Jump to content

Hate to wake up a dead subject but F14" "


Gentoo87

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Blaze1 said:

 The technical data is simply export controlled.

 

Like I said murky waters. If you somehow magically made the F14D in your backyard. I'm pretty sure that no one would bother you. If you then tried to sell that airplane to someone overseas, you would have a problem.  


Edited by Lurker

Specs: Win10, i5-13600KF, 32GB DDR4 RAM 3200XMP, 1 TB M2 NVMe SSD, KFA2 RTX3090, VR G2 Headset, Warthog Throttle+Saitek Pedals+MSFFB2  Joystick. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, shagrat said:

There is a difference between public in "US citizens" and public as in "won't mind if you mail a copy to North Korea". Though it's debatable, if in today's world that regulation is sensible or even effective, it still is in place. So a document can be de-classified and available to NATO Partners, military contractors etc., de-classified and available to the public but restricted for foreign countries or countries under ITAR, or de-classified and publicly available to everyone.

Some stuff is sold worldwide by Amazon, as print on demand, but fortunately it is more complicated than just "de-classified".

 

While I agree with the general principle of what you're saying shagrat, it doesn't apply to the example I described.  The US government generally considers articles in the US public domain as having been exported due the lack of control over such items.  In that earlier post where I cited previous experience, if the documents were available to US citizens exclusively, it would have required them to submit identification proving their nationality and that wasn't the case.  It was available to all nationalities.

 

 

42 minutes ago, Lurker said:

 

Like I said murky waters. If you somehow magically made the F14D in your backyard. I'm pretty sure that no one would bother you. If you then tried to sell that airplane to someone overseas, you would have a problem.  

If you managed to make and F-14D in your backyard (ignoring any law on arms) and sold it, copyright may be the issue rather than anything else.


Edited by Blaze1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Blaze1 said:

If you managed to make and F-14D in your backyard (ignoring any law on arms) and sold it, copyright may be the issue rather than anything else.

 

I'd be more curious where you got all the Titanium needed, because there's a possibility that a solid chunk of the titanium used in the Tomcats, like that used in the SR71, may have come from Soviet mines XD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 8/23/2021 at 7:02 PM, Blaze1 said:

I was pointed to this thread by another member because I thought the FOIA process was quite interesting.

 

You mentioned that the documents in question are unclassified, specifically NAVAIR 01-F14AAD-1A (1997).  I received a response to an FOIA request for the same manual back in 2014.  The response stated the manual was confidential and as a result being withheld completely.  It's possible that during the intervening years the manual has subsequently been declassified, however I'd be surprised if that was the case, so when you say "the documents are unclassifed", I assume you mean after redaction of systems and modes pertaining to the APG-71, ALR-67, ALQ-165 ASPJ, AIM-7M, AIM-9M etc?

Everything in that manual aside from the IRST system which much of its tech went into Lockheed's new Legion TGP is unclassifed. They (the Navy) said they were happy to give us the manual with the IRST info (which made a decent part of the manual) was remove/redacted. This work had already been done after the month or so we waited and it was only as they were about to send it did ITAR step in.

 

Everything else pertaining to the APG-70, MFD and SMS pages for the PTID, info on updated AIM-54s such as the ECCM, Sparrowhawk and Kaiser ect, essentially what ED/Heatblur would still require to attempt an F-14D is unclassified. It could, after all these years still be Iran as the reason they are holding them back but regardless 80% of it is unclassifed its purely just the IRST that is still currently the issue from what we've been able to find 3rd party and also from the Navy themselves. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/5/2021 at 4:55 AM, Southernbear said:

Everything in that manual aside from the IRST system which much of its tech went into Lockheed's new Legion TGP is unclassifed. They (the Navy) said they were happy to give us the manual with the IRST info (which made a decent part of the manual) was remove/redacted. This work had already been done after the month or so we waited and it was only as they were about to send it did ITAR step in.

 

Everything else pertaining to the APG-70, MFD and SMS pages for the PTID, info on updated AIM-54s such as the ECCM, Sparrowhawk and Kaiser ect, essentially what ED/Heatblur would still require to attempt an F-14D is unclassified. It could, after all these years still be Iran as the reason they are holding them back but regardless 80% of it is unclassifed its purely just the IRST that is still currently the issue from what we've been able to find 3rd party and also from the Navy themselves. 

So to be clear, the unredacted manual is still classified confidential due to IRST, while the redacted version is unclassified but falls foul of ITAR and this was specifically mentioned by the Navy in their official correspondence to you and or your friend?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One kinda doubts IR is even modeled in DCS well enough that the IRST would matter. How well is the SU-27?

Specs & Wishlist:

 

Core i9 9900k 5.0Ghz, Asus ROG Maximus XI Hero, 64GB G.Skill Trident 3600, Asus RoG Strix 3090 OC, 2TB x Samsung Evo 970 M.2 boot. Samsung Evo 860 storage, Coolermaster H500M, ML360R AIO

 

HP Reverb G2, Samsung Odyssey+ WMR; VKB Gunfighter 2, MCG Pro; Virpil T-50CM v3; Slaw RX Viper v2

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Uxi said:

How well is the SU-27?

Like most things in DCS - simplified.  Mostly overperforms - laser ranging far over 10km, seeing through clouds and smoke, not affected by sun and reflections... sometimes underperforms in long range when in clear IR contrast situation.

  • Like 1

🖥️ Win10 i7-10700KF 32GB RTX3060   🥽 Rift S   🕹️ T16000M HOTAS   ✈️ FC3, F-14A/B, F-15E   ⚙️ CA   🚢 SC   🌐 NTTR, PG, Syria

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel like we are going in circles. Even if every little detail of this plane (or any other aircraft for that matter) was unclassified, does that mean that anyone in the world can simply build a commercial game product, especially a fairly accurate simulation, using that material? You need would need permissions form the manufacturer and most probably (in the case of military aircraft) the government. 


Edited by Lurker

Specs: Win10, i5-13600KF, 32GB DDR4 RAM 3200XMP, 1 TB M2 NVMe SSD, KFA2 RTX3090, VR G2 Headset, Warthog Throttle+Saitek Pedals+MSFFB2  Joystick. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Lurker said:

I feel like we are going in circles. Even if every little detail of this plane (or any other aircraft for that matter) was unclassified, does that mean that anyone in the world can simply build a commercial game product, especially a fairly accurate simulation, using that material? You need would need permissions form the manufacturer and most probably (in the case of military aircraft) the government. 

 

Not really.  I think most of us know this.  Heatblur were given leeway to create an F-14A/B sim, so if the technical data did become available for the 'D', there's a strong possibility (in my opinion) they'd be given the opportunity again to develop another excellent simulation.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lurker said:

unclassified, does that mean that anyone in the world can simply build a commercial game product

The answer like always is that it depends. ITAR doesn't have a FOIA equivalent and it's much harder to get something removed from the USML than to get it declassified, assuming enough time has passed and there's no derivative tech. However, ITAR is also not black and white, even non US persons and companies can undergo a certification process that allows them to use ITAR controlled material. Whether or not such an arrangement is possible with the F-14D in the future is something that can't be decided easily without actually approaching the DDTC. The issue is that the amount of regulatory nightmare involved with such a project makes it financially unfeasible to any sane company. 

 

There's also a high level of risk that this naturally carries with itself. ITAR/EAR are famous for having an extremely serious punitive/investigative program associated with them and the regulations with such a project would be incredibly complex. One mistake when you're handling ITAR restricted material that a Blue Lantern check uncovers and the results could vary from 'the company goes bankrupt and the project is terminated immediately' or 'everyone involved goes to prison for years'. You're dealing with the sharp teeth of the OFAC enforcment and a notoriously hostile investigative program that exists to make people's lives miserable in any country with a US embassy. You mess up, you get on the OFAC SDN list and your career in any professional capacity is over.

 

So the issue isn't a blanket ban but the fact that doing anything regarding this issue as a company working on a commercial product is incredibly risky. There have been issues with this with other sim products where the developers had to remove it entirely and that was not even a tactically relevant platform in any capacity. As for the manufacturer, as far as I'm aware  (based on comments by HB) the  F-14 module had absolutely nothing to do with Grumman, they weren't involved at all.

 

But like always, that also depends. Razbam (at least originally) made the Mirage 2000 without involving the manufacturer (which is why it's called M2000 in game), on the other hand, the Kiowa isn't just licenced but Polychop has to submit the finished product for a review by a Bell where they check if the quality is acceptable for them. 


Edited by WobblyFlops
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/7/2021 at 3:58 AM, Blaze1 said:

So to be clear, the unredacted manual is still classified confidential due to IRST, while the redacted version is unclassified but falls foul of ITAR and this was specifically mentioned by the Navy in their official correspondence to you and or your friend?

Essentially...remember the only reason A1 exists is because they wanted to release the normal F-14A/B manual and took everything that was classifed into this new manual...it could be they couldn't be bothered or there isn't enough info to just take the IRST info out into another book and call it A2 or something but otherwise everything else in A1 baring the IRST is unclassified but due to ITAR, not available. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Southernbear said:

Essentially...remember the only reason A1 exists is because they wanted to release the normal F-14A/B manual and took everything that was classifed into this new manual...it could be they couldn't be bothered or there isn't enough info to just take the IRST info out into another book and call it A2 or something but otherwise everything else in A1 baring the IRST is unclassified but due to ITAR, not available. 

Southerbear, I'm not quite sure what you mean when you say "...they wanted to release the normal F-14A/B manual...".  To whom did they want to release the normal F-14A/B manual, so are we talking about the FOIA process here or general access for those requiring the manual for their jobs?

 

The F-14 has always had an unclassified (but ITAR controlled, when ITAR became a thing) NATOPS e.g NAVAIR 01-F14AAA-1 (for the F-14A) and NAVAIR 01-F14AAD-1 (for the F-14D) and a classified confidential NATOPS supplement e.g NAVAIR 01-F14AAA-1A (for the F-14A) and NAVAIR 01-F14AAD-1A (for the F-14D).  So the -1A manuals aren't new relative to -1's, they have always been the supplementary documents.  Classifying documents is expensive and can make learning more difficult for the crew, as access would be restricted to "The Vault", so that's part of the reason as I understand to have the separate volumes.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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