F-14A-GR-135 Early

[Southernbear]

Basically, how is it? Did it get any new armaments like the AIM-7E4 or AIM-9H they said they might look into? Or did we literally wait 2 years for just a new RWR and slightly different performing TF-30s?

[Northstar98]

Right now its only the RWR and the accompanying in-cockpit changes for it. Both As are the same block and have the same engines.

Unfortunately there aren't any external changes aside from the removal of the GPS dome.

Weapons like the AIM-9G and H are on ED.

Edited yesterday at 11:36 AM by Northstar98

[JupiterJoe]

Yes, and more importantly than any of that, all of these issues still remain:

If HB fixed the issue of ACLS not working with FFB sticks/Iceman trimming nose down when in the RIO position, all else would be forgiven. 

Edited yesterday at 11:43 AM by JupiterJoe

[Czar]

10 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

Weapons like the AIM-9G and H are on ED.

Why?

3rd party are often responsible for weapons development and after they hand the code to ED, no?

[JupiterJoe]

12 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

Unfortunately there aren't any external changes aside from the removal of the GPS dome.

 

Where was the GPS dome located on the later variants?  I don't see any difference in the external models.

[Northstar98]

1 minute ago, Czar said:

Why?

3rd party are often responsible for weapons development and after they hand the code to ED, no?

Well, I was under the impression ED had taken over weapons development (which is a good thing as it means aircraft share the same weapons), though would've thought it would be on HB to provide artwork (see AIM-54, AIM-7Es etc).

[Czar]

2 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

Well, I was under the impression ED had taken over weapons development (which is a good thing as it means aircraft share the same weapons), though would've thought it would be on HB to provide artwork (see AIM-54, AIM-7Es etc).

ED takes over after 3rd party develops it.

HB did the Phoenixes, same goes for the old F-4 weapons and handed over to ED. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Functionalities I mean, not just art.

[Northstar98]

15 minutes ago, JupiterJoe said:

Where was the GPS dome located on the later variants?  I don't see any difference in the external models.

Behind the cockpit.

1990s+ F-14A:

 

1980s "Early" F-14A:

 

12 minutes ago, Czar said:

ED takes over after 3rd party develops it.

HB did the Phoenixes, same goes for the old F-4 weapons and handed over to ED. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Functionalities I mean, not just art.

All I can say is on the HB Discord, HB team members are saying they'll be added when ED develops them. I believe the same is true for the CM-400AKG ALBM on the JF-17 - Deka are again waiting on ED to implement the weapon.

Edited yesterday at 12:05 PM by Northstar98

[Czar]

3 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

All I can say is on the HB Discord, HB team members are saying they'll be added when ED develops them. I believe the same is true for the CM-400AKG ALBM on the JF-17 - Deka are again waiting on ED to implement the weapon.

hmmmm....now that's a head scratcher...

ED never announced being busy with the many F-4 weapons or any other 3rd party weapons, throughout the years.... it was all meant to be a develop and hand over the ''keys'' to ED to maintain weapons wise.
Could it be the case for the HB info there be the exception to the rule?

Deka can be wainting for ED to implement their weapon (code) into the sim, that's how I imagined it would go.

I'm sure CMs have the answer to that. All I can do from this point is guessing.

Cheers.

[Northstar98]

Just now, Czar said:

hmmmm....now that's a head scratcher...

ED never announced being busy with the many F-4 weapons or any other 3rd party weapons

They did mention a few in a newsletter, here's one mentioning the Shrike, here's one mentioning the Bullpup and GBU-8 - in the 2nd note the wording "we are currently developing a new variant of the AGM-12 Bullpup..." , 

I believe the AGM-45B Shrike is also on ED (and that's why it isn't in) etc.

[Silver_Dragon]

on fact, ED always has claims all weapons has on your side.

[Czar]

3 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

They did mention a few in a newsletter, here's one mentioning the Shrike, here's one mentioning the Bullpup and GBU-8 - in the 2nd note the wording "we are currently developing a new variant of the AGM-12 Bullpup..." , 

I believe the AGM-45B Shrike is also on ED (and that's why it isn't in) etc.

Oh heavens. That doesn't sound good. ED should not be busy with 3rd party weapons meanwhile having their own modules and core updates to do alongside....

This should go to 3rd party. Am I wrong on this?

Maybe that ''we'' is a way to say as in co-operation with HB as ED themselves will implement into DCS?

Now that's the weirdest thing I've heard about DCS this year... sounds awful.

Thanks.

[Silver_Dragon]

1 minute ago, Czar said:

Oh heavens. That doesn't sound good. ED should not be busy with 3rd party weapons meanwhile having their own modules and core updates to do alongside....

This should go to 3rd party. Am I wrong on this?

Maybe that ''we'' is a way to say as in co-operation with HB as ED themselves will implement into DCS?

Now that's the weirdest thing I've heard about DCS this year... sounds awful.

Thanks.

 

Do you remember ED has a Weapon team? from the last patchs (only some examples):

DCS 2.9.20.15010

Weapons

• Introduced advanced model for R-27 missile family. Missiles got new CFD-based flight model, authentic control system that includes wing actuator model, altitude band-switching autopilot, Kalman-type guidance filters (different for IR and RF versions) which also drive seeker gimbal mechanics, INS and datalink system with realistic inaccuracies (for RF missile only), and RF or IR seeker. New semiactive RF seeker provides 'multitarget' tracking feature. This means that RF signals from several distinct targets will interfere and form one bigger apparent target once they simultaneously fall into the missile tracking gate. This apparent target may lead the missile between real targets in a target group, or to dispensed chaff. It also may steal missile velocity tracking gate and break guidance. R-27 proximity fuze now has a conical antennas pattern and variable explosion command delay to adjust for target size and closure rate. And, in addition, missiles got number of limitations caused by control systems design. For example RF missile can not be launched with roll angle exceeding 120 degrees because of gimbaled INS roll limit.
• Added Mk-83AIR GP HD bomb
• Added laser PRF code adjustment option for GBU-54
• Fixed phantom bomb instances being frozen on impact instead of penetrating whatever they collided with
• Added fuze options for Soviet bombs and dispensers (BetABs, FABs, OFABs and RBKs). Adjusted BetAB, FAB and OFAB warhead parameters
• Added fuze options for Chinese bombs (250-2 and 250-3)
• Fixed phantom LGB instances trajectory desynchronization when using non-default laser PRF code
• Corrected available fuze variant sets for US HTP and non-HTP bombs
• Mk-20/CBU-99. Improved bombsight accuracy. Please note that using FMU-140 in low-altitude horizontal flight bombing runs will lead to poor accuracy - in these cases Mk 339 fuze must be used. FMU-140 should provide acceptable accuracy in dive bombing runs and, in specific conditions, in horizontal flight bombing runs (function altitude set to ca. 1/3 of release altitude and specific airspeed at release, e.g. function altitude - 3 kft, release altitude - 10 kft, TAS - 580 kts)
• Mk-20/CBU-99. Fixed Mk 339 fuze function delay being counted down after arming instead of after release
• BL755. Added fuze function delay options
• GMLRS. Added animation of rotation of the tail stabilizers block
• BetAB-500ShP. Improved bombsight accuracy in normal release conditions (release at 500 m altitude)
• Fixed non-detonation of bombs in certain conditions
• Fixed IRIS-T missiles constantly switching between command and IR guidance, which caused them to miss.

DCS 2.9.17.12034

Weapons

• Weapons. AGM-45 all seeker models able to track 052B/054A and HQ7 radar - fixed

 

[Czar]

5 minutes ago, Silver_Dragon said:

Do you remember ED has a Weapon team? from the last patchs (only some examples):

I know they maintain and bug fixes the weapons, as I mentioned in ''handing over the keys''.

[ReleaseTheMiG17]

47 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

Behind the cockpit.

1990s+ F-14A:

 

1980s "Early" F-14A:

 

All I can say is on the HB Discord, HB team members are saying they'll be added when ED develops them. I believe the same is true for the CM-400AKG ALBM on the JF-17 - Deka are again waiting on ED to implement the weapon.

To be fair, GPS and TCS are removal from lua files.

 

[Northstar98]

Ah, I knew about TCS but didn't realise the dome was as well.

In that case, no external changes from the existing A AFAIK.

[Tomcatter87]

Has anyone tried out if the Iranian Weapons pack works with the new early-135-GR?

Iranian F-14 Weapons Pack (V1.2.10)

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

2 hours ago, Czar said:

Why?

3rd party are often responsible for weapons development and after they hand the code to ED, no?

Not any more. 3rd parties can send a request to ED for a particular weapon to be included with their module, but in the end it's up to ED to make it available within the DCS framework.

[captain_dalan]

6 hours ago, Southernbear said:

Basically, how is it? Did it get any new armaments like the AIM-7E4 or AIM-9H they said they might look into? Or did we literally wait 2 years for just a new RWR and slightly different performing TF-30s?

I love her so far, and it was after all the F-14A that was originally announced all those years back. And I have a thing for old RWR's!!! BTW, she is exactly as the late 135 (as she should be), except for the absence of the dedicated RWR display in the front and some minor ECM thingies in the back. Makes all the repeater management in the front more fun!
 

 

[Silver_Dragon]

1 hour ago, Czar said:

I know they maintain and bug fixes the weapons, as I mentioned in ''handing over the keys''.

ED start them from de Deka JF-17 times.... and other example, the tons of Weapons of the Mig-21Bis (by leatherneck), never implemented. I have a post about the "missing" stuff.

6 hours ago, Southernbear said:

Or did we literally wait 2 years for just a new RWR and slightly different performing TF-30s?

On fact, the TF-30 was a bonus, as the Iranian versions (by the Heatblur Trello), no a promise. I think that has a very low priority by HB actualy, centred on other content first.

[Czar]

1 hour ago, Raven (Elysian Angel) said:

Not any more. 3rd parties can send a request to ED for a particular weapon to be included with their module, but in the end it's up to ED to make it available within the DCS framework.

52 minutes ago, Silver_Dragon said:

ED start them from de Deka JF-17 times.... and other example, the tons of Weapons of the Mig-21Bis (by leatherneck), never implemented. I have a post about the "missing" stuff.

I see now. Thank u, guys.

[Monkman911]

Hi all!

I was excited to see that in the changelog we were going to get keybinds for "ready pre-contact" and "intent to refuel". I have tried both and I cannot get them to work. Also with the early A model I expected the glove vanes to deploy when transitioning to super sonic. Will that come later? The nose still tucks under when making the transition.

Cheers!

[Silver_Dragon]

8 minutes ago, Monkman911 said:

Hi all!

I was excited to see that in the changelog we were going to get keybinds for "ready pre-contact" and "intent to refuel". I have tried both and I cannot get them to work. Also with the early A model I expected the glove vanes to deploy when transitioning to super sonic. Will that come later? The nose still tucks under when making the transition.

Cheers!

I think there's a post where Heatblur said that these fins were disabled since the first versions because they were ineffective.

By Ironmike here:

 

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

48 minutes ago, Czar said:

I see now. Thank u, guys.

Yes, we used to have for example a “aim-7m_heatblur” and a “aim-7m_ED that could perform vastly differently, even though it was technically the same weapon. There were all sorts of issues with it, so ED had to come up with a solution and decided to take care of all weapons themselves. It also makes them trust the source material more, as they themselves did the research.

[Swordsman422]

Some things on the physical model still need adjusting; the grilled gun gas vents, removal of ECM blister on the boat tail, port side nose gear door vent, and shorter TACAN antenna, but given that the external models of the Late A and B also need some tweaks, I won't expect these changes before the end of EA.