F-14B(U) but still no F-14A -95

[Gunslinger22]

Am I the only one who is partially disappointed to see HB showing new toys but we’re still awaiting the release of the F-14A early, which is what I literally purchased the module for and was shown since the beginning of development. 

Seems they’ve got a lot of their plate development wise, it’d be nice to know that this feature creep isn’t massively the reason why we haven’t got the ALR-45 in our cockpits already. 

[Mnemonic]

Honestly I’m super happy to see Turkey with normal HUD, it’s epic.

Early A would not bring as much to a table, but of course I would love to see that one too.

[Ahogephilia]

 

I'm also more attached to the current analog F-14 myself.

can't wait ealry-tomcat to be released.

[scommander2]

It is in the pineline:

F-14A (Early) - 135GR on Heatblur Public Roadmap | Trello

as well as:

F-14A 95GR (IRIAF version) (bonus) on Heatblur Public Roadmap | Trello

 

[Stackup]

14 minutes ago, Gunslinger22 said:

Am I the only one who is partially disappointed to see HB showing new toys but we’re still awaiting the release of the F-14A early, which is what I literally purchased the module for and was shown since the beginning of development. 

Seems they’ve got a lot of their plate development wise, it’d be nice to know that this feature creep isn’t massively the reason why we haven’t got the ALR-45 in our cockpits already. 

You aren't the only one, gib ALR-45!  They keep seeming to find ways to push previosuly announced projects like the full fidelity A-6 further onto the back burner which saddens me to no end...

[Gunslinger22]

11 minutes ago, scommander2 said:

It is in the pineline:

F-14A (Early) - 135GR on Heatblur Public Roadmap | Trello

as well as:

F-14A 95GR (IRIAF version) (bonus) on Heatblur Public Roadmap | Trello

 

I'm well and truly tracking that, but what's a shame to me is that the ALR-45 was first shown in 2016 and then again in 2020. 5 years since the last update but now we're being shown the sparrowhawk and PTID? 

[scommander2]

1 minute ago, Gunslinger22 said:

I'm well and truly tracking that, but what's a shame to me is that the ALR-45 was first shown in 2016 and then again in 2020

No problem and we are on the same page...  

[LanceCriminal86]

They have to rip into the cockpit art anyways to work on the earlier A stuff and the cleaner cockpits that they've hinted on. The F-14's cockpit wasn't put together the same way the F-4's was so it's more intrusive to go back in there and rework the cockpit to clean it up. And if you're already doing that, spending some extra art hours to get the B Upgrade bits modeled, some of which are also correct for the existing Late F-14A and B, then it makes a lot of sense to just get it all done at once.

[captain_dalan]

On 1/16/2025 at 11:31 PM, Gunslinger22 said:

Am I the only one who is partially disappointed to see HB showing new toys but we’re still awaiting the release of the F-14A early, which is what I literally purchased the module for and was shown since the beginning of development. 

Seems they’ve got a lot of their plate development wise, it’d be nice to know that this feature creep isn’t massively the reason why we haven’t got the ALR-45 in our cockpits already. 

 

On 1/16/2025 at 11:46 PM, Stackup said:

You aren't the only one, gib ALR-45!  They keep seeming to find ways to push previosuly announced projects like the full fidelity A-6 further onto the back burner which saddens me to no end...

 

On 1/17/2025 at 12:01 AM, scommander2 said:

No problem and we are on the same page...  

Me as well. I got this module for the early A but just like nuclear fusion, it's always 10 years in the future. I'm completely cold on the Sparrowhawk B. If it drops for free I won't use it. If it's a payed update, I don't need it. If it's a full new module, I don't want it. I have this plane from the very start, and I've never dropped a single bomb from it. Did one rocket run that one time for the laughs of it and that's it. If mud moving was to become a habit of mine, I'd rather have an A-6, but that seems even further removed from an early A. 

Now if someone was to announce a D F-14, I'd get that at full price, just to complete the roster. Heck, I'd do that for a genuine early A as well, we're talking first/second cruise or AIM/ACEVAL blocks and I don't mean visual reskins, I mean actual planes that handle and perform like that, but alas, that ain't happening. At least not until the heat death of the universe or the next phase transition or whatever resets our reality 

[Vähäkylä]

It is absolutely ridiculous to complain about the F-14 being made better. Plenty of people have long wished for the HUD and PTID. 
Yeah, are there other cool things it could have? Absolutely. But to act like it is somehow a bad thing to get more features is just extremely silly.

This is _YOUR_ desire: to get this specific A-model. And that's fine! But it is not fair to act like it is somehow a mistake from the company whose only customer you are not.

[Convoy]

I'd rather see the B(u) before the early A. I'd rather see the B(u) in front of everything honestly. Before the EF, before the A-6, before the Navy F-4. And I'll gladly pay $80 if it's a completely seperate module. 

[MBot]

Preferences obviously differ, but personally all I ever wanted was the original Cold War-era Tomcat. I never wanted the F-14B, LANTIRN or now the B(U). If Heatblur would have just released the early F-14A 5 years ago and then been done with it, I would have been happy.

[Gunslinger22]

10 hours ago, Vähäkylä said:

It is absolutely ridiculous to complain about the F-14 being made better. Plenty of people have long wished for the HUD and PTID. 
Yeah, are there other cool things it could have? Absolutely. But to act like it is somehow a bad thing to get more features is just extremely silly.

This is _YOUR_ desire: to get this specific A-model. And that's fine! But it is not fair to act like it is somehow a mistake from the company whose only customer you are not.

I think a massive issue currently within the DCS community is that people continually forgot that this is not just hobby filled with enthusiasts whom get/request things purely based on what they want. HB develop and sell a product, I am a consumer of their product. When I purchased the F-14 it was under the understanding of the advertised their product (F-14 with ALR-45). Now it's been 7 years since I paid for a product I have technically not received yet, how is it absolutely ridiculous for me to complain when the B(U) was never advertised and we still haven't not received what was initially advertised to us?  I seriously don't get this immature response that any criticism of the company that develops yours and our toys is sacrilege or some deeply childish thing to do. 

[Naquaii]

12 minutes ago, Gunslinger22 said:

I think a massive issue currently within the DCS community is that people continually forgot that this is not just hobby filled with enthusiasts whom get/request things purely based on what they want. HB develop and sell a product, I am a consumer of their product. When I purchased the F-14 it was under the understanding of the advertised their product (F-14 with ALR-45). Now it's been 7 years since I paid for a product I have technically not received yet, how is it absolutely ridiculous for me to complain when the B(U) was never advertised and we still haven't not received what was initially advertised to us?  I seriously don't get this immature response that any criticism of the company that develops yours and our toys is sacrilege or some deeply childish thing to do. 

At the same time you're saying you're disappointed by HB showing screens and clips of something that isn't yet announced and something that HB potentially would like to do. This changes nothing for the early version of the F-14A which is still something that is part of the current module and being worked on.

Has it been a long time since the release of the F-14? Yeah, arguably, and can I understand wanting the last two remaining versions? Yeah, absolutely. But they are being worked on and they will come.

That said it is a bit odd to expect HB not to show anything new they they would like to do in the future at all because of this. There is no scenario in which an early F-14A stands against a F-14B(U) (which still hasn't officially been announced, I might add), the early F-14A is a part of the current module and something that needs done before it's a completely module. A prospective future F-14B(U) will always be a later consideration than that.

Edited January 18 by Naquaii

[Gunslinger22]

15 minutes ago, Naquaii said:

At the same time you're saying you're disappointed by HB showing screens and clips of something that isn't yet announced and something that HB potentially would like to do. This changes nothing for the early version of the F-14A which is still something that is part of the current module and being worked on.

Has it been a long time since the release of the F-14? Yeah, arguably, and can I understand wanting the last two remaining versions? Yeah, absolutely. But they are being worked on and they will come.

That said it is a bit odd to expect HB not to show anything new they they would like to do in the future at all because of this. There is no scenario in which an early F-14A stands against a F-14B(U) (which still hasn't officially been announced, I might add), the early F-14A is a part of the current module and something that needs done before it's a completely module. A prospective future F-14B(U) will always be a later consideration than that.

As initially stated I'm partially disappointed, I absolutely respect and admire the work the team is putting in. But it doesn't address my initial concern as a paying customer (I say this somewhat sarcastically but use it to show that this is still business and not to muddy the hobby/fan side of this game)  to possible mission creep on how these products are stretching out so long. 7 years is an incredible amount of time. 

 

Secondly to your point, I neither wish nor want HB to simply shut the doors on what they're working on to the public. But with a growing list of things shown that HB are currently working on, versus the actual list of things to be delivered is becoming a point to note. Nonetheless nothing from what can be written within these forums will realistically change or effect how HB operates as they're a business who needs to pay employees and make money, putting large efforts in to a 7 year old product that they've already made their money off doesn't seem something they're going to do unless their is true financial benefit to it. 

[Naquaii]

11 minutes ago, Gunslinger22 said:

As initially stated I'm partially disappointed, I absolutely respect and admire the work the team is putting in. But it doesn't address my initial concern as a paying customer (I say this somewhat sarcastically but use it to show that this is still business and not to muddy the hobby/fan side of this game)  to possible mission creep on how these products are stretching out so long. 7 years is an incredible amount of time. 

 

Secondly to your point, I neither wish nor want HB to simply shut the doors on what they're working on to the public. But with a growing list of things shown that HB are currently working on, versus the actual list of things to be delivered is becoming a point to note. Nonetheless nothing from what can be written within these forums will realistically change or effect how HB operates as they're a business who needs to pay employees and make money, putting large efforts in to a 7 year old product that they've already made their money off doesn't seem something they're going to do unless their is true financial benefit to it. 

Well, the only thing I can say and did say above is that the F-14A is still coming, it hasn't been abandoned and nothing about this changes that.

[JupiterJoe]

I am thrilled for any new F-14 content.  I believe HB's F-14 is is a big factor in DCS' success.  A landmark in simulation.

Edited January 23 by JupiterJoe

[captain_dalan]

13 hours ago, Vähäkylä said:

... But to act like it is somehow a bad thing to get more features is just extremely silly.

This is _YOUR_ desire: to get this specific A-model. And that's fine! But it is not fair to act like it is somehow a mistake from the company whose only customer you are not...

In the  software industry there's a concept called feature creep. And when 'improvements' are keep being added while remaining standing issues remain unresolved, it's generally considered bad practice. 

Now I too understand, we who signed up for the early F-14A are fewer and thus less of a priority. But that doesn't mean we are bound to remain quiet on the topic. Would you if you were in our place? Is it mistake adding these features? Man, judging by the hype of some 2025 announcements, I would say definitely not. Bread and games, man, bread and games.... 

But as for me...... 

4 hours ago, MBot said:

Preferences obviously differ, but personally all I ever wanted was the original Cold War-era Tomcat. I never wanted the F-14B, LANTIRN or now the B(U). If Heatblur would have just released the early F-14A 5 years ago and then been done with it, I would have been happy.

THIS!

[DD_Fenrir]

To say I find these demands - and they are demands, delivered with some very churlish and entitled langauge - for the early F-14A most distasteful would be understating things.

When the DCS: F-14 was released those years ago, there was no such entity on the menu. HB stated that both the A and B variants we were getting were from the mid-90s, that was it.

They had every liberty to say "no further variants, you have what was advertised and paid for, thank you for you custom, we're done." And you would have had to lump it.

But they didn't.

They have - very graciously IMHO - through there own passion and interest listened to the community and at no extra charge decided to expand the modules perview to encompass these two additional sub-variants, the Iranian spec A and an early US Navy spec A.

A new RWR had to be programmed; some cockpit model 3D changes will be required, in both pits; external 3D will require adjusting. You'll expect some appropriate skins as well, which HB generally seem happy to supply. And a butt load of thankless code editing, cos it's DCS.

Meanwhile they're developing a DCS: F-4E module from the ground up with some revolutionary feaures; they are also assisting True Grit develop the Eurofighter. These two are the only things that will generate future revenue. You don't deserve to run a business if you don't think these take priority over everything else (save squashing critical bugs on your existing products).

Which they do; they are always working on bug fixing the F-14 and Viggen. If it isn't bug fixing it's correcting some misinterpreted systems functionality. There's no direct $$$ in this part save the knowledge that you are a reliable developer who offers ongoing product support helps reassure potential customers for those older modules.

Then there's working on Draken and A-6 AI aircraft. They don't get an extra $$$ for working on those things; they weren't even obliged to provide them. They just did it cos they thought it would be cool and help make more immersive scenarios for their products. The fact these have repeatedly been delayed only goes to show that HB have a good business model.

I'm sorry, but does this sound like a developer who doesn't give a sh!t? Does this sound like a developer who is only in it to grab your $$$ for minimal return?

So here's some advice.

By all means ask the status of the early F-14A variants, but by god, have some goddamn deference for some hard working people who are giving you something for free.

Some of you have manners that would make a goddamn street hoodlum baulk.

 

Edited January 18 by DD_Fenrir

[draconus]

So they decided to do more, cool, but if they said so, please do so. No one will beg for it now just because it wasn't planned for in the beginning.

Is it really free? Maybe just the AI unit if someone plays DCS as a free to play game. For all others - no. Does HB gets any money for this? I don't know, I don't want to know and frankly I don't care. I just took their word for it, that they'll do it. We know they are responsible for finishing features and bug fixing the Tomcat but last year's patch logs were much shorter. So yes, it's perfectly normal for customers to be concerned, especially when they see HB showing new projects and it has nothing to do with the lack of appreciation. Or if they really ask for that appreciation there's nothing wrong to remind we do appreciate it but we already paid money, we did the beta testing for free, the product is still in the store and finishing it is part of their business too.

[DD_Fenrir]

4 hours ago, draconus said:

So they decided to do more, cool, but if they said so, please do so.

You act like they aren't; maybe it's not on a timescale to your liking but it's on a timescale that keeps them viable as a business. Whose in a better position to determine which workflows will result in a solvent company, Drac, you or them?
 

4 hours ago, draconus said:

Is it really free?

The early A variants, yes, essentially. The product as initially advertised stated that both the A and B variants we were getting were from the mid-90s. If you brought it then, you are potentially (pending release of the early-As) getting more than was advertised.
If you purchased later on the information that the early-As were going to be included in the modules development then, ok, I'll concede you might be disappointed by the timescale, but if you're sole reason for finally buying in is because you have a hard-on for Tomcats with gun gas purge grills rather than part-venturi then:

1. You are a connosieur
2. You therefore have a level of passion, knowledge and understanding that reflects a better than average intellect
3. That level of intelligance should help you appreciate you are part of a minority, a niche, within a niche within a niche
4. It should also help you appreciate that it is highly doubtful whether your little clique of early-A afficianados (most of whom would probably have already purchased the Tomcat, because, well, Tomcat!) suddenly buying in now will come close to cover the further development costs.

Ergo, and given that HB has never baulked from being honest about what was initially included, been transparent regards their later intention to include the early As, shown some development progression prior to work on the F-4 and stated repeatedly that work is still happening but other priorities have had to take precedence, well, then you should have the goddamn nous to realise that if you want an early-A so goddamn much then maybe you better let HB make the F-4 to keep their business solvent and take the delay like a goddamn grown-up else you might not get it at all.
 

4 hours ago, draconus said:

Does HB gets any money for this? 

As relayed above, maybe a handful of additional sales may have resulted with the announcement that the early-A from some uber-blinkered afficiando who'll only fly pre-1985 Tomcats but I'll bet, as stated before most of them would probably have already purchased the Tomcat, because, well, Tomcat!

It could be argued that it makes the DCS: F-14 module more attractive to new entrants to DCS, but in the vast majority of cases people are going to be buying Tomcat rather than specifically an early-A. I really don't see a case for it making or breaking the majority of purchase decisions.

So no, HB don't get additional revenue for building the early-As, or if they do, it's so small it pales into insignificance.

 

4 hours ago, draconus said:

I don't know, I don't want to know and frankly I don't care.

Well they're supposed to care about you apparently, and your opinion. Nice attitude by the way. I'm sure if HB treated you as a customer with the same diffidence you'd be the first to start squealing but apparently it's ok to treat them like lackeys?

You paid for and were delivered an advertised product that is still supported and even being improved; it could well be argued that the latter part goes above and beyond any contractural obligations that tie HB to you. Certainly doesn't give anyone the right to make obnoxious demands and talk down to anyone on the development team.

 

4 hours ago, draconus said:

 I just took their word for it, that they'll do it. 

And this is just it. Repeatedly, everytime they have been asked, they have stated that either the work is ongoing or that it's been delayed because of the Phantom.

The only time I have observed them refraining from reply is when it's clearly some bozo who has just been spamming the forum or discord every other day trying to prove a point and make himself feel like a hero. 

What the hell else do you want?

Deadlines? Why would they tie themslves to a deadline when as previously demonstrated, other revenue earning work would make better use of their man hours? They would then get repeated haranging from the early-A nuts that they didn't meet the deadline, despite the fact that maybe they had higher priority, actually earning $$$ tasks that needed to be achieved.

To which I refer you to my previous statements: want an early-A so goddamn much then maybe you better let HB make stuff that will earn them actual money to keep their business solvent and take the delay like a goddamn grown-up else you might not get it at all.

 

4 hours ago, draconus said:

We know they are responsible for finishing features and bug fixing the Tomcat but last year's patch logs were much shorter.

Silly me I thought it might be a good thing that in the neverending war against bugs they seem to be winning?

It'll never be truly won though; there's always some surprise changes from ED in the underlying game engine code one patch that'll have the potential to break something and require a fix, quick or otherwise. 

Plus, what about the improvements to missiles and radar fidelity? Not necessarily bugs per se, but times when HB had to assume or interpret data in one way during initial development but then discovered their assumptions or interpretations were erroneous during later life of the module; repeatedly they have gone back at corrected these, and been transparent to the community about it. Not every developer would be so self-effacing.

Neither earn direct revenue either, though it does earn you good reputation, that you are a reliable developer who offers ongoing product support and this may help reassure potential customers, but these would be swing voters anyway.

 

4 hours ago, draconus said:

So yes, it's perfectly normal for customers to be concerned, especially when they see HB showing new projects and it has nothing to do with the lack of appreciation.

Why? Given all of the above, why?

You've got to be a pretty petty, blinkered individual to assume that an F-14B(U) module means your early F-14A has suddenly become Heatblur's red headed step child.
It's banal, pitchfork wielding, ignorance of the most pathetic variety and this community can do well without it. Get a grip.

 

4 hours ago, draconus said:

Or if they really ask for that appreciation there's nothing wrong to remind we do appreciate it but we already paid money

And again, you have recieved the product as advertised. I fail to see why this is so hard for you to grasp.

 

4 hours ago, draconus said:

we did the beta testing for free

Bovine excrement and irrelevant. You opted in to early access and got a reduction in the price of purchase for your beta testing. Your choice, you were not obliged, and Heatblur would have every right to thank you but they owe you NOTHING.

 

4 hours ago, draconus said:

the product is still in the store and finishing it is part of their business too.

Indeed, and they are working their way towards that goal, but as has been repeated on multiple occasions but I'll say it again because apparently it needs to be said repeatedly till some of you get it:

Want an early-A so goddamn much? Then maybe you better let HB make stuff that will earn them actual money to keep their business solvent and take the delay like a goddamn grown-up else you might not get it at all.

 

 

Edited January 19 by DD_Fenrir

[RustBelt]

12 hours ago, Naquaii said:

At the same time you're saying you're disappointed by HB showing screens and clips of something that isn't yet announced and something that HB potentially would like to do. This changes nothing for the early version of the F-14A which is still something that is part of the current module and being worked on.

Has it been a long time since the release of the F-14? Yeah, arguably, and can I understand wanting the last two remaining versions? Yeah, absolutely. But they are being worked on and they will come.

That said it is a bit odd to expect HB not to show anything new they they would like to do in the future at all because of this. There is no scenario in which an early F-14A stands against a F-14B(U) (which still hasn't officially been announced, I might add), the early F-14A is a part of the current module and something that needs done before it's a completely module. A prospective future F-14B(U) will always be a later consideration than that.

If it wasn’t officially announced, what was it doing in the “what we’re gonna do” video? 
 

Also to others, Early-A was a later addition too. It was B, late A, forestall, and some AI A-6. That’s all that was in the initial plan.

Edited January 19 by RustBelt

[Gunslinger22]

1 hour ago, DD_Fenrir said:

You act like they aren't; maybe it's not on a timescale to your liking but it's on a timescale that keeps them viable as a business. Whose in a better position to determine which workflows will result in a solvent company, Drac, you or them?
 

The early A variants, yes, essentially. The product as initially advertised stated that both the A and B variants we were getting were from the mid-90s. If you brought it then, you are potentially (pending release of the early-As) getting more than was advertised.
If you purchased later on the information that the early-As were going to be included in the modules development then, ok, I'll concede you might be disappointed by the timescale, but if you're sole reason for finally buying in is because you have a hard-on for Tomcats with gun gas purge grills rather than part-venturi then:

1. You are a connosieur
2. You therefore have a level of passion, knowledge and understanding that reflects a better than average intellect
3. That level of intelligance should help you appreciate you are part of a minority, a niche, within a niche within a niche
4. It should also help you appreciate that it is highly doubtful whether your little clique of early-A afficianados (most of whom would probably have already purchased the Tomcat, because, well, Tomcat!) suddenly buying in now will come close to cover the further development costs.

Ergo, and given that HB has never baulked from being honest about what was initially included, been transparent regards their later intention to include the early As, shown some development progression prior to work on the F-4 and stated repeatedly that work is still happening but other priorities have had to take precedence, well, then you should have the goddamn nous to realise that if you want an early-A so goddamn much then maybe you better let HB make the F-4 to keep their business solvent and take the delay like a goddamn grown-up else you might not get it at all.
 

As relayed above, maybe a handful of additional sales may have resulted with the announcement that the early-A from some uber-blinkered afficiando who'll only fly pre-1985 Tomcats but I'll bet, as stated before most of them would probably have already purchased the Tomcat, because, well, Tomcat!

It could be argued that it makes the DCS: F-14 module more attractive to new entrants to DCS, but in the vast majority of cases people are going to be buying Tomcat rather than specifically an early-A. I really don't see a case for it making or breaking the majority of purchase decisions.

So no, HB don't get additional revenue for building the early-As, or if they do, it's so small it pales into insignificance.

 

Well they're supposed to care about you apparently, and your opinion. Nice attitude by the way. I'm sure if HB treated you as a customer with the same diffidence you'd be the first to start squealing but apparently it's ok to treat them like lackeys?

You paid for and were delivered an advertised product that is still supported and even being improved; it could well be argued that the latter part goes above and beyond any contractural obligations that tie HB to you. Certainly doesn't give anyone the right to make obnoxious demands and talk down to anyone on the development team.

 

And this is just it. Repeatedly, everytime they have been asked, they have stated that either the work is ongoing or that it's been delayed because of the Phantom.

The only time I have observed them refraining from reply is when it's clearly some bozo who has just been spamming the forum or discord every other day trying to prove a point and make himself feel like a hero. 

What the hell else do you want?

Deadlines? Why would they tie themslves to a deadline when as previously demonstrated, other revenue earning work would make better use of their man hours? They would then get repeated haranging from the early-A nuts that they didn't meet the deadline, despite the fact that maybe they had higher priority, actually earning $$$ tasks that needed to be achieved.

To which I refer you to my previous statements: want an early-A so goddamn much then maybe you better let HB make stuff that will earn them actual money to keep their business solvent and take the delay like a goddamn grown-up else you might not get it at all.

 

Silly me I thought it might be a good thing that in the neverending war against bugs they seem to be winning?

It'll never be truly won though; there's always some surprise changes from ED in the underlying game engine code one patch that'll have the potential to break something and require a fix, quick or otherwise. 

Plus, what about the improvements to missiles and radar fidelity? Not necessarily bugs per se, but times when HB had to assume or interpret data in one way during initial development but then discovered their assumptions or interpretations were erroneous during later life of the module; repeatedly they have gone back at corrected these, and been transparent to the community about it. Not every developer would be so self-effacing.

Neither earn direct revenue either, though it does earn you good reputation, that you are a reliable developer who offers ongoing product support and this may help reassure potential customers, but these would be swing voters anyway.

 

Why? Given all of the above, why?

You've got to be a pretty petty, blinkered individual to assume that an F-14B(U) module means your early F-14A has suddenly become Heatblur's red headed step child.
It's banal, pitchfork wielding, ignorance of the most pathetic variety and this community can do well without it. Get a grip.

 

And again, you have recieved the product as advertised. I fail to see why this is so hard for you to grasp.

 

Bovine excrement and irrelevant. You opted in to early access and got a reduction in the price of purchase for your beta testing. Your choice, you were not obliged, and Heatblur would have every right to thank you but they owe you NOTHING.

 

Indeed, and they are working their way towards that goal, but as has been repeated on multiple occasions but I'll say it again because apparently it needs to be said repeatedly till some of you get it:

Want an early-A so goddamn much? Then maybe you better let HB make stuff that will earn them actual money to keep their business solvent and take the delay like a goddamn grown-up else you might not get it at all.

 

 

Mate that's a long writeup to be wrong. 

First shown in 2015 with an ALR-45 equipped cockpit. So as advertised is it not?

Stated above 1 year prior to launch that there will be an ALR-45 (Pre 90's A) so as advertised unlike what you suggest. 

 

[Cobra847]

The ALR-45 equipped early -A is in active finalization progress based on our RWR work in the F-4E, and I hope it will drop in Q1. 

Edited January 19 by Cobra847

[DD_Fenrir]

9 hours ago, Gunslinger22 said:

Mate that's a long writeup to be wrong. 

First shown in 2015 with an ALR-45 equipped cockpit. So as advertised is it not?

Stated above 1 year prior to launch that there will be an ALR-45 (Pre 90's A) so as advertised unlike what you suggest. 

 

Fair point, however...

You and I both know that a an ALR-45 is only half the equation when it comes to defining the early A.

Ask yourself why were they developing an ALR-45?

It clearly seems like there was an assumption at HB, pre-release that F-14A = ALR-45 and F-14B = ALR-67.

It's an easy one to make when reading a lot of the general history stuff on the Tomcat. It so often states that the F-14B was delivered with new engines and a better RWR suite, but rarely states that the -As were upgraded to this new RWR also.

Besides:

Edited January 19 by DD_Fenrir