turkeydriver

I like how the hit doesnt guarantee a kill but it is way underpowered-my wingie just put 2 Aim-9s into a MiG-21 tail on hits and I put a third in him-only left him smoking but still under power!

The Eagle truly is King Kong WRT having a powerful radar. They could lock my little F-16A before I could generally paint them on my little biddy radar. Advantage Eagle. However...I felt pretty darn confident I could get to the merge if I was at low altitude (due to the V sub C notch in their radar). At medium to high altitude...defeating a face shot was problematic (was ACMI in your favor or not that day) did you "worm" effectively that day. Clear advantage to the Eagle, Tomcat & Hornet.

 

 

LOL...I never met another viper pilot that felt inferior to a guy in another jet. The F-18A gave me the biggest trouble...but they had shorter legs than us, so if they were hauling a CL tank that day, and I saw that at the merge...boy my fangs were out. If they were clean...I'd probably die in the phone booth, groveling in a nose high slow speed rolling scissors. BFM against the Hornet was like BFM against another Viper. But then they'd bingo out and go home. Regarding the F-16 vs F-14...the Tomcat is the world's largest airspeed indicator. Meaning you knew his energy state immediately. In the F-16 our BFM problem was defined by a simple flow chart. 1) Am I inside his turn circle? If Yes...go kill him. If No, get inside his turn circle and kill him. That's not hubris or ego, that is simply the way we trained. Once AIM-9Ls & Ms became more plentiful our options improved. Again I am speaking strictly as a former A model (Blk 10 & Blk 15) guy. You had good days and you had bad days, and some days you got luckier. The F-16 would still be my choice to go to war.

Hah you just lost your first fight with any F-14 nugget outta VF-101. First thing to get under your skin is to MANUALLY keep the wings swept past the merge at idle (wings swept you have insane pitch and a real life wing loading of 45-50 lbs/sqft-crunch those numbers!) then put it into ZONE 5 or or ZONE 3(F110 motors) and pull inside and outpitch your attacker for an easy AIM-9 or guns kill. It works great to unerve the other pilot who relies on judging the wing sweep. If you use sound BFM and manage your energy instead of relying on some 9g garbage to win the fight you should do well. Don't go high speed with a tomcat and don't go low speed unless you're a hornet. As long as you keep the fight above 400 kts and below Mach .95, you can make the F-14 work hard for a kill.

As far as the inside his turn circle-you must mean a clean F-16 with maybe a belly tank. Only at low altitude where your little wings work well with your high thrust and low weight. VF-32 vs Israeli F-16s did give many F-16 victories BUT ONLY when the JOs who would benefit most from the training were driving the jets. Thats one big thing that many people don't understand-in the navy, when prepping for a deployment, you spend the majority of your training on the new guys and just get your veterans requalled. So most exercises are with the JOs flying to get the benefit-this isn't an excuse, but a reality. The veteran good stick O-4s and aboves had no problem fighting them to an empty fuel state and keeping the fight neutral or winning. Too much internet space has been wasted on armchair pilots who clown on the F-14 in the BFM arena. There are many variables and yes the F-16 enters the fight with an advantage, but the F-16Ns cracked up and retired after 6 years due to F-14s making them work for it. Mind you the F-16N was the most powerful and maneuverable F-16 ever built.

All the above comments are for an IRL F-14 fight-I'm not sure how well the TW and TMF turkeys match up to the real thing. I just know the TW tomcats need a LOT more roll authority. The F-14 was no A-4 when it comes to rolling, but it does 220 degrees a second as long as you're not super slow.

Navy sailor in that spot could expect an achievement medal or possibly a Comm at best for that role. There are instructions- whoever put her in for that award is paying her back or trying to keep her quiet-I can't imagine any senior NCO or officer reveiwing that award and signing off on it without batting an eye.

PFunk thanks for coming back for a second look. the patch does fix most of the bugs you mention-I havent tested to see if the fleets still merge halfway through the F-14 campaign. I think you could review it again, I have no problems flying around the terrain, but there could be a lot of reasons for that. The Tupolev series were given a lot of attention as far as different models/missions go (snooping recon bears and badgers have all the right blisters compared to the missile shooters/bombers) The airbases need a lot of help. The A-7 is quite plesent to fly and I feel it can fly circles around the F-14 from mach .99 on down-that needs to change. Attention paid to the F-14 is nice, glove vanes auto deploy starting at Mach 1.3. But overall, I think most features this game holds are unable to be taken full advantage of. So while i agree your view was harsh- the community here seems to echo it. Wait until June and give it another go.

Turkeydriver,

 

I respect your opinion and comments. I've been a supporter of TK and his sims since EAW. Either by modding, skinning and by purchasing. I, along with many here, went through the whole WalMart release fiasco and have stuck by him since. However, when he decided to not trust us to include his fan base as testers and bug finders and fired off his beta team, he opened himself up for criticism from the same people who could have helped him maintain the once high standards (and BTW have never been acknowledged by him as keeping this series alive). Instead, he now releases for sale, semi-broke games thatwhen patched, break as many things as fix. He's rejected the offers from many of us to help him for free. And when most of us have said that we'd gladly pay a higher price for his sims, he rejected that as well. So instead we get a $30 sim that will take several more patches to fix things that never should have made it out the door. This has become a disturbing trend for well over a year.

 

I hold on to hope that things will get fixed by him. SF:NA has been a welcomed addition since it was announced. But the terrain/FPS issues and lack of terrain detail, plus the other bugs is a deal breaker.

 

I may be the odd man out, but I stand by my thoughts.

Point well taken. I didn't know he fired his beta team and refused testers......though I'm sure its because of the people who used his work for other games( I don't know the exact details-but someone exported some/parts of his models for other games?). I thinks he knows basically the majority of posters would pay $50 or more for a polished sim, but he understands his limitations in development and that he can only survive in this end of the market. I'll admit I'm disappointed with the bugs, and I think the turkey FM needs some tweaking (roll anyone?) I've played EAW and SF;P1 from the walmart release as well. I'm just a bit jaded and want Thirdwire to grow and improve. Your criticism is valid, thanks for taking time to explain it to me.

I know. Sadly, we're all paying to do it.

Or rather-we got what we paid for. I'm a realist but consider the fact that sims don't make a profit allowing TK to buy Ferraris. I'm quite sure there was no ill intent in the release but rather he needed funds to continue to develop this. It was in a releasable state, albeit with a few more bugs than normal. I'm glad for the new effects and avionics that are in there, they add to the realism. I fully agree exploding A-7s on the cat and taking SAMs from Soviet ships 1/4 a mile away on the cat are not acceptable, but you belive this will get fixed. If you require a perfect game with many more features, then please get a lawsuit and sue us all for an extra $30 for every TK sim we ever purchased, as well as many thousands more for those few that robbed his Thirdwire models for their own gain. If we were all charged $60 forthis game, and it was purchased by every one who purchased any Falcon or Lomac title, we would have had a much more sable game at release. I'm very happy for the way TK handles his business. Man I sound like a TK fanboi. I don't mean too, but we need to keep in perspective the whole picture instead of "gimme perfect NOW!" I don't support intentionally releasing in a buggy state to make the public beta test(SWTOR anyone?), but I do believe in releasing as soon as possible in order keep the lights on and food on the table so to speak.

Grats to your wife Dave. Tell her to rest easy, we got it. And may i say i may contact you in 4-8 years for my own shadowbox, you did an amazing job!

They don't go into much detail about the damage to the B-52. Was it very light damage? Or did it abort its mission and limp back to base? The HARM is not much use if it can't take down an aircraft with a direct hit on the tail. But it may be simply a matter of selecting the right warhead for the mission as I don't see why it couldn't have a warhead as effective as a Sparrow, but it might also need the fusing of the Sparrow to work against aircraft. The effectiveness of a warhead against an aircraft is definitely affected by the timing of its detonation.

Well the warhead on a HARM is a forward directed area blast with Tungsten cubes now right? I think thats an improvement of the AGM-88A used in Desert Storm. I'd imagine as its designed to decimate a delicate dish or plate for radar guidance, its not really going to be effective as an anti-air weapon. I can see the validity of a anti air designed ARM against AWACS-or even fighters with powerful radars acting as an AWACS. I couldn't see it effective at all against a maneuvering target as the passive seeker would have a difficult time calculating lead pursuit on a target with the radar on the pointy end only. Receiver sensitivity and calculations must be very precise on a piece of avionics to calculate the specific are of a fixed radar site-one moving at 400 knots would not allow the inputs to be used in calculations before they were too outdated to provide any useful information.

Thanks. downloading now. I rammed the MiG out of frustration as 2 AIM-9(prox hits AFAI can tell)and gun hits left him with a perfect motor and good maneuverability. Thanks for the responses. I'm all about tweaking them down if they were overpowered in the past-but how man RL AIM-9s from the Lima on didn't score a one hit kill? I can think of two in the falklands-one was a C-130 that needed 30mm as well, and one was a Mirage damaged and then shot down by friendly AAA returning home.

I'll have to do some testing with the missile view-good suggestion MiGBuster, and rank against the effectiveness of up-the-tailpipe shots.

Haven't installed the weapon mod yet due to testing, but it seems tail on shots at low deflection are a one shot/one kill on a MiG-23. I'll keep testing.

Turkeydriver, see here - Harm versus B-52 .

I particularly like the name that was given to the BUFF after the incident . . . "In HARM's way"

 

And in this link - Profiles - you can see a side view of the aircraft (its 3rd from bottom), plus side view artwork of a great many other B-52's.

 

Thanks Gary, that's a crazy incident.

Supposedly A B-52s tail gun radar was damaged by an AGM-88 in GW1. It wasn't uncommon to launched the HARMs behind what you were escorting and lob them over the strikers to have them rain down on the SAMs-might have been a tactic to show they werent any HARM shooters-since the closest target would be what you wanted to shoot down( the B-52 strikers). I'll see what i can find on the topic.

You should install ravenclaw's mini weapons pack which I find to be more realistic (performance-wise) than the stock ones:

 

http://combatace.com...weapons-pack-1/

 

They also LOOK exactly like they're supposed to in real life as well!

Thanks. downloading now. I rammed the MiG out of frustration as 2 AIM-9(prox hits AFAI can tell)and gun hits left him with a perfect motor and good maneuverability. Thanks for the responses. I'm all about tweaking them down if they were overpowered in the past-but how man RL AIM-9s from the Lima on didn't score a one hit kill? I can think of two in the falklands-one was a C-130 that needed 30mm as well, and one was a Mirage damaged and then shot down by friendly AAA returning home.

I'll have to do some testing with the missile view-good suggestion MiGBuster, and rank against the effectiveness of up-the-tailpipe shots.

So I had one mission to escort A-7s over Iceland and we encountered MiG-23s. They seem to fall to AIm-7 and AIm-54 easily enough, but one tough bugger took 3 AIM-9Ls and about 6 hits with a gun before he punched out. Tonight I hit with 2 AIM-9L again and twice with then gun, then RAMMED him. My titanium F-14 went up in flames and he flew on with a little bullet damage but no smoke. SO are the AIM-9s weak or is the MiG-23 super tough. I'll dig around to see if I can read damage modelling.

Can't make everyone happy. I'm sure we could of fixed it if Oli hadn't of passed away. So what you see is what you get.

Sorry if i sounded critical- I'm very pleased and do enjoy the MF tomcat and the new one in SF2NA, just being a Monday morning QB on what I'd like changed-perhaps I outta read up on medding and do it myself for a change....add to the community vice asking.

The MF tomcat is pretty but the airbrake design is based off a very early F-14A and there were other problems with the model. For the most part the FM is a bit better, but your F-14 should handle like and underpowered F-15 at the worst. The MF jet and TKs initial release both need work-It would be nice if the slow speed maneuvering aspect of the F-14 and F-15 with slats/flaps could be explored and modelled. Both those jets have the lift and AoA to make that part of the fight a joy as long as your not bagged out on gas and weapons.

Thanks Stary. I launched with SF2I as I have a merged insall and it usedthe controls I have there. The acceleration and pitch response is good but the roll is severely undermodelled as is the energy managment and turn rate and radius. I'm not looking for an F-16, but its modelled like an F-105 that can't roll! It has serious problems with a MiG-23!!!!! The TF-30s seem to be good on their power as once I've bled energy, I need to dive to build up energy. I love the TWS and multi-target capability-and its guidance for multiple AIM-54s seems to only work well against a close flying group, which is accurate. The MF F-14 seems to be more accurate around the carrier as its a bit tougher to land than the F-4. The SF2NA tomcat is as stable as anything and its a piece of cake to put it on the centerline.

as for controls...

 

after having some issues with the ingame input manager, I simply copied my controls file from my SF2E mod and voila! All works fine including my extra entries for viewlist

How do I do this-where is it located in my SF2E install?

Ground Resonance is a phenomenon inherant in all helos but mostly twin rotors like the H-46/47. It's instantly cured once you get airborne. Basically a Resonant vibration is induced that the helos vibration absorbers cannot affect and the helo begins to shake itself apart. Once the you leave the deck, the landing gear/skids can move and assist in vibration damping.

I will refrain from posting another Rick Astley video.

 

So Here's to keeping our hopes up! as it's

.

May 09, 2012.

Good stuff there.

In the SF series, the are unmodded F-4Es and then modded (1973?) F-4Es with the slats-I've not done any testing to see if they work other than give you a better turn. I'd love to find out though.

Not in this shot

https://plus.google.com/photos/118322065616726818559/albums/5678752652966581777/5705359284733169490

Yep-sorry I was on the wrong pic.

I wonder if this is a Standard ARM missile which fired A-7

The A=7 is dropping two walleyes.

Firing order needs a bit of work for when 4 AIM-54s are carried in the tunnel. The back pair will fire off first as that rear pair restricts maneuverability and has a bigger affect on weight and balance thatn the front pair. The 2 up front don't penalize your g limit or maneuverability other than the 2,000lbs of extra weight.

All in all, Tk is doing it right-Soviet surface ships with their wall of missiles is the way to go. One thing I'd request in a future update is a realistic length of afterburner plume. It should lengthen/grow with intensity with airspeed. Can't wait for this. Paypal account standing by....

Easy as sending one plane to China for some inverse engineering, and there you have your spare parts.While most of their military prowess are mainly badly photoshoped images and fantasy claims targeted for internal consumption rather than international deterrence, the IRIAF´s capability to keep the tomcat operational is nothing to underestimate.To my knowledge, Tomcats are not falling from the sky every year, and operational accidents happens in every air force.Now, what should be under the looking glass is the military value of tomcats in current world´s air warfare, which, i personally, doubt very much, they pose a real threat..other than a fast AWACS.

R.I.P. to the aviators who lost their lives, no doubt, doing what they loved most, flying...regardless of their nationality.

 

Best regards

 

Prowler

Even China who is trying to show the world how developed they are have difficulty producing a modern fighter engine. They've been working on their WS-6 forever and a day and so far the its just going to be an afterburning turbofan with a low hour rework. Not very advanced at all considering they've only just started replacing all the AL-31s they've been buying from Russia.

Iran has an ability to make things happen-a lot of their projected ability is subterfuge- 10 tomcats in the air aren't anything close to 10 battle ready tomcats. They do have an unmatched ability to rework and locally manufacture whatever possible. If anything conventional ever happened with them, I believe their F-14s would be limited to Sparrow shots at best as whatever AIM-54s they could make work are way to old to be anything near reliable, and the MIM-23 Hawk conversion AAM has a horrible hit rate- as far as the public knows anyway.