I was looking over this IIAF statement and I noticed a lot of differences with the F-14 In game compared to the one in this source. but mainly the fact it’s stated to have the prat and witney TF30-P-414 engine that had 9,480 kg of thrust with after burner and 6,350 in standard use.
9 Likes
also found some sources supporting this and a bit more
" The F-14A Aircraft is the basic platform of the F-14 series. It is equipped with two TF30-P-414A engines. Sixty “core” F-14A Aircraft are being upgraded with the AN/ALR-67 Countermeasure Warning and Control System, LANTIRN and the Programmable Tactical Information Display (PTID). In all F-14 series aircraft, the Automatic Flight Control System (AFCS) will be replaced by the Digital Flight Control System (DFCS)."
(((F-14 Tomcat)))
(due note the IRAF and the A that’s game have different engines and compressors because Iran ordered them AFTER the engine fixes to the A models))
It is likely that gaijin copypasted the F-14A FM to the F-14A IRIAF without actually doing research into what the F-14A IRIAF is.
They do this a LOT.
If you weren’t aware, the F-14A had the 412 early and was upgraded to the 414 later
6 Likes
yeah… im going to start a bug report then because the Iraf has been struggling Ty tho
2 Likes
Good luck, bug reports don’t really find success.
1 Like
yup ._.
1 Like
You are wrong, a properly written error report supported by an official document has a high chance of success.
1 Like
So what does P-414 add asides from reliability upgrades that matter more IRL than in game?
2 Likes
I think you’re naive and haven’t looked at the hundreds of times valid reports are ignored through contrived reasoning formed on the fly to maintain the meta gaijin has already decided on.
6 Likes
Perhaps because most of these reports are based on information from Wikipedia and similar sources. However, if the information is supported by official documents, it is taken into account.
This is not the case. I have seen valid reports be denied.
5 Likes
Just take for example the following report
“Not a bug.
These are inert AGM-65s (blue strips around missile), combat AGM-65s loaded on the LAU-88 cannot be hung next to the LITENING in order to avoid damage the optics by engine flame.”
They don’t even provide a source, just make a statement and assert that it is true, when you would think that if it was an illegal configuration there wouldn’t be images of it, nor would it be permitted since “you train how you fight”.
7 Likes
I know this is a conversation had already, but with this installed, F14IRIAF sitting at 13.0 would cause a lot of pain, but 13.3 or 13.7 seems too mean for a jet without PD mode or all aspect missiles, so how about R73 addition, and put it 13.3, would pretty much eliminate any call of pain since there will not be F4SIIs and the bunch of 12.0 premiums running into it. What do we think?
It’s fascinating to me they don’t allow triple mav next to the targeting pod, but are totally cool with triple mav next to the landing gear, despite the third mav often being omitted out of how close the clearance to the landing gear is.
In real life, yes, six mav is super rare. There are technical (not just tactical) reasons not to do it. However, it is POSSIBLE and we should have it ingame alongside the TGP.
By any logic that says A-10C shouldn’t get 6 mavs+Litening, the Mig-27 family shouldn’t even have a functional cannon, the Yak-141 should be unarmed, the KH-38MT shouldn’t be in the game, etc etc etc.
Russian bias used to be a joke but it is now real. It wasn’t real until the Ka-50 was added, imo
Issue is, Gaijin has none, I agree with ur point except Yak 141 where a different set of rules had to apply otherwise we won’t see the likes of Ho229 in game either. Which some of these I would love to see.
I’m totally cool with a little free reign. My point isn’t that we should be rid of Yak-141, I think it’s great that it’s ingame. I think we should have that AND 6 mav A-10C. the MiG-27 cannon can be reliable ingame.
The only one of the things I mentioned I want gone is KH-38MT
1 Like
I literally used the manual. Their response was “the feature is in testing” but the Gripen got it because of a bug report… They literally don’t care whatsoever if the source is good.
2 Likes
No. It’s barely an upgrade. It barely caused “pain” at 12.7. Even the addition of R-73 and its correct ARH loadout wouldn’t warrant 13.3.
that’s because they somehow managed to upgraded them within the last 5 years, the one in-game is its original variant
Does A models(F-14A Early and F-14A IRIAF) even possible to gets FCS?
Afaik, A models did not receive DFCS until the late 90s, and only limited squadrons such as VF-14 Top Hatters and VF-41 Black Aces received it.
Moreover, with the exception of some test beds, the common denominator of the A model that received DFCS is the “ F-14A late” with ALR-67 RWR, Bombcat and PTID upgrade modifications, which have not yet been implemented in the game.