Questions regarding F-14 features.

[Max1mus]

Hello, there are multiple things about the tomcat that seem unfinished and severely influence MP balancing apart from the AIM-54.

 

1: Jamming. You were kind enough to add a Jammer to the F-14 itself, which automatically breaks lock every few seconds, not allowing any HOJ shots. However, the F-14 is completely immune to Jamming. Is there a way to at least add the FC3 jamming to it for now? And if not, why? It would provide a method to break lock at long ranges without having to maneuver or loose altitude, a game changer.

 

2: Jester and Datalink missile detection. Currently the F-14 with Jester will see every single missile launched at him as long as its not below the aircraft, as far as i have seen. Even when Jester is operating systems and the detection comes with a reliability that a human RIO could never have. Same with datalink, it seems (or seemed, maybe its fixed now, have not tested) to detect all incoming missiles, a feature that no other DL in the sim has. Are there plans to adjust this?

 

3: Damage Model. I have asked about this in another thread but not received any answers from HB itself. Is it still WIP? Its currently the tankiest aircraft in the game and as you can clearly see in SATAL and multiplayer servers quite able to fight for a long time after being hit by a large BVR missile. No other aircraft of this size in the sim shares this.

 

4: Infrared coefficient. Now i dont know too much about how that code works, but apparently the infrared coefficient per engine in the .lua is lower than the F/A-18Cs, which seems a bit weird since i do not see what would make the tomcat particularly stealthy in that area. Is it an artificial way to "nerf" IRST in the sim? It also affects the PK if infrared missiles, AIM-9X will stop tracking very easily against it, too.

 

 

You dont need to answer all of these questions but it would be nice to know the progress or reason for no progress on some of these topics.

[QuiGon]

Very good questions! :thumbup:

 

1) See here as well: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=247462

2) Great question, because Jester has indeed superhuman spotting abilities, even though HB always stated he won't have superhuman abilities.

3) I think I've never been killed with a single missile in the Tomcat and have survived up to 3 missiles multiple times, but often the first missile destroys criticial systems like a wing or the engines.

Edited August 12, 2019 by QuiGon

[Stingray 537 Mongo]

I agree with some of your points but not others.

The Tomcat actually seems to be one of the most fragile aircraft in the game. I've been shot down by one Aim-9 before. It seems to always take out the engines, or the hydraulics, or blow a wing off or something. The systems are so well modeled and the internal damage model so well done that a well placed missile or guns burst, even a small one, will doom the jet. Just last night as a matter of fact I got shot down by a snap shot from a Charlie that did nothing but take out the hydraulics. Maybe 5 rounds hit me, but they hit in the right places and I went into the drink.

 

I can't speak to jester because I almost never fly the Cat alone but I can say that the missiles appearing on datalink makes perfect sense due to how far reaching AWACS radar is so it may be a case where other data links in the sim need to be brought up to HB's standard and not the other way around.

 

For ECM, if that's how the actual system is then that's how it should be. If it's OP then either disable ECM in script or don't have the Tomcat in the mission. It's on Mission Makers and Server Admins to balance the game, not the Devs. The Dev's job is to bring us the most accurate and realistic module they possibly can. It's a simulator, not an arcade. Designing in balance at the developer level destroys the spirit and the intent of the program.

 

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

Edited August 12, 2019 by EightyEightMike (Mongo)

[Chaogen]

In regards to 3 and 4. I've been shot down by single IR missiles a few times. I personally don't think there's an issue. Besides when I do survive from a hit, it generally either takes out an engine and/or hydraulics. The latter, more than likely, resulting in an mostly uncontrollable situation which will end up in the dirt eventually. Otherwise it will take out my radar in which case I'm mostly combat ineffective anyway. Now the SU-25.. There's a hard to kill tank. I have yet to kill one with a single Sidewinder. SU-23s, will also sometimes take more than one missile.

[legearre]

“Please nerf the plane that keeps beating me in MP because......balance.”

 

The 14, like every other module, has strengths and weaknesses. When I am smart, keep aggression in check, play to the 14’s strengths, and use the right tactic to fit the situation (which many times means to bug-out), I win. When I am dumb, too aggressive, allow the aircraft’s weaknesses to glare, and don’t use the right tactic for the situation, I loose. And when I loose, I just work on getting better.

[IronMike]

1. Jamming against the Tomcat works, turning on or off the jammer breaks lock, only it has no visual representation in the TID or DDD. Can't say if this will change atm.

 

2. Datalink is done by ED, we have only limited access to it. We'll see what we can do about this, we are aware of it.

 

3. The damage model, especially the internal one, is actually quite accurate. Rarely have I been hit and fought on, the one engagement with you was pure luck and I died before I made it back to the boat (fyi since you left the server). The external, visual representation is still a bit WIP, but the rest is in a pretty much finished state. The Tomcat for sure is tanky, but those who fly it often, will rather wish to share your experience. Not trying to downtalk you, honest impression.

 

4. I am not sure how the code works here either, but I would not take the numbers 1 for 1. might be in relation to aircraft size etc. in any case, I can assure you that everything we implemented, we did from the viewpoint "recreate Tomcat as accurately as possible" regardless of how it would influence its environment, or be influenced by it, positively or negatively, within the limits of DCS. Meaning: nerfing is not really part of our vocabulary and most certainly would never be the reason for a change or for a specific setting/ characteristic.

 

Hope that helps.

[Max1mus]

Thanks for the answers, however if you believe that being able to fight after a single AIM-120 hit is a rare event, i would suggest some more testing to be done outside of public servers (where people usually dual launch within NEZ to avoid exactly what happened that day). R-27 will reliably kill it in one shot, but R-77 and AIM-120 in the majority of cases allow it to continue fighting for a good while. A single AIM-120 will also never or almost never kill the pilot despite direct head on hits.

[lunaticfringe]

R-77 warhead: 50 lbs

AIM-120A/B warhead: 50 lbs

AIM-120C/D warhead: 40 lbs

 

R-27 warhead: 86 lbs

 

*shrug*

[Max1mus]

@Ironmike tested the Jamming, what you said about it is not correct. Tested with J11A and tomcat with pilot/RIO. Jamming on/OFF does not even break lock.

[Jester2138]

If you expect every missile hit to insta-explode airplanes, your expectations are in the wrong place.

 

Try out IL-2 for a better-than-DCS demonstration of how airplanes can take damage. DCS damage modelling is extremely simplistic in comparison, even in the Tomcat which is undoubtedly as good as it can get in DCS.

[QuiGon]

1. Jamming against the Tomcat works, turning on or off the jammer breaks lock, only it has no visual representation in the TID or DDD. Can't say if this will change atm.

Really? That's interesting. I would like to have a more thoroughly implementation though with jamming noise and/or fake contact like in other aircraft.

[Marduk879]

4. I am not sure how the code works here either, but I would not take the numbers 1 for 1. might be in relation to aircraft size etc. in any case, I can assure you that everything we implemented, we did from the viewpoint "recreate Tomcat as accurately as possible" regardless of how it would influence its environment, or be influenced by it, positively or negatively, within the limits of DCS. Meaning: nerfing is not really part of our vocabulary and most certainly would never be the reason for a change or for a specific setting/ characteristic.

 

Hope that helps.

 

How could you accurately set this value when you dont know how the code works? Or do you mean that just you specificaly dont know how it works?

Maybe its about time someone who actualy KNOWS how it works tells us plebs?

 

Im in really big doubt here because when you look into the lua files theres alot of commented text for variables in this section stating that even ED devs(or whoever puts them there) dont know what they mean or do.

Edited August 13, 2019 by Marduk879

[IronMike]

@Ironmike tested the Jamming, what you said about it is not correct. Tested with J11A and tomcat with pilot/RIO. Jamming on/OFF does not even break lock.

 

 

 

 

Ok, thanks bud. Might only apply for the F-15 then, it worked for me and Fallen when we turned ECM on and off again.

 

With the aim120s, the problem is again, that we can only model accurate what we get told by the sim, means if its impact is too small, we cannot change that. the warhead is done on ED side as well (as you can see that 27ers do not seem to have the same week effect), proximity fuzes often don't work etc. I agree that slammer and r77 hits should be at least equal to 27s. but that is unfortunately not on our side. it would be unwise to off shift the damage model only to accommodate one missile (kinda like we cannot tune the FM against a faulty drag system). but it ain't done to give the tomcat an advantage or so, we only try to be accurate seen from the data that we simulate.

[umkhunto]

I mean, it's not just datalink, the AWG-9 can and will detect missiles on it's own. Often I've not had DL, then see the launch on radar of hostile missiles, whether it be air to air, SSM and on rare occasions even SAMs. I've watched phoenixes from other tomcats, there were not DL tracks, but TWS tracks from my own radar. I don't see that as a problem.

 

EDIT: Also, if the Tomcat is so OP in SATAL, which I can't believe it is, lobby the organisers of the event to remove it from the roster of permitted airframes.

Edited August 13, 2019 by umkhunto

[captain_dalan]

R-77 warhead: 50 lbs

AIM-120A/B warhead: 50 lbs

AIM-120C/D warhead: 40 lbs

 

R-27 warhead: 86 lbs

 

*shrug*

 

How dare you trying to make sense on an internet forum?! :music_whistling::joystick::smilewink:

[IronMike]

Yeah those seem a bit odd. I can't say anything about how they are exactly in real life though.

[Max1mus]

Maybe the on/off lock break only works with jester?

 

Also, how can you say your damage model is realistic when it is not for the majority of the missiles? Whats the measurement, if not the amount of damage caused by the existing missiles in the sim?

[legearre]

Questions regarding F-14 features.

 

“Darn it IronMike, we really liked your F14 until mission designers starting putting it on the RED side and we started losing to it. Now, in this make believe world of DCS, we demand you match the real world, no matter that no one knows for sure what that really is, and nerf this thing before our egos really get bruised...”

[freehand]

I would really appreciate in single player if I could orbit when taking the part of jester.

 

Thank you.

[lunaticfringe]

Also, how can you say your damage model is realistic when it is not for the majority of the missiles? Whats the measurement, if not the amount of damage caused by the existing missiles in the sim?

 

Your contention is specifically anecdotal, especially where it concerns what goes into the damage calculation. You listed a pair of missiles that apparently have a hard time taking it out 1:1 versus a third you say has high reliability at it. Just based on warhead weight one can see an immediate difference and a basic reason for such a dynamic.

 

That said, one would certainly hope there are more dynamics at play than raw warhead. Type of warhead, kinetic energy at the time of detonation or impact, distance of detonation proximity- all of these aspects (and more) should be factored, as should the size of the aircraft itself; oft mentioned is 160664- which had over four thousand pounds of T-34C Mentor, fuel, and deceased crew wrapped around its starboard wing in a midair and was able to RTB, was repaired, and returned to service.

 

These aren't toys, and can take damage. Make a real case in test- and don't call BS just because she doesn't simply detonate- that's a fuel state function. Cascading failures are more common than not when dealing with larger aircraft.

[Max1mus]

Your contention is specifically anecdotal, especially where it concerns what goes into the damage calculation. You listed a pair of missiles that apparently have a hard time taking it out 1:1 versus a third you say has high reliability at it. Just based on warhead weight one can see an immediate difference and a basic reason for such a dynamic.

 

That said, one would certainly hope there are more dynamics at play than raw warhead. Type of warhead, kinetic energy at the time of detonation or impact, distance of detonation proximity- all of these aspects (and more) should be factored, as should the size of the aircraft itself; oft mentioned is 160664- which had over four thousand pounds of T-34C Mentor, fuel, and deceased crew wrapped around its starboard wing in a midair and was able to RTB, was repaired, and returned to service.

 

These aren't toys, and can take damage. Make a real case in test- and don't call BS just because she doesn't simply detonate- that's a fuel state function. Cascading failures are more common than not when dealing with larger aircraft.

 

We have tested it over and over again. You can reliably, i would say over 75% of the time still continue flying after an AIM-120 hit. In some cases it would still have working engines, merge and kill the launching aircraft after 2 AIM-120 hits. In 0% of cases did the pilot die immedeatly on impact.

 

There can surely be a middle ground between fc3 "dead on the spot" and heatblur "Working engines after multiple hits by a large BVR missile". Also, wouldnt in some cases the aircraft completely desintegrate after a hit when the fuel department is set on fire? The "fireball" can be seen in combat footage and has been reported on some incidents with MiG-21/25. Also happens to the F-14 in 0% of the cases with the named missiles.

[lunaticfringe]

The fireball is shown on the MiG-21F-13 because it was about as structurally rigid under fire as a roll of aluminum foil and was pressed for gas as soon as it passed the outer marker, and those tanks weren't self-dealing. The higher the fuel state, the lower the probability of detonation because there's less air in the internal tanks.

 

Again- it's situational. Without data regarding the circumstances its anecdotal.

 

If you have actual test data showing consistent launch ranges, speeds, and resulting end speeds at the point of detonation/impact, show them. I'd be interested to see them.

[IronMike]

Maybe the on/off lock break only works with jester?

 

Also, how can you say your damage model is realistic when it is not for the majority of the missiles? Whats the measurement, if not the amount of damage caused by the existing missiles in the sim?

 

DCS hands us a damage state for areas of the airframe and based on that we decide what happens to systems in that area - in these particular system failures we believe that we are fairly in depth and accurate (for example would shrapnel cut rather fuel or oil or hydraulics here, etc). we'll take a second look at the airframe though, we do agree that an aim9 and an aim120 (even proximity hit), should be a kill "95-99%" of the time.

[draconus]

Also, wouldnt in some cases the aircraft completely desintegrate after a hit when the fuel department is set on fire?

You know that jet fuel is not flamable unless heated or vaporized?

Also why would you expect the aircraft to blow up when it is hit by shrapnel/rod warhead type?

[de.Impact]

You know that jet fuel is not flamable unless heated or vaporized?

Also why would you expect the aircraft to blow up when it is hit by shrapnel/rod warhead type?

 

Heres a quote by the pilot that fired the first Aim-120 shot and killed a Mig-25 Foxbat (a slighty heavier aircraft than the F-14). He described the moment of missile impact:

 

“I saw three separate detonations, the nose and left wing broke instantly, and the tail section continued into the main body of the jet, and finally one huge fireball.”

https://fighterjetsworld.com/air/fir...-amraam/13095/

 

 

Yes. Missiles kill aircraft.