken by a fully laden A-10. If RAZBAM ever fixes that, it might be a consideration... until then, the Tomcat is the only fast thing that has a TGP right now rainbowdashwink.png

 

And I want to get the A as well more than the D... lots more realistic and great looking paint jobs there, it's the true one and even those engine nozzles look far better. But I do fear the 40% higher SFC in reheat...

 

Careful my man, the white knighs of razbam might come after you for pointing flaws in their glorious FMs... In fact 4 whole threads got nuked for that today...

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right now I'm very much an A guy; however, I won't know which one I like more until I get to try it out. I just really want a VF-1 bird because of my time growing up in San Diego near Miramar.

 

I'm quite happy with them perfecting the B before the A rolls out. I'm just pleased as punch to be flying the Cat at all right now. I have barely touched any other module since release, and I don't expect to spend any significant time anywhere else but in the Cat for a long, long time.

 

I'm less excited about a D. If they make one, of course I will get it, but I am much more interested in the semi-old stuff. Once we're into MFDs, fancy HUDs, and FBW, it starts to seem less like flying and more like office work.

 

 

Before the Cat, the Tiger was my go-to bird. The two are absolutely perfect for each other, and both have the great Top Gun nostalgia aspect for me. The movie that got me interested in airplanes starting at age 3 :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the the fuel consumption might be the biggest issue for me. The F-14Bs 54K bring back is already tight enough on gas. Can’t imagine what it’s gonna be like with TF30s.

 

It shouldn't be too bad, the F-14A had the same max trap at each time point, but is ~1800 lbs lighter overall. The F-14 started with a max trap of 51800, but this was increased in the late-80s or early-90s to 54000. It was the same for all 3 versions of the F-14 in the fleet.

 

In general, the TF30 will have plenty of performance for the pattern, but will run at slightly higher thrust settings. The difference between the engines will be most noticeable while flying the ball since the TF30's response time is definitely slower. This will likely be the issue that most players notice, especially since the version of direct lift control planned for the mid-80s F-14A is a lot less effective than the version of the F-14B.

 

-Nick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...