TLTeo

That's exactly what I mean - the 101 has the Sea Eagle even though no country ever actually bought/used them. You're right about pit/controls for the Exocet, but depending on how much work it is it wouldn't be impossible either, see e.g. Lantirn on the Tomcat (or some features on the Mirage 2000? I think the GCI datalink thingy changes the pit a bit for instance).

I don't think the argument of "it was never on the Spanish jets so it won't be included" works, given what they're doing with the Super 530 or the Sea Eagle on the C-101. My guess is if the F1M was remotely capable of using it (or other similar weapons), it will be included for the sake of variety. Which is honestly perfectly fine given how loadout restrictions work these days.

Yea the issue isn't that the datalink is classified and therefore it can't be implemented (datalinks are super simplified in DCS anyway). It's that the datalink is classified for whatever reason (and other things on top of it?) and the document that details it also contains information on other systems.

ED's guns are consistently too inaccurate for whatever reason, from the weird barrel issues with the M3, to excessive dispersion in the M39, M61 and GAU-8, all of which have been reported. I don't think one can infer anything about the F-14 just by comparing it to ED's modules.

Take height h from the radar altimeter, take dive angle a from attitude gryo, assume terrain is perfectly flat, estimate range as r = h/cos(a) I guess?

It was never alive

Nothing at all there is specific to the CE. It only says the E (which is relevant to the EE variant, NOT the CE) has improved a2g avionics and that is true - it comes with an INS and improved RWR. Nothing at all on that page says anything about CCIP or CCRP.

The CE was just the export version of the C, it did not receive the upgrades of the CT. The upgraded version is the M.

I don't understand why this conversation is still going on when Aerges wrote that they will tune the adverse yaw behavior days ago.

Yea it could be fun. I'm excited to see how that works out for IndiaFoxtEcho's modules.

True, I forgot about those. Still not F-4Es though.

^ This. The only F-4 variant that contributed meaningfully to Desert Storm was the F-4G.

Yea the point is whatever you call that switch, it's not on the HOTAS, it's on the sidewall next to the throttle just like on the Mirage.

I assume they refer to the switch used to toggle between VSL Hi/Lo and PAL modes.

There are also pictures of EX prototypes with AMRAAMs on the CFTs

Weird, I've never had anything go wrong. Do you have a link to any threads?

For those with a two stage trigger, I think the ideal is having unsafe be the first stage of the trigger, and weapon release be the second.

My guess is that the F1M will be a better stand in, since both are end-of-life updated airframes.

You might be right. I was under the assumption that since Iran had 9Es for their Phantoms and hacked whatever they could on their Tomcats out of desperation, the F-14 would also have carried that missile. I have only really found one picture of something that looks like a 9E on an Iranian Tomcat though, everything else looks like a 9J/P.

They will probably also allow some AIM-9J/P variant since there are so many of them in the game, but yeah I wouldn't expect them to model the AIM-9E just for a relatively niche variant.

The R had a fixed sight, if I recall correctly you can set the depression manually but it's not even a gyro sight. The Y had a fancier sight more similar to the A-4's bombing computer.

The F1M is a late 90s upgrade of the EE/CE fleets

CCIP won't be a thing until the F1M release. The radar gunsight isn't implemented yet.

A while ago I tried googling RL pictures and couldn't find any, so my guess is no.

Retracting flaps at Mach 1.3 because the acceleration is too slow is probably the most Starfighter thing that's ever happened in the history of aviation lmao