Feedback Thread F-14 Tomcat - Update 10th March 2023

[Frosty2124]

15 minutes ago, draconus said:

So far found these problems in F-14 MT: TCS symbols only, LANTIRN symbols/data only, uncommanded VR zoom in cockpit during Gs.

 

iirc and I might be wrong but aren't there new g effects? that last issue might be related

[draconus]

12 minutes ago, Frosty2124 said:

iirc and I might be wrong but aren't there new g effects? that last issue might be related

I don't recall any new G effects from update notes. The problem is general in DCS afaik.

[Top Jockey]

6 hours ago, Frosty2124 said:

 

Maintenance issues and temporary fixes are arguably the meat and potatoes of realism. if we were going further, realistically you'd be rolling a dice every time you started the jet as to whether or not you'd have a 100% capable aircraft, even then you could brick the radar on launch, or have a system go INOP in flight.

as to your points:

1) its random what fix will be mounted if anything, I'm sure that if its that disheartening for you, a well worded letter to HB might result in a refund if you surrender the product although, you are receiving the product you purchased.

...

 

Yeah, but that might not be everyone's cup of tea.

Different people do buy modules and get their enjoyment out of them, for effectively different reasons:

- some buy the F-14 because they want to feel as a real life jet fighter as most as possible, and therefore they seek the utmost realism ;

- others buy this module, because they highly appreciate the legendary F-14 Tomcat as the pure machine it is ... and want to enjoy its flight, its capabilities, its looks (cockpit and airframe), etc.

And in this last case, flying something that is supposed to be powerful, hi-tech in its time, legendary like the Tomcat, doesn't quite match with broken, cheap patch, badly kept parts in the ACM panel - in terms of personal preference speaking.

 

On the second bold, you're probably right, but one can't exactly guess there would be metal plates patched to the ACM panel and the such.

Edited March 13, 2023 by Top Jockey

[Frosty2124]

12 minutes ago, Top Jockey said:

 

Yeah, but that might not be everyone's cup of tea.

Different people do buy modules and get their enjoyment out of them, for effectively different reasons:

- some buy the F-14 because they want to feel as a real life jet fighter as most as possible, and therefore they seek the utmost realism ;

agreed, the ACM panel falling off (and associated field expedient fixes) is part of this.

12 minutes ago, Top Jockey said:

- others buy this module, because they highly appreciate the legendary F-14 Tomcat as the pure machine it is ... and want to enjoy its flight, its capabilities, its looks (cockpit and airframe), etc.

the ACM panel fixes form part of the looks of the cockpit too

12 minutes ago, Top Jockey said:

And in this last case, flying something that is supposed to be powerful, hi-tech in its time, legendary like the Tomcat, doesn't quite match with broken, cheap patch, badly kept parts in the ACM panel - in terms of personal preference speaking.

welcome to military aviation, it's a myth that everything works all the time every time, I spent 7 years on Eurofighter and can attest to this first hand even on delivery jets (with less than 50 hours).

I appreciate your preferences and can sympathise with what your saying, I'd have loved my jets to have arrived from the factory and been able to go straight on ops. but sadly what your expectations are, are unrealistic both in terms of back than and even nowadays

also, i believe that that when finalised you'll be able to disable this feature iirc, so effectively your concerns are moot.

Edited March 14, 2023 by Frosty2124
my broken ass spelling

[Top Jockey]

31 minutes ago, Frosty2124 said:

agreed, the ACM panel falling off (and associated field expedient fixes) is part of this.

the ACM panel fixes form part of the looks of the cockpit too

welcome to military aviation, it's a myth that everything works all the time every time, I spent 7 years on Eurofighter and can attest to this first hand even on delivery jets (with less than 50 hours).

I appreciate your preferences and can sympathise with what your saying, I'd have loved my jets to have arrived from the factory and been able to go straight on ops. but sadly what your expectations are, are unrealistic both in terms of back than and even nowadays

also, i believe that that when finalised you'll be able to disable this feature iirc, so effectively your concerns are moot.

 

 

Sure, I fully understand.

On the bold, I didn't express myself right, I'm not questioning that, of course people know stuff eventually do fail, break, etc.

 

What I meant was, that several Tomcat fans / simmers, might find much more preferable visually wise to look at a not so 'disfigured' panel / cockpit.

It's merely personal preference, and they are also on their own right - just that.

Edited March 14, 2023 by Top Jockey

[Viper-21]

Dude, the option is on the way. Your solution is already in the works, just wait for the update

[Frosty2124]

2 minutes ago, Top Jockey said:

 

Sure, I fully understand.

On the bold, I didn't express myself right, I'm not questioning that, of course people know stuff eventually do fail, break, etc.

 

What I meant was, that several Tomcat fans / simmers, might find much more preferable visually wise to look at a not so 'disfigured' panel / cockpit.

It's merely personal preference, and they are also on their own right - just that.

 

yes, and as i eluded to above, the ability to disable this feature is coming 

for now, just refresh the aircraft till you get the ACM panel you want, ergo effectively moot at this point.

hope this helps

[Top Jockey]

3 minutes ago, Frosty2124 said:

yes, and as i eluded to above, the ability to disable this feature is coming 

for now, just refresh the aircraft till you get the ACM panel you want, ergo effectively moot at this point.

hope this helps

 

I didn't say it wasn't, I've read it the first time IronMike wrote it.

Personally never felt the need to 'refresh' the aircraft just because of those dynamic cockpit features - was merely sharing my point of view here about them.

[RaisedByWolves]

16 minutes ago, Viper-21 said:

Dude, the option is on the way. Your solution is already in the works, just wait for the update

Cannot do that. We are a bunch of insolent babies.

[Frosty2124]

Just now, RaisedByWolves said:

Cannot do that. We are a bunch of insolent babies.

i think i just fell in love

5 minutes ago, Top Jockey said:

 

I didn't say it wasn't, I've read it the first time IronMike wrote it.

Personally never felt the need to 'refresh' the aircraft just because of those dynamic cockpit features - was merely sharing my point of view here about them.

so what was the point you were trying to make?

[Top Jockey]

14 minutes ago, RaisedByWolves said:

Cannot do that. We are a bunch of insolent babies.

 

What ? Didn't you read it's coming ?

You should be more patient. 

[RustBelt]

34 minutes ago, Top Jockey said:

 

What ? Didn't you read it's coming ?

You should be more patient. 

How dare you provide feedback in the feedback thread. You’re only supposed to agree with stuff. Unless it’s Phoenix performance. Because that feels like science! 

[Uxi]

I'm enjoying FORGE. I'll keep it random if/when. 

[draconus]

1 hour ago, Uxi said:

I'm enjoying FORGE. I'll keep it random if/when. 

Yep, always good to see more realism after knowing some stuff was catered more toward game side.

[TAIPAN_]

I like the FORGE. 

Was a pleasant surprise. 

[Lionheartwolf]

I also like the FORGE, I think I will like it more when it's less random though.

I can also see why the developers are hesitant to give us a brand new looking cockpit. What is their point of reference? There hasn't been a new F-14 in decades let alone a new F-14 A/B. They built this entire thing on some photos, unclassified documents and service manuals, and the feedback of people trying to remember something from about 40 years ago.

These are not classic cars, these are military technologies that were highly guarded when they were new, and still closely guarded to this day, thats why we will probably never see a new looking F-14, and might never see an F-14D. They can probably do it but it wont be real, it will be an artistic interpretation of, and if that is all you are after then there are mods for that.

 

[draconus]

8 minutes ago, Lionheartwolf said:

There hasn't been a new F-14 in decades let alone a new F-14 A/B. They built this entire thing on some photos, unclassified documents and service manuals, and the feedback of people trying to remember something from about 40 years ago.

It's not that. They did not go with a new one because the Tomcats almost never been in that state for more than a couple weeks. They went with simulating the aircraft as it was most of the time during deployment.

[71st_AH Rob]

All military vehicles are like that, the only time they look new is when they are delivered. 

I took my wife to the local airshow at the airbase near us a few years ago. The aircraft were interesting but there was an Army display and I wanted to show her what I worked with day to day. Then I saw a Chinook and took her through it. Something didn't seem right. It was pristine, none of the wear and tear, none of the dark brown stains that no matter how hard they seem to clean, seem to remain between the floor boards and on the webbing of the seats that you try not to linger on. And it smelled like a new car on the lot, just after they removed the plastic protection from the seats, instead of spilled JP 8, vomit, urine and fear. 

I asked the copilot how many hours it had, it was a brand new CH-47F, with less than a hundred hours, probably about the same as him. 

I like the Forge elements, but please, no Smell-O-Vision, I can already imagine it.

[Dannyvandelft]

The right side mirror isn't always adjustable in certain MP servers (MT) in single player it works. Don't know what causes it, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[JupiterJoe]

Is it true that MT has increased the draw-distance for the LANTIRN/TCS feed?  If so, it is still only able to slew to targets within 20 miles if you've selected them as a map marker.  Is this a limit of the real-life system, or a limit of the sim?  Thanks.

Edited March 14, 2023 by JupiterJoe

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

19 hours ago, JupiterJoe said:

Is it true that MT has increased the draw-distance for the LANTIRN/TCS feed?

No, this has nothing to do with multi-threading.

It's a separate change that was mentioned in the patch notes:
 

• Cockpit. MFD surface render increased from 80 to 150 km range

[Spurts]

1 hour ago, Raven (Elysian Angel) said:

No, this has nothing to do with multi-threading.

It's a separate change that was mentioned in the patch notes:
 

• Cockpit. MFD surface render increased from 80 to 150 km range

Missed that.  THAT has me excited.

[grant977]

On 3/14/2023 at 10:24 AM, 71st_AH Rob said:

instead of spilled JP 8, vomit, urine and fear. 

Love it. Too bad forge can simulate smells.

[JupiterJoe]

1 hour ago, Raven (Elysian Angel) said:

No, this has nothing to do with multi-threading.

It's a separate change that was mentioned in the patch notes:
 

• Cockpit. MFD surface render increased from 80 to 150 km range

Thank you.  So only being able to slew to targets within 20 miles, if you've selected them as a map marker, is a limit of the real-life LANTIRN system, or a limit of the sim?

[IronMike]

4 hours ago, JupiterJoe said:

Thank you.  So only being able to slew to targets within 20 miles, if you've selected them as a map marker, is a limit of the real-life LANTIRN system, or a limit of the sim?

You cannot really make out objects beyond that point, so slewing beyond that is unrealistic. You can with qwaypoint, but that doesnt mean you would find a unit there at a large range. Surface render also does not mean "distinguishable objects", though I didnt check how it is in ED's targeting pods, and dont want to comment on that, as I have limited knowledge on their rl counterparts. But the older the pod, the worse the resolution, the lesser a realistic range to really spot anything. So having Jester be able to slew to a specific tank at 50nm, would kinda equal cheating.

Edited March 15, 2023 by IronMike