F-14D possibly?

[sBinnala64]

hey, I really love the tomcat, and since Heatblur talked about the early F-14A (I think, I get my news from HIP Games), so will they also do the F-14D and/or the F-14B Upgrade? I think it would be cool to fly, and I think F-14 players would go crazy (including me lol). I heard there wasn't really enough data for it, but if it were possible, it would be very cool.

[upyr1]

We have the B I would love the D though. 

[Tank50us]

*cracks knuckles*

OK... while I would also love the Super Tomcat... Heatblur has already said they can't really do it at this time. The USN won't give them the required data to make it for fear that Iran could get it and use that data to upgrade their Tomcats.

In a few years, when Irans F-14s aren't even capable of flying, they may be able to do it. But only if they can get the data from the USN.

[draconus]

Something definitely IS possible but it's not clear yet if it's the D or just the upgrade features.

[SkateZilla]

14 hours ago, Tank50us said:

*cracks knuckles*

OK... while I would also love the Super Tomcat... Heatblur has already said they can't really do it at this time. The USN won't give them the required data to make it for fear that Iran could get it and use that data to upgrade their Tomcats.

In a few years, when Irans F-14s aren't even capable of flying, they may be able to do it. But only if they can get the data from the USN.

Note: the Navy is not in control of the information the DoD is via ITARS, the only data that is an issue is the IRST systems.

Iran's tomcats are already being retired, their AM program failed, as did their retrofit plans.

A B/U would allow HB to use the current external and cockpit model (w/ some changes), vs retrofitting a new external model and cockpit (w/ digital displays) for the D.

The Sparrowhawk HUD is leaps and bounds better than the A/B Minimal HUD (Closer to the Hornet HUD), the B/U also has the upgraded databus for a few newer weapons and stores.

The D would also required a Flight Model re-work, as other than the Digital Radar and supporting systems, the Flight Control System was also changed.

So if you break it down between B/U and D Model:

B/U:
Uses existing External Model. (A few tweaks to pylons data busses and appearance).
Uses existing Cockpit Model. (Upgrading to a off the Shelf SparrowHawk HUD Unit and VDIG)
Uses existing Flight Model and Engine Model
Uses existing Radar and Supporting systems.
Updates and Code revision for the upgraded Digital Data Bus. (And SparrowHawk VDIG).
All Data is available (if they can find it, for the Digital Bus changes and SparrowHawk/VDIG Upgrades).

D :
Requires Adjustments to External Model (Adjustments to Control surfaces, wings, Chinpod, Intakes and a few other small changes)
Requires Adjustments to the Cockpit Model (replacing all of the Radar Displays w/ Digital Displays, plus VDIG).
Requires Updates and Code Revision for New Kaiser VDIG, Radar Displays, MFDs.
Requires Updates and Code Revision for New Radar
Requires Updates and Code Revision for New Flight Control System. (and Engine Management System).
Requires Updates and Code Revision for new Digital Data Bus.
Data for IRST and a few of the upgraded Digital Radar Systems are still blocked from public release through ITARS

 

So Minimal Reworking for a B/U,
Or A lot of Reworking for a partial D.

Which one is more financially feasible from a business standpoint.... I wonder..

The Tomcat Module Honestly could have been separate Modules,
F-14A (Early and Late)
F-14B (B and B/U)

Edited January 10, 2024 by SkateZilla

[ShuRugal]

1 hour ago, SkateZilla said:

Iran's tomcats are already being retired, their AM program failed, as did their retrofit plans.

I feel like this is selling short the fact that they have kept them flying and fighting successfully for sixty years.

The IRI has some serious problems, but a lack of resourcefulness is certainly not among them.  I don't think there are any other powers in that region which could have kept such a complex fighter in service for so long while under total embargo.

[draconus]

8 minutes ago, ShuRugal said:

I feel like this is selling short the fact that they have kept them flying and fighting successfully for sixty years.

Still less than 50 but, indeed, impressive.

1 hour ago, SkateZilla said:

So if you break it down between B/U and D Model

Wouldn't both need DFCS and RIO PTID?

[SkateZilla]

7 minutes ago, ShuRugal said:

I feel like this is selling short the fact that they have kept them flying and fighting successfully for sixty years.

The IRI has some serious problems, but a lack of resourcefulness is certainly not among them.  I don't think there are any other powers in that region which could have kept such a complex fighter in service for so long while under total embargo.

they kept maybe a dozen flying, using the other 55 or so airframes for parts.

Outside of widespread use in the earlier wars, 

in the last 20 years they've been used as "AWACS" or they simply buzzed troops on the ground.

Their tomcat's haven't been in a dogfight or pulled more than 5Gs in prolly a decade.

The last aircraft that tried to pull a 7G break, was one of the newly retrofitted AMs, and it quickly crashed. another AM, Lost Hydraulics and both engines on Final in '22.
So out of less than 10 converted to the "AM" standard, 2 of those had crashed, the Units selected for the "AM" upgrades were the best airframes they had.

The only good thing to come from the "AM" program was an awesome new Asia Minor Splinter Scheme.

[SkateZilla]

5 minutes ago, draconus said:

Still less than 50 but, indeed, impressive.

Wouldn't both need DFCS and RIO PTID?

B/U starting with OFP 317:
FMC Upgrade,
-WCP Upgrade
-MDP Upgrade

MIL STD 1553B Data Bus Upgrade * Required Both Processor Upgrades above to be integrated first,

Pilot's VDIG were upgraded,

RIO Tactical Display were upgraded,

Both positions ECMD's were upgraded,

Weapons Interface Computer Upgraded,

 

After OFP 317, Integration of the LANTIRN Pod was started.

It really depends on how far HeatBlur goes,

a Full on D has nearly every thing replaced in the cockpits, tearing out a majority of the VDIG and replacing it with a MFD System, same for the Rear position

[captain_dalan]

On 1/10/2024 at 1:46 PM, SkateZilla said:

Note: the Navy is not in control of the information the DoD is via ITARS, the only data that is an issue is the IRST systems.

Iran's tomcats are already being retired, their AM program failed, as did their retrofit plans.

A B/U would allow HB to use the current external and cockpit model (w/ some changes), vs retrofitting a new external model and cockpit (w/ digital displays) for the D.

The Sparrowhawk HUD is leaps and bounds better than the A/B Minimal HUD (Closer to the Hornet HUD), the B/U also has the upgraded databus for a few newer weapons and stores.

The D would also required a Flight Model re-work, as other than the Digital Radar and supporting systems, the Flight Control System was also changed.

So if you break it down between B/U and D Model:

B/U:
Uses existing External Model. (A few tweaks to pylons data busses and appearance).
Uses existing Cockpit Model. (Upgrading to a off the Shelf SparrowHawk HUD Unit and VDIG)
Uses existing Flight Model and Engine Model
Uses existing Radar and Supporting systems.
Updates and Code revision for the upgraded Digital Data Bus. (And SparrowHawk VDIG).
All Data is available (if they can find it, for the Digital Bus changes and SparrowHawk/VDIG Upgrades).

D :
Requires Adjustments to External Model (Adjustments to Control surfaces, wings, Chinpod, Intakes and a few other small changes)
Requires Adjustments to the Cockpit Model (replacing all of the Radar Displays w/ Digital Displays, plus VDIG).
Requires Updates and Code Revision for New Kaiser VDIG, Radar Displays, MFDs.
Requires Updates and Code Revision for New Radar
Requires Updates and Code Revision for New Flight Control System. (and Engine Management System).
Requires Updates and Code Revision for new Digital Data Bus.
Data for IRST and a few of the upgraded Digital Radar Systems are still blocked from public release through ITARS

 

So Minimal Reworking for a B/U,
Or A lot of Reworking for a partial D.

Which one is more financially feasible from a business standpoint.... I wonder..

The Tomcat Module Honestly could have been separate Modules,
F-14A (Early and Late)
F-14B (B and B/U)

 

I would look at it the other way. Of course, this is only my perspective, so i won't claim others share it, but:
1. An update Bombcat B with a new HUD? Yes, it will be far less work then a brand new D. But how marketable it really is? Yeah, i know, people have been complaining about the existing HUD for ages, but how many would pay a full price for a new HUD? SOME certainly would. But how many? And the new possible loudouts? I don't think that would justify the sales either. Personally, i wouldn't buy it all, as mud moving isn't my thing. But you would you charge people with extra 70$ for a HUD and some bombs? And if you do, how many will pay, and how many will feel cheated for not getting it for free? I mean, if you go for something like, i don't know, a 20$ upgrade, then sure, you'll probably get rid of most of the ill will, but why not go for:

2. A brand new F-14D? The level of work needed would be much higher indeed, but not as much as starting from nothing. You already have the engines modelled, and the basic aerodynamic properties. Some of the internal systems as well. But even better, the user experience should be so much different, then you can clearly market is a new plane and charge it as such. I have no idea how the average DCS user decides on a purchase, but the F-14 fans and enthusiasts i know, would absolutely go for a fully priced F-14D. Everything from hot it flies, how it presents and processes information, what it can carry, even how it looks will be different. Something more to look forward to experiencing, unlike the crutches of a new HUD. 

Anyways, just my 2 cents. 

[SkateZilla]

7 minutes ago, captain_dalan said:

I would look at it the other way. Of course, this is only my perspective, so i won't claim others share it, but:
1. An update Bombcat B with a new HUD? Yes, it will be far less work then a brand new D. But how marketable it really is? Yeah, i know, people have been complaining about the existing HUD for ages, but how many would pay a full price for a new HUD? SOME certainly would. But how many? And the new possible loudouts? I don't think that would justify the sales either. Personally, i wouldn't buy it all, as mud moving isn't my thing. But you would you charge people with extra 70$ for a HUD and some bombs? And if you do, how many will pay, and how many will feel cheated for not getting it for free? I mean, if you go for something like, i don't know, a 20$ upgrade, then sure, you'll probably get rid of most of the ill will, but why not go for:

2. A brand new F-14D? The level of work needed would be much higher indeed, but not as much as starting from nothing. You already have the engines modelled, and the basic aerodynamic properties. Some of the internal systems as well. But even better, the user experience should be so much different, then you can clearly market is a new plane and charge it as such. I have no idea how the average DCS user decides on a purchase, but the F-14 fans and enthusiasts i know, would absolutely go for a fully priced F-14D. Everything from hot it flies, how it presents and processes information, what it can carry, even how it looks will be different. Something more to look forward to experiencing, unlike the crutches of a new HUD. 

Anyways, just my 2 cents. 

I meant separating the A Versions and the B Versions.

Before a B/U or D even enters the Frame there's already going to be 3 Versions Flyable (A-Early, A Late, B Mid).

If HB goes the route of the D, it should be separate as it would be a vast re-write of code as a majority of the avionics have been completely changed.

The amount of development work/investment to simply include it in a package that already exists, in hopes to re-coup the dev costs by sparking new sales of an old package vs a separate package and having 100% of the revenue go towards development costs.

A B/U and D would be more than "a new HUD",

Even on the B/U parts of the VDIG and RIO Tactical Display have been replaced, along with the Aircrafts main processors,

Outside of the Same engines, it's a mid-step to the D, the USN used the B/U Program to get the fleet of B's closer to the F-14D and D/Rs.

Because pilots rotating back were going from Digital Radars and MFDs to Analog Radars and old displays.

Rooster's Reaction would pretty much sum up every pilot that flew D or D/Rs and rotated back to Bs.

Edited January 13, 2024 by SkateZilla

[captain_dalan]

10 minutes ago, SkateZilla said:

I meant separating the A Versions and the B Versions.

Before a B/U or D even enters the Frame there's already going to be 3 Versions Flyable (A-Early, A Late, B Mid).

If HB goes the route of the D, it should be separate as it would be a vast re-write of code as a majority of the avionics have been completely changed.

The amount of development work/investment to simply include it in a package that already exists, in hopes to re-coup the dev costs by sparking new sales of an old package vs a separate package and having 100% of the revenue go towards development costs.

 

 

Ah i see. Then we or on the agreement on that.

 

11 minutes ago, SkateZilla said:

A B/U .....<snip> would be more than "a new HUD",

Even on the B/U parts of the VDIG and RIO Tactical Display have been replaced, along with the Aircrafts main processors,

Outside of the Same engines, it's a mid-step to the D, the USN used the B/U Program to get the fleet of B's closer to the F-14D and D/Rs.

Because pilots rotating back were going from Digital Radars and MFDs to Analog Radars and old displays.

Rooster's Reaction would pretty much sum up every pilot that flew D or D/Rs and rotated back to Bs.

 

Not much different as an end user experience. Most of us, the vast majority fly without a human RIO. And even then, only seldom venture in the rear cockpit. All that effort would be wasted on something more people won't really get to play with. 

[Elf1606688794]

I would pay for an F-14D.

Heatblur, did you hear that?  

[SkateZilla]

19 hours ago, Elf1606688794 said:

I would pay for an F-14D.

Heatblur, did you hear that?  

you and everyone else that has any type of fetish for after burners and kenny loggins.

[-Cipher-]

The short answer is most likely yes but not anytime soon

On 1/10/2024 at 2:11 AM, sBinnala64 said:

hey, I really love the tomcat, and since Heatblur talked about the early F-14A (I think, I get my news from HIP Games), so will they also do the F-14D and/or the F-14B Upgrade? I think it would be cool to fly, and I think F-14 players would go crazy (including me lol). I heard there wasn't really enough data for it, but if it were possible, it would be very cool.

[cheezit]

If the most in-demand F-14D or F-14B(U) weren't the OIF/OIF II representative, DFCS wouldn't *need* to be a sticking point.  Ditto modeling how the AIM-9X worked with the MIL-STD-1760-capable variants of the Tomcat.

[F-2]

https://m.bilibili.com/video/BV1Cd4y1S7Hw
some Irst footage

[F-2]

https://kknews.cc/zh-hk/military/b3yxjmm.html
 

 

[Dannyvandelft]

I'm sure either a B(u) or D would be built completely from the ground up, akin to the Phantom's modeling. I doubt they would reuse the current model.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[draconus]

5 minutes ago, Dannyvandelft said:

I'm sure either a B(u) or D would be built completely from the ground up, akin to the Phantom's modeling. I doubt they would reuse the current model.

I'm pretty sure the current model is still more than fine, both external and cockpit. Of course new panels and instruments plus more shaky things would need to be added and some corrections on external model. Not implying it should be cheap or included in A/B module though.

[Dannyvandelft]

I'm pretty sure the current model is still more than fine, both external and cockpit. Of course new panels and instruments plus more shaky things would need to be added and some corrections on external model. Not implying it should be cheap or included in A/B module though.

I asked the devs if certain features of the Phantom would come to the Tomcat, and long story short, the Tomcat model doesn't allow for it. It's a completely different process. And since the new Tomcat model would be a seperate module for full price, I expect HB themselves would want nothing less than a plane simulation equally as impressive as the Phantom. The Phantom is the new standard in DCS, and I expect they themselves would want nothing less than that for the next gen Tomcat.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[draconus]

17 minutes ago, Dannyvandelft said:

I asked the devs if certain features of the Phantom would come to the Tomcat, and long story short, the Tomcat model doesn't allow for it. It's a completely different process.

Ok, fair enough, if devs say so.

[SkateZilla]

On 2/27/2024 at 4:03 AM, Dannyvandelft said:

I asked the devs if certain features of the Phantom would come to the Tomcat, and long story short, the Tomcat model doesn't allow for it. It's a completely different process. And since the new Tomcat model would be a seperate module for full price, I expect HB themselves would want nothing less than a plane simulation equally as impressive as the Phantom. The Phantom is the new standard in DCS, and I expect they themselves would want nothing less than that for the next gen Tomcat.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
 

Pretty sure HB already said the tomcats (A-Early, A and B) would be transitioned to the new framework developed for the phantom.

[r4y30n]

I asked the devs if certain features of the Phantom would come to the Tomcat, and long story short, the Tomcat model doesn't allow for it. It's a completely different process. And since the new Tomcat model would be a seperate module for full price, I expect HB themselves would want nothing less than a plane simulation equally as impressive as the Phantom. The Phantom is the new standard in DCS, and I expect they themselves would want nothing less than that for the next gen Tomcat.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

But Cobra specifically stated F-4 features would be back ported to the F-14 in the screenshot further up… I’m not saying everything shiny and new will be ported but certainly not nothing.

[Dannyvandelft]

But Cobra specifically stated F-4 features would be back ported to the F-14 in the screenshot further up… I’m not saying everything shiny and new will be ported but certainly not nothing.

I didn't say nothing, I said "certain features" I asked about. Wing vapor, yes that's coming. Circuit breakers aren't, because the Tomcat isn't modeled like that.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk