DCS: F-14 Development Update - AIM-54 Phoenix Improvements & Overhaul - Guided Discussion

[KoN]

On 12/2/2023 at 3:29 PM, Sindar said:

54 pages of discussion and explanation. And the real picture online now is as follows: 1-2 F-14 players for the whole team of thirty pilots. A year ago it was 6-8 players per team. You can draw 54 more pages of charts, but it won't change the fact that F-14s are toothless junk now. That's why it's 40% off. He's unplayable online. That's a fact. It used to be the most dangerous enemy of all. And nobody's gonna change that. The developer gave all the answers half a year ago. Just suck it up and calm down. Nobody reads you anymore.

 

This is very true 2023 .

I'm flying online in very competitive server , few years back this F14 was feared with it's loadout .

Now maybe two F14s on the server with Nearly all Phoenix missing it's targets. 

Now I know it's all about certain situations and chaff and jammer and ground and of course the enemy pilot evading ect. 

So what has happened. ??? .

Edited December 15, 2023 by KoN

[draconus]

19 minutes ago, KoN said:

So what has happened. ?

In short, it was incorrect then. HB got new data and corrected the overperforming missile, while ED took over control of the weapons from the 3rd party devs. It's not final though. We still wait for the new missile API implementation to make some minor changes and add more realistic capability and maybe better guidance from ED.

[KoN]

5 hours ago, draconus said:

In short, it was incorrect then. HB got new data and corrected the overperforming missile, while ED took over control of the weapons from the 3rd party devs. It's not final though. We still wait for the new missile API implementation to make some minor changes and add more realistic capability and maybe better guidance from ED.

Thank you , so what is this API implementation .

When you say over performing do you mean in jet propulsion or radar guidness

Ive been watching AIM54s being fired in the online servers and most of the 54s are missing its targets .

This is the A version which require permanent lock to hit targets Correct . ?

 

Edited December 15, 2023 by KoN

[draconus]

22 minutes ago, KoN said:

This is the A version which require permanent lock to hit targets Correct . ?

No. It depends on the shot type - either STT (lock needed until hit) or TWS (lock until missile active), or just mad dog (missile active from launch). C can go active even if STT lock is lost or the missile shot in TWS is not yet active when track is lost.

It was rocket engine OP afair.

Edited December 15, 2023 by draconus

[Sideburns]

23 minutes ago, KoN said:

Thank you , so what is this API implementation .

When you say over performing do you mean in jet propulsion or radar guidness

Ive been watching AIM54s being fired in the online servers and most of the 54s are missing its targets .

This is the A version which require permanent lock to hit targets Correct . ?

 

 

Afaik it was kinematically overperforming, this has now been corrected but the sensors aren't operating as they should... this is due to be resolved when missile API update is rolled out.

[Sindar]

23 часа назад, draconus сказал:

In short, it was incorrect then. HB got new data and corrected the overperforming missile, while ED took over control of the weapons from the 3rd party devs. It's not final though. We still wait for the new missile API implementation to make some minor changes and add more realistic capability and maybe better guidance from ED.

I hope and wait.

[The_Tau]

On 12/16/2023 at 10:02 AM, Sindar said:

I hope and wait.

I wouldnt expect much better PK to be honest, as missile performance wouldn't drastically change. Remember that AIM54/AWG9 weapons system was designed in 1960s and put operationally in 1970s, so yeah no wonder that missile from 2000 - AIM120C-5 is better. However for nearly 20 years of F14 until 1991 (when first 120As appeared), Tomcat was only fighter with true FOX3 capability. And F-14B we got is essentially from 1987, so in typical "modern" setting pvp fighting against F-18s/F-16s from 2005 with JHMCS/AIM-9X/LINK16  its no surprise that tomcat is "out teched". But if you had historical 1989-1990 settings with same F14 we got, with all its weaponry (minus BOL chaff expanders) fighting vs AIM-7 only F-15s/F-18s or AIM-9Ms only F-16s or R-27Rs 27s/29s, then everybody would fly F-14, isnt it?

Edited December 20, 2023 by The_Tau

[Noctrach]

1 hour ago, The_Tau said:

I wouldnt expect much better PK to be honest, as missile performance wouldn't drastically change. Remember that AIM54/AWG9 weapons system was designed in 1960s and put operationally in 1970s, so yeah no wonder that missile from 2000 - AIM120C-5 is better. However for nearly 20 years of F14 until 1991 (when first 120As appeared), Tomcat was only fighter with true FOX3 capability. And F-14B we got is essentially from 1987, so typical "modern" setting pvp fighting against F-18s/F-16s from 2005 with JHMCS/AIM-9X/LINK16  its no surprise that tomcat is "out teched". But if you had historical 1989-1990 settings with same F14 we got, with all its weaponry (minus BOL chaff expanders) fighting vs AIM-7 only F-15s/F-18s or AIM-9Ms only F-16s or R-27Rs 27s/29s, then everybody would fly F-14, isnt it?

 

Its the lovely irony of PvP environments... People don't wan't to fly F-14 on modern because the 54 is just outclassed by the 120 and to an extent the 77. Simultaneously nobody is allowed to fly it with Phoenixes on the weird community canon of what cold war is, because the jet and weapons outclass almost everything flying there. (All of which occupied the same timeframe as our F-14A)

Might be the problem is not with the plane or its missiles...

On topic of the missile. The AIM-54A seems to have really cool motor ignition audio right now, I couldnt hear it on the AIM-54C. Is this intended or bug/WIP?

[Sindar]

23 часа назад, The_Tau сказал:

I wouldnt expect much better PK to be honest, as missile performance wouldn't drastically change. Remember that AIM54/AWG9 weapons system was designed in 1960s and put operationally in 1970s, so yeah no wonder that missile from 2000 - AIM120C-5 is better. However for nearly 20 years of F14 until 1991 (when first 120As appeared), Tomcat was only fighter with true FOX3 capability. And F-14B we got is essentially from 1987, so typical "modern" setting pvp fighting against F-18s/F-16s from 2005 with JHMCS/AIM-9X/LINK16  its no surprise that tomcat is "out teched". But if you had historical 1989-1990 settings with same F14 we got, with all its weaponry (minus BOL chaff expanders) fighting vs AIM-7 only F-15s/F-18s or AIM-9Ms only F-16s or R-27Rs 27s/29s, then everybody would fly F-14, isnt it?

Yes. Nobody argues. The eternal question of balance in MP. I'll add one remark. I can put the F-16 in doggy style on my F-14. AIM-120 does not help them. Only speed and size help them. The discussion is not about the F-14, but about the Phoenix. Now he is not behaving exactly as they wrote to us. We don't cry. We are waiting.

[Grater Tovakia]

So, I have been away from DCS for a while, and finally was able to sit down today and get into things. My suspicions have all been confirmed regarding the Phoenix. The vast majority of you who complain are employing it terribly wrong. 

 

In a series of missions against Veteran AI, my Phoenix's hit roughly 90% of the time. Just now on MP, I took a 50-mile shot on some low and slow missiles, lost the tracks! and the Greatest White Hope got the job done. 

 

As someone who has been eagerly waiting to see how a more accurate C model performs, I am beyond impressed. Thank you to HB and the community who have chipped away at this.

[IronMike]

On 12/17/2023 at 10:49 PM, Grater Tovakia said:

So, I have been away from DCS for a while, and finally was able to sit down today and get into things. My suspicions have all been confirmed regarding the Phoenix. The vast majority of you who complain are employing it terribly wrong. 

 

In a series of missions against Veteran AI, my Phoenix's hit roughly 90% of the time. Just now on MP, I took a 50-mile shot on some low and slow missiles, lost the tracks! and the Greatest White Hope got the job done. 

 

As someone who has been eagerly waiting to see how a more accurate C model performs, I am beyond impressed. Thank you to HB and the community who have chipped away at this.

Thank you for your kind words, and thank you for not treating it like an AMRAAM. Who would have thought? It works if you treat it like a phoenix.

[Hobel]

Am 15.12.2023 um 10:07 schrieb KoN:

This is very true 2023 .

I'm flying online in very competitive server , few years back this F14 was feared with it's loadout .

Now maybe two F14s on the server with Nearly all Phoenix missing it's targets. 

Now I know it's all about certain situations and chaff and jammer and ground and of course the enemy pilot evading ect. 

So what has happened. ??? .

Learn to use the aim54 and its strengths, yes there have been changes but that doesn't mean it's useless.

It also has its uses on PvP servers.

Currently many players fly high and fast between 30-40,000 feet to throw the aim120 far.

You can fire the Aim54 at 90nm in TWS mode and it will still reach targets that are at 30-40,000 feet with a lot of energy, sometimes up to M3, if the aim54 catches a player in the situation he dies or has to give up a lot of altitude, even if the aim54 does not make a kill in the situations its use has proven itself, the hostile had to go defensive and give up his altitude, which is an important factor.

And also benefits team members.

 

[BubiHUN]

On 12/15/2023 at 10:34 AM, draconus said:

In short, it was incorrect then. HB got new data and corrected the overperforming missile, while ED took over control of the weapons from the 3rd party devs. It's not final though. We still wait for the new missile API implementation to make some minor changes and add more realistic capability and maybe better guidance from ED.

Is there any source wich says they are working on the missile API?

[Harlikwin]

4 hours ago, BubiHUN said:

Is there any source wich says they are working on the missile API?

Mostly just rumors. Supposedly they are going back to the Fox1 API and finally putting the R27 etc on it. Hopefully they fix the 530's as well.

[Hawkeye_UK]

On 12/22/2023 at 12:54 AM, Hobel said:

Learn to use the aim54 and its strengths, yes there have been changes but that doesn't mean it's useless.

It also has its uses on PvP servers.

Currently many players fly high and fast between 30-40,000 feet to throw the aim120 far.

You can fire the Aim54 at 90nm in TWS mode and it will still reach targets that are at 30-40,000 feet with a lot of energy, sometimes up to M3, if the aim54 catches a player in the situation he dies or has to give up a lot of altitude, even if the aim54 does not make a kill in the situations its use has proven itself, the hostile had to go defensive and give up his altitude, which is an important factor.

And also benefits team members.

 

The problem is alot of DCS players don't even understand the concept of BARCAP and area denial to allow other assets to go about their business.  Its always target fixation and chase thinking they have to kill the aircraft for their mission to be a success.  Here lies the problem, a strategic lack of understanding.

 

Edit - it also makes me smile from the early days of when the Aim54 was OP to now people thowing the toys out the proverbial cot because they expect it to be better than an Aim120, and be killing 9g turn fighters from 40+ miles down low.  There is a reason the F15 isn't equiped with Aim54 and its not politics.

Edited December 29, 2023 by Hawkeye_UK

[unknown76]

vor 4 Stunden schrieb Hawkeye_UK:

The problem is alot of DCS players don't even understand the concept of BARCAP and area denial to allow other assets to go about their business.  Its always target fixation and chase thinking they have to kill the aircraft for their mission to be a success.  Here lies the problem, a strategic lack of understanding.

 

Edit - it also makes me smile from the early days of when the Aim54 was OP to now people thowing the toys out the proverbial cot because they expect it to be better than an Aim120, and be killing 9g turn fighters from 40+ miles down low.  There is a reason the F15 isn't equiped with Aim54 and its not politics.

 

With the overperforming Aim54 from early days HB feed the myth about it and that's how it works IRL. Deterrence forces opponents to give up. It's only the presence of Tomcats and the myth about it that affects opponents intentions.

But "behind the scenes" DCS players have recognized that there is no magical TWS+Phoenix capability for successful surprise attacks from 50+ miles away against fighter sized targets. That is known IRL as well and thatswhy it was reasonable to replace expensive Tomcats by chaeper AMRAAM capable Hornets.

 

Nevertheless I love the F-14. ;-)

Edited December 29, 2023 by unknown76

[Kageseigi]

13 hours ago, Hawkeye_UK said:

There is a reason the F15 isn't equiped with Aim54 and its not politics.

Different mission, different design, different time. You could also say there's a reason why the F-15 isn't launched from carrier decks, goes Mach 3, or has swing-wing capability. It was never designed for it, and there was never a need for it.

The F-14 was also going to carry the AIM-120 (if the budget had been approved), but that doesn't mean it would have given up the AIM-54 (or its planned successors). The Tomcat was literally designed for the Phoenix, and having that long-range capability is what made it even more formidable and threatening, even if it wasn't what would directly cause the kill. It was the airborne equivalent of a spear versus a sword.

9 hours ago, unknown76 said:

But "behind the scenes" DCS players have recognized that there is no magical TWS+Phoenix capability for successful surprise attacks from 50+ miles away against fighter sized targets. That is known IRL as well and thatswhy it was reasonable to replace expensive Tomcats by chaeper AMRAAM capable Hornets.

 

To be fair, there is a lot about DCS that is not accurate to reality, especially when it comes to sensors and countermeasures. It may just be my personal opinion, but I suspect there are just as many (if not more) DCSisms that are going against the F-14/AIM-54 effectiveness as going for it. Whether they be due to the F-14/AIM-54 implementation that hinders itself (radars losing track too easily, missiles going into a loft after getting notched, inaccurate tracking/activation due to old missile API, etc.) or to overperforming defensive systems of other systems/modules (omniscient RWR, unrealistic ECM, RNG chaff, etc.).

I'm very grateful for DCS and Eagle Dynamics for what they have created.  But I do consider Heatblur to produce the highest quality simulations (though I may be biased). And when you have different developers creating modules, you're going to have different levels of quality and accuracy. Meshing them all together while trying to maintain realistic and intended functionality is a task I do not envy. And when systems are intertwined, and they are worked on by different developers (e.g. Heatblur's F-14 radar with ED's missile guidance with Mag3's MiG-21 RWR), things are bound to have problems.

So I definitely would not praise or condemn the real F-14/AIM-54's capabilities based on its performance in DCS at any given time. Yes, they are old technology. But they were also the most advanced technology at the time, and continued to be upgraded. Really, I'm surprised with how little actual (reliable) information is known about the Phoenix for how old it is. It seems no one truly knows what it was and was not actually capable of. And that's a mystery that may never be solved.

Were the F-14 and AIM-54 as great as the legends say? Probably not. But were they as "ineffective" as they are currently implemented/speculated? Also probably not. Reality is most likely somewhere between the two... the question is: where exactly?

Edited December 30, 2023 by Kageseigi

[captain_dalan]

On 12/29/2023 at 6:48 PM, Hawkeye_UK said:

The problem is alot of DCS players don't even understand the concept of BARCAP and area denial to allow other assets to go about their business.  Its always target fixation and chase thinking they have to kill the aircraft for their mission to be a success.  Here lies the problem, a strategic lack of understanding.

 

Edit - it also makes me smile from the early days of when the Aim54 was OP to now people thowing the toys out the proverbial cot because they expect it to be better than an Aim120, and be killing 9g turn fighters from 40+ miles down low.  There is a reason the F15 isn't equiped with Aim54 and its not politics.

 

To be fair, the mission doesn't exist on most PvP open servers. There's no way of tracking it or scoring it. Even relatively "professional" E-sport events are essentially team death matches, something that hardly resembles any RL context. Planes aren't designed nor used in such vacuum. But it seems that that is what most of the user based wants. For all the snobbery towards the users of other products, we seem to be following the same engagement patterns with our product. Only recently did i see videos of some events that start adding mission elements to DCS PvP, but we have a long way to go. 

[Hobel]

vor 11 Stunden schrieb captain_dalan:

To be fair, the mission doesn't exist on most PvP open servers. There's no way of tracking it or scoring it. Even relatively "professional" E-sport events are essentially team death matches, something that hardly resembles any RL context. Planes aren't designed nor used in such vacuum. But it seems that that is what most of the user based wants. For all the snobbery towards the users of other products, we seem to be following the same engagement patterns with our product. Only recently did i see videos of some events that start adding mission elements to DCS PvP, but we have a long way to go. 

Basically this is possible on any dynamic PvP server, if you suppress another plane and friends can complete missions as a result, the job is done.

A friend and I recently flew out with the F18 and 20x Aim120s and only made 1 kill. The point is that even though the missles came in with very little energy because we fired them very far and early, which was intentional because even a slow missile scares a Hostile into giving up all of its altitude.

if you want you can play like this and it also has its uses

[Billy]

On 12/29/2023 at 9:48 AM, Hawkeye_UK said:

There is a reason the F15 isn't equiped with Aim54 and its not politics.

Stores drag?

[Schmidtfire]

On 12/30/2023 at 7:44 AM, Kageseigi said:

I suspect there are just as many (if not more) DCSisms that are going against the F-14/AIM-54 effectiveness as going for it.

This pretty much sums it up. No matter how realistic and simulated F14/AIM54 is, it’s still part of DCS World. While it might function properly ”by the book” it’s overall performance is still bound to DCS World rules. Fighting against perfect RWR’s, simple ECM implementation, serverlag and netcode issues etc.

In a stupidly busy MP environment (like on GS server) over land and mountains, it will be a nightmare and many tracks will be lost. In SP and in a fleet defence role - it performs as expected most of the time.

[draconus]

1 hour ago, Schmidtfire said:

In a stupidly busy MP environment (like on GS server) over land and mountains, it will be a nightmare and many tracks will be lost. In SP and in a fleet defence role - it performs as expected most of the time.

So, all good, right? You, as a player, decide if you take on realistic mission or just shoot around in MMO.

[RustBelt]

On 1/1/2024 at 9:51 AM, captain_dalan said:

To be fair, the mission doesn't exist on most PvP open servers. There's no way of tracking it or scoring it. Even relatively "professional" E-sport events are essentially team death matches, something that hardly resembles any RL context. Planes aren't designed nor used in such vacuum. But it seems that that is what most of the user based wants. For all the snobbery towards the users of other products, we seem to be following the same engagement patterns with our product. Only recently did i see videos of some events that start adding mission elements to DCS PvP, but we have a long way to go. 

There has and will ever be only ONE online PvP play mode. Quake. Doesn’t matter if it’s an RTS, an FPS, a Flight Sim, and it doesn’t matter what play rules you set up prior. Once play begins it’s just Quake. Been that way since before even Quake. Just ask any hard core Doom Grognard or Air Warrior grey hair.

Edited January 5 by RustBelt

[draconus]

6 hours ago, RustBelt said:

There has and will ever be only ONE online PvP play mode. Quake.

What about close squad servers with planned missions and briefings?

[RustBelt]

17 hours ago, draconus said:

What about close squad servers with planned missions and briefings?

You mean PvE?