Feedback Thread - F-14 Tomcat Patch June 8th 2022

[IronMike]

Dear all,

as always we appreciate your feedback on the current patch. In particular it would be great to hear from those of you who use FFB, if there are any remaining issues.

We also started introducing a set of fixes together with ED that help with the AIM-54s guidance and reduced the induced drag, which was set too high before. Additionally Eagle Dynamics introduced a fix for guidance, which makes the transitions between mid course and terminal guidance smoother and also introduced a fix to the F-14 AI using the phoenix as an active missile in TWS. (Our sincere thanks at this point for their great support!)

We also updated our missions that use the Stennis, so that deck positions match with the new model - unfortunately we removed the SC version of Reforger a bit prematurely, as it was initially meant to have a hybrid state to display SC features for SC owners and remain default for those who don't own the Supercarrier module. Due to some remaining issues online this change was reverted, but it was too late to re-upload the OP Reforger SC version, which will return next patch, unless the hybrid features for the Stennis will be re-introduced by then. Either way we hope you enjoy the new Stennis, we think ED did an awesome job on it.

Our apologies that we were not quick enough to introduce Quickstart missions for the new South Atlantic map, these will also follow with the next patch. We would like to congratulate Razbam on the new map in particular, as we think it is an outstanding map and will be a great playground for both Tomcat and Viggen alike. While this is a bit off topic, it does not hurt to mention that we had incredible fun testing the map, and we hope you will, too.

Below please find the rest of the changelog, and as usual, thank you for your continued feedback and support!
 

DCS: F-14 Tomcat by Heatblur Simulations

• Reduced AIM-54 induced drag. 
• Returned to original guidance parameters thanks to a guidance fix by ED.
• ED: AA missiles. Corrected target tracking extrapolation.
• ED: Weapons. AIM-54 launched by AI will enable active mode automatically instead of semi-active guidance in TWS.
• Fixed fuel flow initialisation - fuel now drains from the correct tanks again. 
• Removed the new unrealistic maneuver flap axis again. 
• Turn on BRSIT flood antenna during sparrow LTE procedure to ensure the first missile can find a target.
• Fixed incorrect LTE for fist sparrow launched in BRSIT mode.
• Clear radar tracks when switching to transitional radar modes (PLM, VSL, MRL).
• Inhibit AVIA display when NAV GRID shown or A/G mode selected.
• TACAN Mode X keybind fixed - now switches to X instead of the middle position.
• Fixed RIO's pilot flap axis command affecting pilot’s flap control.
• Fixed Iceman taking control and throttling up on ground during SP RIO startup.
• Fixed AUTO THROT light illuminated when disengaging APC via throttle mode switch.
• Fixed Iceman overriding ALT HLD and oscillating when the player switches to RIO seat. 
• Fixed AP not working correctly with FFB sticks. 
• Fixed LANDING CHK light remaining illuminated after touchdown.
• Updated deck object placements for all missions including the new Stennis model. 
• Removed OP Reforger SC version - temporarily.

Edited June 8, 2022 by IronMike

[Badger1-1]

Maybe its me but I did some test yesterday and now repeated them and wow...Phoenix is back(was it ever gone?)

 

What I found was some extreme whobbling due to chaff and or jammer, but no game breaker!

edit: The AI seems to know the AIm54 is coming at around 16-15secs out, missle went active 2-3 secs later...is that known?

 

Thanks HB

Edited June 8, 2022 by Badger1-1

[IronMike]

9 minutes ago, Badger1-1 said:

Maybe its me but I did some test yesterday and now repeated them and wow...Phoenix is back(was it ever gone?)

 

What I found was some extreme whobbling due to chaff and or jammer, but no game breaker!

edit: The AI seems to know the AIm54 is coming at around 16-15secs out, missle went active 2-3 secs later...is that known?

 

Thanks HB

 

What tells you that the missile went active? The best indication is the distance according to your tgt size switch setting, so 13, 10 or 6nm.

[Callsign JoNay]

I was surprised there was no fix for the extra burble effect we've been experiencing since the patch that implemented it in the Hornet. I believe it is dependent on whether or not the Wake Turbulence setting is checked or not. Has that been looked at yet?

[IronMike]

2 minutes ago, Callsign JoNay said:

I was surprised there was no fix for the extra burble effect we've been experiencing since the patch that implemented it in the Hornet. I believe it is dependent on whether or not the Wake Turbulence setting is checked or not. Has that been looked at yet?

That should have been disabled on ED's side, indeed. If you still notice doubled wake turbulence or burble effect with DCS wake turbulence set to on, please let me know. Thank you!

[Noctrach]

Overall a step in the right direction I think. However, the loft seems less optimal now and I'm seeing quite a bit of guidance + AWG-9 weirdness involving broken tracks.

Extrapolated shots don't guide at all and AWG-9 symbology seems inconsistent.

Edited June 8, 2022 by Noctrach

[RustBelt]

Any particular tests FFB users can do to give you better info? 

[Badger1-1]

3 hours ago, IronMike said:

What tells you that the missile went active? The best indication is the distance according to your tgt size switch setting, so 13, 10 or 6nm.

Once the TWS contact starts flashing?

[IronMike]

6 minutes ago, Badger1-1 said:

Once the TWS contact starts flashing?

It usually starts flashing when the missile goes active, indeed, but I have seen it be slightly inaccurate, whether late or early, too. So in reviews I always check the range, according to my tgt size switch setting. If you never change it, that would be 10nm.

2 hours ago, RustBelt said:

Any particular tests FFB users can do to give you better info? 

Nothing in particular, thank you, however flying as you would and if possible some usage of the autopilot, would be great. IIRC most issues came up when trying to use the AP, including submodes. Thanks for the kind offer and hope everything works fine now.

[Indianajon]

Hi IronMike,  I had a very unusually thing happen tonight which had me scratching my head. I loved it but thought I'd better check it was correct. 

I was flying a random zone 5 mission (number 6 I think? Will grab the track in a sec). I was in norm missile mode, STT with the Aim-7. Shot at about 10 miles and almost immediately (maybe a second at most) Jester shifted to PD-STT and lost lock. It took me about 3-4 seconds to lock back up using PAL and I fired a second fox 1. However the first continued to track and hit the target (F16 defending by diving and trying to pull into the notch using chaff & flare).

I've never had a fox 1 track and hit after a broken lock, even if I have managed to lock back up. I loved it but it's not how I understood sparrows worked.

I will put my tacview up momentarily.

Tacview-20220608-204249-DCS-Zone 5 - 06.zip.acmi

6 minutes ago, Indianajon said:

Hi IronMike,  I had a very unusually thing happen tonight which had me scratching my head. I loved it but thought I'd better check it was correct. 

I was flying a random zone 5 mission (number 6 I think? Will grab the track in a sec). I was in norm missile mode, STT with the Aim-7. Shot at about 10 miles and almost immediately (maybe a second at most) Jester shifted to PD-STT and lost lock. It took me about 3-4 seconds to lock back up using PAL and I fired a second fox 1. However the first continued to track and hit the target (F16 defending by diving and trying to pull into the notch using chaff & flare).

I've never had a fox 1 track and hit after a broken lock, even if I have managed to lock back up. I loved it but it's not how I understood sparrows worked.

I will add everything else worked a dream and the fuel feed etc is fixed.

Tacview-20220608-204249-DCS-Zone 5 - 06.zip.acmi 4.19 MB · 0 downloads

 

 

Edited June 8, 2022 by Indianajon

[captain_dalan]

Redone the 6 on 6 mission i posted in the "Phoenix to Space" thread (or something like that) and yes indeed, there are some changes there, both in mothership guidance and missile performance. Overall, more missile now find their target while still (if barely) supersonic. How much is a result of changes in drag and how much in lofting logic is hard to tell. Moreover, the missiles fired from closer still end up slower then the missiles fired from further. This may however be specific to the way the bandits are set in the mission and requires further investigation against a single target under constant conditions. What has DEFINITELY changed is with how much energy the missiles arrive at the "pitbull" point and it has changed for the better, especially for targets fired from closer ranges. Before this update, the missiles went active at about mach 1.7 for 50 mile shots (in this scenario) to mach 1.5 for missiles fired around 35 miles. Now though, the missiles go active at about mach 1.8 for the former and about mach 2.0 for the latter. Note, target size is set to normal, so 10 mile active command is assumed. This means that the missile starts it terminal guidance with more energy to spare, and what is more important, when fired closer, that energy quantity goes up. This seems to be a result of changes in slope angle, which is not considerably shallower for closer shot. The terminal guidance itself still bleeds a lot of energy, and most shots end up intercepting their targets with only marginally better kinetic performance then they did, but the increase is there. 

10 tacview files are attached bellow for people that want to make the comparison to the previous tracks. Only did one test against maneuvering targets (MiG-29 Persian Gulf BVR mission) and the results were satisfactory. One missile went active at almost mach 3 and found its target, while the other bandit survived only by Split-S-ing out of Dodge. So, so far, i think this update is an improvement. More tests will follow to account for specifics. 

Cheers! 

Tacview-20220608-221719-DCS-6 on 6 test mk47.zip.acmi Tacview-20220608-222215-DCS-6 on 6 test mk47.zip.acmi Tacview-20220608-222710-DCS-6 on 6 test mk47.zip.acmi Tacview-20220608-223202-DCS-6 on 6 test mk47.zip.acmi Tacview-20220608-223654-DCS-6 on 6 test mk47.zip.acmi Tacview-20220608-215400-DCS-6 on 6 test mk47.zip.acmi Tacview-20220608-215809-DCS-6 on 6 test mk47.zip.acmi Tacview-20220608-220225-DCS-6 on 6 test mk47.zip.acmi Tacview-20220608-220740-DCS-6 on 6 test mk47.zip.acmi Tacview-20220608-221230-DCS-6 on 6 test mk47.zip.acmi

[DSplayer]

With the new 54 guidance change, I noticed when the missiles go active and if the target is doing evasive maneuvers, the missiles do hard G twitches when it loses lock (it doesn't look as smooth as it was earlier) which is similar to the behavior that it had before the big AIM-54 fix this earlier year. Kind of a double edged sword since it seems like it can pull more instantaneous Gs but you can also have problems where the missile decides to just twitch so much that it could lose a lot of energy. What I did notice in terms of speed was that the AIM-54A-Mk60 was once again able to reach beyond Mach 5 when launched at higher altitudes (for my test it was ~54000ft) and was able to maintain a speed of Mach 4.5 while cruising onto the target (launched from ~92nms away) with a pretty good terminal energy too.

Image of that 92nm test's telemetry chart:

Spoiler

 

Perhaps maybe explaining what "Reduced AIM-54 induced drag.", "Returned to original guidance parameters thanks to a guidance fix by ED.", and "ED: AA missiles. Corrected target tracking extrapolation." means in terms of what happens to the missile's energy and what happens when the missile goes active will probably help us a lot when we're trying to understand what the changes did.

EDIT: I redid the test on the same mission and parameters but this time I used the older Weapons.lua file from the previous OB patch that I had copied. There does seem to be a slight difference with the speed along with flight path that it took since it shaved off about 3-5 seconds from the TTI. The speed increase is most prevalent with the Mk47 motor variants. They seem to cruise at slightly above Mach 3.3 now (closer to high Mach 3.3s for the Mk47C and high Mach 3.5s for the Mk47A) compared to when they used to cruise below Mach 3.5 (closer to Mach 3.34 for the Mk47A on the old LUA and Mach 2.94 for the AIM-54C). That's a pretty substantial increase all while the AIM-54C still gets to go super high compared to the other 2 variants and is still takes the longest of the 3 to hit the target. Overall, that induced drag reduction really helps the AIM-54 get speed at that initial lofting phase along with the descent phase. What differences the original guidance parameters really did remains to be seen imo.

Old LUA Mk60:

Spoiler

 

New Weapons.lua excluding AIM-54A-Mk60 (In order: Mk47A, Mk47C)

Spoiler

 

 

New LUA excluding Mk60 (In order: Mk47A, Mk47C)

Spoiler

PHXTestNewLUA.acmi PHXTestOldLUA.acmi

Edited June 9, 2022 by DSplayer

[Badger1-1]

10 hours ago, IronMike said:

It usually starts flashing when the missile goes active, indeed, but I have seen it be slightly inaccurate, whether late or early, too. So in reviews I always check the range, according to my tgt size switch setting. If you never change it, that would be 10nm.

Nothing in particular, thank you, however flying as you would and if possible some usage of the autopilot, would be great. IIRC most issues came up when trying to use the AP, including submodes. Thanks for the kind offer and hope everything works fine now.

Of course I change it  Was testing the settings and what works best, but good to know that you are aware

Edited June 9, 2022 by Badger1-1

[Shadok]

I have test AP with FFB stick. Every thing works fine, also with Iceman !

Thanks for the work.

PS: With MSFFB2 we have to keep the hand on the stick to allow it to do the corrections, otherwise by closing the stick cell with paper tape for example. It's fun to see it moving alone .

Edited June 9, 2022 by Shadok

[RustBelt]

Covering the photocell is mandatory with the Sidewinder. You can’t fly with fingertip precision with that stupid thing turning off the motors. 

[Shadok]

52 minutes ago, RustBelt said:

Covering the photocell is mandatory with the Sidewinder. You can’t fly with fingertip precision with that stupid thing turning off the motors. 

Of course.

I wanted to point out that the AP acts only if the optical cell is closed so that the motors correct the stick position. Which, in my opinion, is not necessarily intuitive.

English is not my native language, I could certainly have been clearer in my first message.

translate with Deepl.

 

[duesensegler]

I sadly didn't have this much luck with my G940 FFB. Before the recent AP reworks the AP worked both with the photocell engaged or not engaged, but now it doesn't work under either circumstance. Only Engaging the AP (attitude hold) seems to work fine, but ALT hold either slowly creeps the nose up to the sky or down to the ground, with similar behaviour in the ACL mode. If there are any tests I could do to help sort this out, I'm more than happy to help.

[Callsign JoNay]

On 6/8/2022 at 10:50 AM, Callsign JoNay said:

I was surprised there was no fix for the extra burble effect we've been experiencing since the patch that implemented it in the Hornet. I believe it is dependent on whether or not the Wake Turbulence setting is checked or not. Has that been looked at yet?

Is anyone else still feeling extra burble effect with the wake turbulence checked, or am I going crazy?

[dorianR666]

On 6/8/2022 at 11:00 PM, Indianajon said:

I've never had a fox 1 track and hit after a broken lock

some sparrows can guide without a lock because of HOJ

[McVittees]

Doesnt the radar switch to flood if the lock is broken, so if the target is near the ADL it may still guide?

[captain_dalan]

46 minutes ago, McVittees said:

Doesnt the radar switch to flood if the lock is broken, so if the target is near the ADL it may still guide?

I actually have scored Sparrow kills in this way from fairly close ranges (enough so i can keep visual on the bandit and manually keep him close to the ADL), usually inside 7 miles. 

[draconus]

Flood mode is 8° wide and -5° to +30° off the ADL.

http://www.heatblur.se/F-14Manual/weapons.html#boresight-mode

Edited June 10, 2022 by draconus

[Torbernite]

2022/6/9 PM8点51分，Shadok说：

I have test AP with FFB stick. Every thing works fine, also with Iceman !

Thanks for the work.

PS: With MSFFB2 we have to keep the hand on the stick to allow it to do the corrections, otherwise by closing the stick cell with paper tape for example. It's fun to see it moving alone .

 

Have you test ACLS? I can't make it work with a G940. Every time it connects and CMD control lights up, the aircraft comes into a dive and crash.

[Callsign JoNay]

I'm struggling to find the best way to test if the wake turbulence checkbox is piling on extra burble to the Tomcat. I tried a side by side of myself doing a level pass over the deck at 100 feet baro. Full dirty config, DLC extended but not manipulated at all.

No wake turbulence checked on the left, wake turbulence checked on the right. I think I see a tiny bit more disturbance on the right side as I'm passing over the roundown. In tacview it looks like my FPM is bumped upwards instead of down, but in the sim it feels like a down force. I dunno. It's very hard to prove this but I do think I feel a burble increase with the box ticked.

Can you guys double check with ED to ensure they have everything set properly to give us the burble effect Heatblur intended?

[Shadok]

2 hours ago, Torbernite said:

Have you test ACLS? I can't make it work with a G940. Every time it connects and CMD control lights up, the aircraft comes into a dive and crash.

For the moment, I believe the ACLS is still in rework: