Jump to content

Is Iran F-14 still planned?


ataribaby

Recommended Posts

It's still present on here at least, though not sure how often HB updates it.

My guess though is that it'll come after the -135-GR (early) first.


Edited by Northstar98
  • Thanks 1

Modules I own: F-14A/B, Mi-24P, AV-8B N/A, AJS 37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, F-16CM, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, Mi-8MTV2, UH-1H, Mirage 2000C, FC3, MiG-15bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), P-47D, P-51D, C-101, Yak-52, WWII Assets, CA, NS430, Hawk.

Terrains I own: South Atlantic, Syria, The Channel, SoH/PG, Marianas.

System:

GIGABYTE B650 AORUS ELITE AX, AMD Ryzen 5 7600, Corsair Vengeance DDR5-5200 32 GB, Western Digital Black SN850X 1 TB (DCS dedicated) & 2 TB NVMe SSDs, Corsair RM850X 850 W, NZXT H7 Flow, MSI G274CV.

Peripherals: VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro, MFG Crosswind V3 Graphite, Logitech Extreme 3D Pro.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if there is any chance of getting an AI version released earlier. I've had Iranian F-14 placeholders in some of missions forever. Granted for AI the current A model is probably close enough, but I think I'm always going to be bothered by this in the back of my head until I get the actual Iranian Tomcats.

  • Like 1

Awaiting: DCS F-15C

Win 10 i5-9600KF 4.6 GHz 64 GB RAM RTX2080Ti 11GB -- Win 7 64 i5-6600K 3.6 GHz 32 GB RAM GTX970 4GB -- A-10C, F-5E, Su-27, F-15C, F-14B, F-16C missions in User Files

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, bedrat2 said:

I'm wondering if Heatblur is waiting till they get the F-4 Phantom out because the F-14 early would have some very similar weapon loadouts with earlier AIM-9B through J and earlier AIM-7A through M/P.

The same could be said for the RWRs, which have similar presentations and (presumably) audio effects.

Modules I own: F-14A/B, Mi-24P, AV-8B N/A, AJS 37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, F-16CM, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, Mi-8MTV2, UH-1H, Mirage 2000C, FC3, MiG-15bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), P-47D, P-51D, C-101, Yak-52, WWII Assets, CA, NS430, Hawk.

Terrains I own: South Atlantic, Syria, The Channel, SoH/PG, Marianas.

System:

GIGABYTE B650 AORUS ELITE AX, AMD Ryzen 5 7600, Corsair Vengeance DDR5-5200 32 GB, Western Digital Black SN850X 1 TB (DCS dedicated) & 2 TB NVMe SSDs, Corsair RM850X 850 W, NZXT H7 Flow, MSI G274CV.

Peripherals: VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro, MFG Crosswind V3 Graphite, Logitech Extreme 3D Pro.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 ore fa, bedrat2 ha scritto:

I'm wondering if Heatblur is waiting till they get the F-4 Phantom out because the F-14 early would have some very similar weapon loadouts with earlier AIM-9B through J and earlier AIM-7A through M/P.

F-14 entered in service in 1974 and at the time there was AIM-7E and AIM-9G. It never carried AIM-9B (way too old) nor AIM-9J (which is for USAF only).

And about the AIM-7A I think the only plane that carried that missile was the F3D in the early '50 still under the pre-1963 nomenclature (AAM-N-2). 

Speaking about loadouts I think the only missiles available for the IRIAF version will be AIM-7E-4 and AIM-9P-1, other than AIM-54A of course.

HB F-4 (1974) as far as i know should have AIM-7E, AIM.9J (pretty similar to the P in game right now) but I really hope we will able to use AIM-9E and AIM-9B for some 1967-69 missions.


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

1 hour ago, Gypsy 1-1 said:

I sure hope not. If they decide to release the F-4 before finishing the F-14 (and Viggen) this would simply not go well with their customers. I would not buy any HB product in EA anymore, simple as that. The F-14 is already 2+ years in EA with no end or finish line to be seen. Like, the last major feature update was last year and since then we only had smaller hotfixes.

 

This is simply not true - for neither the Viggen nor the F-14. Just last patch (April) we completely rebuilt the entire FC/AP system. This might not seem like a major undertaking, but it's larger than even some other features like the Forrestal and has taken months of full-time engineering resources.

FWIW; both the Viggen and F-14 will certainly be in a better state come F-4 launch, but there are no guarantees that we will have removed the EA tag by then. We're not very traditional in our use of the EA tag, as feature-wise the Viggen has been complete for a very long time on the total balance (we've added a lot of unplanned or unannounced features to the Viggen over the years!) and the F-14 is in a similar position (does anyone think the burble or new mass dynamics were on the development roadmap before 2021 for example? 😉) I think you'll be shocked at how much novelty is coming to the F-14, even excluding what we've already done in the past 12m.

Since beginning development of the F-4, we've actually expanded the F-14 roadmap significantly, but more on this later.

I think it's important to judge "launching another product while existing ones are in EA" based on this. The goalposts are constantly moving and while counter-intuitive, I should hope it's seen as a positive. 🙂

 

On 4/27/2022 at 11:38 AM, ataribaby said:

Is Iran F-14 still planned please? Without TV sensor and fuel tank pylons ?


It is - but there are higher priorities in the F-14 still that we're working on executing on; e.g.:

  • In-cockpit VR Pilot body.
  • TARPS
  • Jamming/associated radar simulation
  • F-14A (Early) with ALR-45
  • LAU-138 + other minor missing art assets
  • ALR-67 bumps

Representing the IRIAF F-14A properly is a wish of ours, but we do not consider it to be a part of EA exit criteria, thus we wish to square away other items first. 🙂 


Edited by Cobra847
  • Like 5
  • Thanks 3

Nicholas Dackard

 

Founder & Lead Artist

Heatblur Simulations

 

https://www.facebook.com/heatblur/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will get the F-4 as soon as it hits the store. 

Meanwhile I wait which goodies for my Tomcat will come around. Yes, I miss a feature of two, but overall I still have a blast with that thing, which is my almost exclusive ride since I started with DCS. 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Cobra847 said:

It is - but there are higher priorities in the F-14 still that we're working on executing on; e.g.:

  • In-cockpit VR Pilot body.
  • TARPS
  • Jamming/associated radar simulation
  • F-14A (Early) with ALR-45
  • LAU-138 + other minor missing art assets
  • ALR-67 bumps

Representing the IRIAF F-14A properly is a wish of ours, but we do not consider it to be a part of EA exit criteria, thus we wish to square away other items first. 🙂 

Well, this is disappointing. I think the Iranian Tomcat is a feature most of the community would get a lot of use out of and it would fit so well into many of the scenarios that currently work best in DCS. Also, I don't mean this to be insulting but how in the world is TARPS a higher priority? What does a recon pod do in DCS? 

Bonus feature or not, it's now part of the promise for the module in the roadmap. And people newer to DCS (such as myself) were apparently not aware it was just a bonus add-on. I've been hoping for the 95GR since I bought the Tomcat :sad:


Edited by gnomechild
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Cobra847 said:

This is simply not true - for neither the Viggen nor the F-14. Just last patch (April) we completely rebuilt the entire FC/AP system. This might not seem like a major undertaking, but it's larger than even some other features like the Forrestal and has taken months of full-time engineering resources.

FWIW; both the Viggen and F-14 will certainly be in a better state come F-4 launch, but there are no guarantees that we will have removed the EA tag by then. We're not very traditional in our use of the EA tag, as feature-wise the Viggen has been complete for a very long time on the total balance (we've added a lot of unplanned or unannounced features to the Viggen over the years!) and the F-14 is in a similar position (does anyone think the burble or new mass dynamics were on the development roadmap before 2021 for example? 😉) I think you'll be shocked at how much novelty is coming to the F-14, even excluding what we've already done in the past 12m.

Since beginning development of the F-4, we've actually expanded the F-14 roadmap significantly, but more on this later.

I think it's important to judge "launching another product while existing ones are in EA" based on this. The goalposts are constantly moving and while counter-intuitive, I should hope it's seen as a positive. 🙂

 


It is - but there are higher priorities in the F-14 still that we're working on executing on; e.g.:

  • In-cockpit VR Pilot body.
  • TARPS
  • Jamming/associated radar simulation
  • F-14A (Early) with ALR-45
  • LAU-138 + other minor missing art assets
  • ALR-67 bumps

Representing the IRIAF F-14A properly is a wish of ours, but we do not consider it to be a part of EA exit criteria, thus we wish to square away other items first. 🙂 

 


 

what about glove vanes?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gypsy 1-1 said:

Well and this is exactly what I expected. You are apparently already allocating resources for modeling and systems to the F-4, hence why the F-14 development is seemingly slowed down. Personally I am not buying or preordering the Phantom until the F-14 is out of EA and the features listed here https://trello.com/b/HsMiJggJ/heatblur-public-roadmap are all done and dusted. And I own both the Viggen and Tomcat. 


Interestingly, in reality when measuring in spend and developer manhours, the Viggen and F-14 have seen an investment of manhours in 2021 and to date in 2022 that is about equal to what was spent in the year preceding release. This is mostly possible because we added 8 full-time engineers to our team through 2021. I see that tapering off as we complete features through summer and call these modules done however (and cards in our roadmap get moved).

Thanks for your support so far; but I feel it is difficult for me to feel shame today in predicting a launch of the F-4 in a situation where both the Viggen and F-14 have most of their remaining elements delivered but the EA tag remains due to new features and/or minor elements missing.

I hope the state of both modules will be to your liking at that time as much as I hope that we'll have removed the EA label. I simply consider the overall quality and completeness of a module far more important than whether a label is attached or not. And a minor feature missing or new features added cannot be unfairly weighed against the total. 

Importantly, just because I'm discussing this doesn't mean our stated goals have changed: we want to move both modules out of EA ASAP - but we consider the actual label far less important than the state of the products themselves. That's what we wish to be judged on; not a tag.
 

1 hour ago, Gypsy 1-1 said:

 

Feature creep is also a thing - it was entirely your decision to include said un-announced features down the road and instead abandon those that were advertised pre-release. It is a matter of proper project management and leadership. 

 

I have to very strongly protest. What you'd call feature creep; I'd call passion, engagement, fun, creativity and a desire to do better. If we tightly and rigidly scoped our projects you wouldn't have JESTER (to the current extent), wake turbulence (First in DCS!), Burble (First in DCS!), trap kneeboard, roadbase support (first in DCS)- etc. The list goes on. Some of these features were even a driving point in developing them in DCS itself (wake turbulence is one example) - and all of them were the result of playfulness and creativity during the development process.

Many things people enjoy the most in our modules are the result of being comfortable with going out of scope, and we will never change in this regard- even though it frequently has a negative financial effect as the long term benefits are quite evident. 


Edited by Cobra847
  • Like 5
  • Thanks 2

Nicholas Dackard

 

Founder & Lead Artist

Heatblur Simulations

 

https://www.facebook.com/heatblur/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, gnomechild said:

Well, this is disappointing. I think the Iranian Tomcat is a feature most of the community would get a lot of use out of and it would fit so well into many of the scenarios that currently work best in DCS. Also, I don't mean this to be insulting but how in the world is TARPS a higher priority? What does a recon pod do in DCS? 

Bonus feature or not, it's now part of the promise for the module in the roadmap. And people newer to DCS (such as myself) were apparently not aware it was just a bonus add-on. I've been hoping for the 95GR since I bought the Tomcat :sad:

 

We get plenty of emails about the Alicat and TARPS 🙂 Which is my way of gently saying that it's not always as clear-cut as knowing what is in more demand than something else. I'd also note that the IRIAF F-14 has prerequisites (Early -A) which adding a graphical representation of the TARPS pod does not have. 

But to answer your key concern, it's coming! don't worry.


Edited by Cobra847
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Nicholas Dackard

 

Founder & Lead Artist

Heatblur Simulations

 

https://www.facebook.com/heatblur/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14分钟前,RaisedByWolves说:


 

what about glove vanes?

I remembered they said in early FAQ that it would be visual effect only if modelled and no relevant aerodynamics.

Human allowed, demon allowed, Deka never allowed.

Distort allowed, provoke allowed, fight back never allowed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also; if I may indulge for a moment- interestingly there are some features that are straight up shared between F-4 development and F-14. A great example is the synthetic tone generation for the ALR-45 (Early F-14A). This is of course great as we're working on it for the F-14 but sort of means we're developing the F-4 at the same time.

Conversely, there are things we're developing for the F-4 that are unannounced that will make their way back into the F-14 (Jester v2, anyone? 😉 ). It's not a zero-sum game, thankfully.

Long term, we think of our products more as living platforms (sort of like DCS) which benefit from "platform improvements" down the line (e.g. some future aircraft tech being useful for earlier releases). We haven't fully realized this vision with the Viggen and F-14 yet though, since they're quite different, but it will become a bigger element in the future. Even something as small as us developing ways to better render curved displays is going to make it's way into the F-14 from the F-4. 

RE the Iranian F-14A (because I realized I didn't actually answer the question in this thread at all!)

We will be doing something feature-wise for the Iranian F-14A. Likely we'll be doing the pod + lack of fuel pylons + other minor changes to make it more authentic + hopefully some ancillary elements like the older pilot equipment. When we get the -135 Early out and get closer on this we'll make a more detailed list. Sorry for the wait, we just want to get the early -A out before we nail down the above.


Edited by Cobra847
  • Like 7
  • Thanks 1

Nicholas Dackard

 

Founder & Lead Artist

Heatblur Simulations

 

https://www.facebook.com/heatblur/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Cobra847 said:

We get plenty of emails about the Alicat and TARPS 🙂 Which is my way of gently saying that it's not always as clear-cut as knowing what is in more demand than something else. I'd also note that the IRIAF F-14 has prerequisites (Early -A) which adding a graphical representation of the TARPS pod does not have. 

But to answer your key concern, it's coming! don't worry.

 

Yeah that's totally fair and I get it from a development perspective. Just want my Iranian Tomcat! Lol

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Cobra847 said:


Interestingly, in reality when measuring in spend and developer manhours, the Viggen and F-14 have seen an investment of manhours in 2021 and to date in 2022 that is about equal to what was spent in the year preceding release. This is mostly possible because we added 8 full-time engineers to our team through 2021. I see that tapering off as we complete features through summer and call these modules done however (and cards in our roadmap get moved).

Thanks for your support so far; but I feel it is difficult for me to feel shame today in predicting a launch of the F-4 in a situation where both the Viggen and F-14 have most of their remaining elements delivered but the EA tag remains due to new features and/or minor elements missing.

I hope the state of both modules will be to your liking at that time as much as I hope that we'll have removed the EA label. I simply consider the overall quality and completeness of a module far more important than whether a label is attached or not. And a minor feature missing or new features added cannot be unfairly weighed against the total. 

Importantly, just because I'm discussing this doesn't mean our stated goals have changed: we want to move both modules out of EA ASAP - but we consider the actual label far less important than the state of the products themselves. That's what we wish to be judged on; not a tag.
 

I have to very strongly protest. What you'd call feature creep; I'd call passion, engagement, fun, creativity and a desire to do better. If we tightly and rigidly scoped our projects you wouldn't have JESTER (to the current extent), wake turbulence (First in DCS!), Burble (First in DCS!), trap kneeboard, roadbase support (first in DCS)- etc. The list goes on. Some of these features were even a driving point in developing them in DCS itself (wake turbulence is one example) - and all of them were the result of playfulness and creativity during the development process.

Many things people enjoy the most in our modules are the result of being comfortable with going out of scope, and we will never change in this regard- even though it frequently has a negative financial effect as the long term benefits are quite evident. 

 

Completely agree on the labels. I couldn't care less whether a module is "early access" or not. It's all about what features it actually has. And with how much DCS is developing and changing, modules really are never "done" anyway

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, gnomechild said:

Completely agree on the labels. I couldn't care less whether a module is "early access" or not. It's all about what features it actually has. And with how much DCS is developing and changing, modules really are never "done" anyway

Indeed! Thanks for putting it so concisely, my posts are (a way too long way) of trying to convey that we feel the same.

That said and in the context of this, the F-14 and Viggen both absolutely need to be in a better state and level of (promised feature) completion before we release the Phantom and our development goals revolve around achieving this.


Edited by Cobra847
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Nicholas Dackard

 

Founder & Lead Artist

Heatblur Simulations

 

https://www.facebook.com/heatblur/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@IronMike @Cobra847

Any update on two items mentioned back in 2018?

1. Heatblur Forge "also as part of forge we are introducing our new dynamic cockpit system" (Pre-Order/Gameplay Reveal Trailer (Oct 2018))

2. A-6 AI (Shoulder to Shoulder - A-6E AI for DCS World (Sept 2018). This was also mentioned last year May 2021 in the Heatblur Public Roadmap as the one of the "last remaining feature/content for the F-14" 

Both of items are coming up to four years since their announcement. 

Thank you for your engagement and dedication to the community. 


Edited by Strider21
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Gypsy 1-1  Looks like you fell victim to EA idea and your own expectations. You think your own roadmap is more logical and better for all than the current one but it's not. You clearly have no idea how the modules are done expecting to put on hold most of the team just to finish EA modules. Think about it - either every dev is really bad at their work and planning or... this is how reality looks like in this business.

Looking forward to the pilot body and TARPS. Also thanks for all the features added to the Tomcat and DCS, HB.

  • Like 4

🖥️ 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

@Gypsy 1-1  DCS is constantly changing and adding features - that's great thing - and so are the modules. I would not like them stall at the development after EA. The said Hornet is 4 years out and still far from end of EA. The Tomcat may not have all the promised features or fixes yet but it was totally playable from the release - people fly whole SP campaigns and full MP missions from 2019 - and that's what matters. You're not supposed to wait for some future moment in DCS/module history where it's fully released and bug free as it may never happen. You just play and enjoy while the devs make it all better and better.

  • 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

@Gypsy 1-1  It's hard to further engage beyond restating our commitment to continued development, improvements and sustainment- on all fronts and in an appropriate way, as I can't do more than list all of the major improvements and additions we've shipped in the past 7 months alone. We'll continue executing best we can, in our order of priorities even though you may disagree with what comes first. If you wish to apply those feelings to supporting us on the F-4E then that is respectable but hopefully our execution will have been appropriate by then to make you feel more comfortable.

Just as an aside, the irony of some of this is that many of the features you're listing are not promised features at release and are features completely out of scope and added post-launch. The Viggen PBR overhaul is a great example of a feature that wasn't even in DCS on launch and is now a cornerstone of our EA exit. Nature of DCS and if I had a dollar for the amount of night lighting overhauls I've had to do 😉 


Edited by Cobra847
  • Like 6
  • Thanks 2

Nicholas Dackard

 

Founder & Lead Artist

Heatblur Simulations

 

https://www.facebook.com/heatblur/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, jaguara5 said:

Sorry to ask, the ''Early -A'' is the -95 or an early -135 version? Got little confused. 

Technically 95 is earlier but when talked about on the forum it's usually distinction between 135 early and 135 late (which is the A we already have).


Edited by draconus

🖥️ 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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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