Caesar

OK, so it is in both. Here's a picture of the light illuminated in the TW F-14A: And here it is (along with the Collision Steering light) in the TMF F-14A_74: Both work the same way: when firing logic is met, the light illuminates.

Depends on if you mean the TW F-14 or the TMF F-14. I don't remember if TW modeled the HOT TRIG button. In the TMF F-14 it's right where it should be and comes on when firing logic is met.

So, for everyone's SA, I had the engine thrust a little jacked up and fixed it (static installed; the engines are still using the new dynamic altitude/airspeed values) for 1.31. If you don't want to re-download the entire pack, you can instead adjust the thrust for each engine. Use the following values: For the TF30s: SLThrustDry=48374.41 SLThrustWet=76064.59 For the F110s: SLThrustDry=61385.46 SLThrustWet=104978.03

Very nice flying.

It is outlined in the overview, but that sucker is long, and I anticipate most people won't read it. The AI F-14s are included for your use as either wingmen, or as AI aircraft within a mission/campaign. They have a hard 7.33g limiter to prevent them from doing the "one-and-done" super-high "g" pull at the merge and leaving themselves sitting ducks, as the AI usually does with the player F-14s. While the team experimented with these aircraft over the past year, I re-validated the use of the limiter for the AI recently, and an AI controlled F-14A 74-AI wound up out-maneuvering and gunning an Su-30, simply because the limiter forced the AI to keep more energy to use at different points in the fight. As to deleting the cockpit line, that's fine. The AI planes aren't supposed to be used by the player. You CAN use them if you want by dropping in a cockpit from another player F-14, but they were designed explicitly for AI control (as outlined above, I usually assign my wingmen AI-series F-14s so they don't suck so bad in a dogfight).

Glad they got airborne again!

VF-103, following their change from Sluggers to Jolly Rogers remained part of CVW-17, using the tailcode "AA" vice "AJ" (CVW-8). This site has damn near every CVW deployment, which will give you what squadrons were attached, and what their tailcodes were (link shows CVW-17) http://www.gonavy.jp/CVW-AAf.html. Required screenie: Early dawn return

I think SUDNAVY wants an F-14A pit for the F-14A and an F-14D pit for the F-14D. We have neither. We use a unified F-14B cockpit, but with changes to the avionics and displays to provide as close an approximation to either as possible. So, I made the recommendation that if he wants an F-14A cockpit in the F-14A to use the ThirdWire one. Pretty much the only difference between the A and B cockpits are that the F-14B had the AN/ALR-67 threat warning display, while the F-14A did not have any separate RHAW display in the front cockpit (other differences prior to the 2000-03 SparrowHawk HUD upgrade were minor, and included the stall warning lights, installed with Airframe Change 654 starting in 1982 - so F-14A_74 and IR wouldn't have had those, but F-14A_82,_96 and all F-14Bs and Ds would). For the F-14D, the pit layout is significantly different, but we don't have an F-14D cockpit, so again, its a difference in avionics and radar displays, while using the F-14B layout from a cockpit perspective. Problem with the TW pit is that it doesn't have LANTIRN or Air-to-Ground weapon symbology, so you wouldn't want to use it for F-14A_96, and its a ThirdWire .LOD model, so we can't put it in the pack anyway. I also do not believe you can cycle the VDI or HSD in the TW pit. So, to get the ECMD on the HSD, I think you have to power off the radar. There might be a way to add cycling displays, but I don't think we've tasked anyone to try, since, again, it's a TW product, and we don't (and can't) include it in the pack.

For the .tmp files, I must have missed those. Don't think they serve any purpose, so you should be able to delete them without problem. Well, so would we, but we don't have an F-14D cockpit available right now. For the F-14A cockpit, you can use the ThirdWire one if you want (I'd recommend the pit from F-14A_77 if you're going to do that). Check the Knowledge Base for how to add/change cockpits.

On the F-14 SP, there is a new version in the pipeline (should be available fairly soon) with a number of updates. However, we don't have a 3D model for the F-14D's cockpit. If you want to use the ThirdWire A's, you can swap that one into the SP F-14s without too much difficulty.

When you get a chance, please check PM!

I'm assuming this is the older SF-1 Tomcat, but the difference is likely KTAS vs KIAS. The boxes on the player screen show KIAS, while the radar shows KTAS. For an example of the delta between the two, I did a little demo in this thread: http://combatace.com/topic/85255-change-aircraft-speed/?hl=kias&do=findComment&comment=685776 Post #14. Hope this helps.

One of the things to consider is that the missiles in the SF-series are generally a bit over-modeled with respect to range performance. I know I've used the example of the AIM-7F here (at CA) probably twice before, since there's a fair amount written about it in open-source documents. The AIM-7F has an advertised range somewhere in the vicinity of 25-27NM. This may be a true statement when the missile is fired against a closing target co-altitude to the launch platform at 40,000 feet, but what if the target is flying 90-degrees angle-off to the launch platform, and both aircraft are at 15,000 feet? Your effective range is somewhere around 8NM! If the target is running, that range drops even more. Another example is the AIM-54. Against a BMQ-34E drone flying at 50,000 feet and Mach 1.5, closing, an F-14 flying at 44,000 feet and Mach 1.5 was able to successfully engage the drone (simulating a Backfire) with Phoenix from 110NM. Because of the closure rate, the missile only flew 72NM before intercepting and destroying the drone (still an impressive range). The reason this worked was because of high closure rate and high altitude (less drag). If the drone were flying perpendicular to the launch platform, the missile would have been ridiculously out of parameters for a shot, and if the shot were taken at lower altitude, the missile would have had to contend with thicker air and more drag, reducing its maximum range. Generally, most air-to-air missiles in SF2 will make it to the intercept point if they are fired within the maximum range as defined in the .ini. One of the few exceptions now is the AIM-54 (either TW or Ravenclaw's), which can die mid-flight or fall out of parameters if a target changes its vector and the missile is launched around Rmax. The missile either runs out of power (300 seconds in the .ini) or runs out of speed. For most other missiles, however, even turning and running many times won't work against advanced AAMs. They either have too low drag, too powerful a motor, or both. Something I've been doing is messing with the drag profiles of various missiles to try to make them handle a bit more realistically. Mixed results so far, but my AIM-7F is a little closer to the published numbers I have available. If you think the AIM-120 is too easily able to shoot you down, even at Rmax while you're flying 90-degrees angle-off or running, you might try to adjust those numbers. The AIM-120 is good, but it is still bound by physics!

Old guard, new guard (ca. 1975) High altitude vapes

Would recommend looking up "Topgun Days" by Dave "Bio" Baranek, "Scream of Eagles" by Robert K. Wilcox, and probably "Roger Ball" by Donald "Duck" Auten. All three cover different aspects of TOPGUN. Bio was an instructor during the time the movie was being made, Scream of Eagles has interviews with many TOPGUN pilots and students, and covers the formation of the school (pre-F-14 days, but the data is still valid), and "Roger Ball" tracks John Monroe "Hawk" Smith's career until 1978, including his time at TOPGUN.

Yubba, This is a long-standing procedure. I think the reason some of the long-timers here are getting irritated at these types of posts is that when you post, it comes across as if no one has thought of this before, or that you figured out what no one else has. Both the SF1 and SF2 Knowledge Bases include instructions on how to add cockpits to aircraft to either make them flyable, more accurate, or just more to the player's taste. The one from SF1 is 9 years old, the one from SF2 is 7, and dropping in other aircraft pits has been around since the sim was introduced. http://combatace.com/topic/20789-how-to-make-ai-planes-flyable/ http://combatace.com/topic/44026-converting-older-planes-to-work-in-sf2-%E2%80%93-a-basic-guide-by-migbuster/?hl=cockpit It's great that you're learning about the sim, how it functions, and how to modify it to your liking, just understand that the majority of the people here have already figured this out a long time ago; it isn't new territory, and the procedures have been posted here for over a decade in the archives, and nearly a decade in the knowledge bases.

Quick update to this one: I adjusted my Ace Combat 5 Mission 1 scenario (4v12) to have more modern missiles. Flew it about 5 minutes ago and had no less than 5 R73M1's fired at me. Dropping out of burner and dumping flares fooled every one. I had about 20 to spare (was flying the F-14D_96, so I started with 60 flares and 320 BOL chaff) by the time the last bandit was engaged. #2 fired an AIM-9M while I was on the last bandit's tail looking to gun him, so I broke, dropped out of burner, and dumped another 10 flares. I didn't get hit. #2 finished him off. So, it does seem like the game engine has some value to deal with heat signatures in afterburner vice military power, and flares seem to work MUCH better if you're not in AB. That or this is an on-going coincidence. Of note, I am using the Red Side Standard missiles, so there might be another R73 out there that just rejects flares like a madman.

Very nice flying there!