Its zoom is accurate, its 4x and 10x. As for lock range, I believe its detailed in the paper in my bug report, but I dont quite have time to read through the wall of text atm.
See this video
I tested the record-range Phoenix shot. Could not actually track/fire until 115 miles, however you can see the TWS display showing the target’s vector (and that it is selected) at 120 miles+ range.
Not all radar modes have the same max lock range. PD STT might’ve allowed you to, and PDV STT would have the longest range.
Just re-fired up the mission. Despite showing up in PD-V and TWS exceeding that range, the game limits lock to 115 standard miles in both cases. The real shot was taken at 110 nautical miles (200km, 126 miles)
SRC couldn’t detect the target and PD-HDN struggled slightly. All modes that could detect the target were unable to fire until 115 miles. (Against a Yak28B) Will try with a fighter and a bigger bomber and see how the results change.
Edit: After further testing, this hard limit is not dependent on any other factors, since whether the target was a Yak-28, MQ-1, or BV-238 the same hard limit applies. (All of which were detected at varying distances beyond 115 miles)
(Also, how does an MQ-1 have a similar detection range to a BV-238? That seems rather impossible to me)
Mission here: WT Live // Mission by pyroraptor841
1 Like
Still open.
2 Likes
A quick heads up for anyone interested, my suggestion for the RIO to stop being so freaking useless in WT was finally approved for discussion!
3 Likes
Is there any F-14A/B turn rate data with light or clean carriage? Manuals only give data for with missile loads which doesn’t particularly help.
I really hope they do eventually add the version of the F-14 that was tested with AMRAAM. Aren’t there a bunch of other vehicles in the game with capabilities which come from testing rather than actual service?
Realistically, I think the best bet for that in-game would be the F-14D Super Tomcat.
Yes I know iirc the F-14D didn’t test them, and only the F-14A did, but adding AMRAAM to an F-14A woul;d be a little odd in the first place.
The F-14D with AIM-9M, AIM-120A/B, and AIM-54C+ on the other hand would be a truly interesting and very capable fighter, which otherwise would have little to no reason to be added over the current F-14B due to gaijins outright refusal to fix the AIM-54C.
At the point when we can expect an F-14D to be added, there will be little to no reason for it to be added in-game anyways, since it would only bring a better radar and 9M’s over the current F-14B, and will have to compete with aircrafts with better weapons and more missiles in the case of the Su-27, Rafale, and EF2000, that also have better flight performance.
For it to be competitive, the AIM-54C(and by extension C+) will have to be fixed so that they aren’t the absolute joke they currently are at the very least, and the AIM-120A/B would also go a long way in bridging the midrange gap between the F-14D and other gen 4 and gen 4+ aircrafts that will be added.
2 Likes
F-14D would already be better due to radar, systems, IRST, AIM-7P block 2, etc. No need for AMRAAM but it is welcome.
2 Likes
Considering that the AIM-54 / -7 already struggles at combat distances vs the -27ER, the AMRAAM / R-77 are going to put them in the dirt due to the TTK disparity on top of the fact they can break cold and have even higher maneuvering limits.
2 Likes
If I had F-14D with AMRAAMs I wouldn’t need any other aircraft because that is all I would play.
4 Likes
I wonder until when Gaijin will suspend wrong fuselage model of F-14s in game. Everytime i see backplate of F-14 makes gross.
Been reported about clueless F-14 model in game from last year (Yes right after F-14A has been released, back in Danger Zone update), still no answer from gj yet.
Am i the only one who Not-satisfied about current F-14 model in game?
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/uaYooe3Ellll
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/n0BF566gVJ8y
PLEASE DO SOME WORK
1 Like
Every nation has modeling inaccuracies that aren’t fixed. I myself reported the J-7E model some time ago. Be patient, these fixes are slow.
Just interesting concepts of the F-14 Grumman and Lockheed played with.
The E/F-14G Hawkcat (no official designation)
It was said to be able to manually eject the radome or automatically when ACM was in engaged by pilot (foreword cockpit) Then automatic transfer to the AWG9 upon separation.
Rumor updated versions would have a 3rd seat with ICAP III (Increased Capability III) antennas in the tail.
They have a whole exhibit at one of the air museums down the street with really cool photos and literature. I may swing by this week to snap pictures.
Id much rather they fix the stupid TCS and AIM-54C than the visual model, ill be completely honest, I care very little for the visual model when its got much bigger problems with sensors and weapons
TCS function has been bug reported since literally day 1 of the dev server. It was the first approved bug report of the “La Royale” dev server and the devs have done literally nothing about it.
2 Likes
Speaking of, @Gunjob sorry to bug u m8, but is the TCS bug report still alive somewhere? it was an old forum dev server bug report so I cant see its status
So it would work at mach 3 the awacs sr71 and why is it called super duper AWACS
1 Like
Still open if there is an update I’ll post it here.
1 Like
It’s probably based of the F-12A, so would have access to the AIM-47 / -54.
1 Like