• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

Aerosoft's F-14 Tomcat.....a small update

Plus, level of details:

2fdb94368fd346a6.jpg


Dump and burn. Yep, the same like F-111!

6de557db95d0f7d5.jpg


HUD in B variant.

b675cead89741168.jpg
 
Last edited:
Here's a "do I need TacPack for this aircraft" hint. Looking at YoYo's images from November 18th forward, if you see the TacPack logo in the corner then what you are looking at requires it (like dropping guided bombs or firing a Phoenix missile) but if you don't see it (like when refueling from the KA-6) you don't need it. The most recent images also include some text.

Not to sound like a TacPack promoter (I bought it to test this aircraft and the Metal2Mesh Mirage) but it is not a cheap add-on utility at $40. But that one copy will be used by more and more aircraft so the cost does get spread out over time. So it becomes that one add-on that you actually keep using unlike a lot of others.
:ernaehrung004:
 
This is one from many big feature and it isnt a "normal" mission from FSX. Better word is "scenario", it isnt FSX mission only.
You can call scenario always when You are in FSX environment. Just take it from menu option, like TacPack carriers, tankers ect.
No need TacPack for scenarios too.
Click to expand...

From what I've seen from the "AI video", Scenarios are just FSX Missions capable of running in Free Flight, ie "Scenarios" simulate in Free Flight
"as if an FSX Mission" was running there.
- Do these "Scenarios" present any added abilities compared to FSX Missions (or you can achieve the exact same thing within a Mission) ?
- Are these Scenarios Multiplayer capable ? (If 2 players run the same scenario in Free Flight, taking off together from same Carrier, do they see the
same things - experience ? Tacpack may be required for synchronization. I mean for example : May 2 Tomcats refuel from the same Scenario plane as per foto above ?)

None of my questions reduce the "value" of this Aerosoft achievement. I'm just curious, being an FSX Mission builder myself.
Sorry for the kind of the offtopic post, but I see some potential regarding Military FSX Multiplayer with these "Scenario" type of coding...
 
Wow, when I saw the credits on the manual I saw that my good old friend Tim from M2M worked on the textures of this project so that means it kicks butt, also Hank and the guys at razbam were involved so, this is a must get for me. Looks amazing and I bet with Aerosoft quality It'll be a great add-on. Congrats to Aerosoft for this fantastic project!

Jose Valdez.
 
I am super excited to get this one and was a bit bummed by the 03 December release versus 01 December, but they needed a few days it seems for a good reason so that's okay by me. I absolutely love the screened, additional equipment accompanying this package and the paint, just a fantastic package and will only make Dino's works a perfect combination. This, coupled with Taco Pack, will allow some semblance of F14 Fleet Defender memories.
 
Quote from Aerosoft preview forums:http://forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?/topic/88861-pre-release-f-14-topic/page-2

Gentlemen (ladies),

we're putting this release on hold for 20 hours. A very unexpected issue popped up that is now fixed but it does need some more testing. As this is a real show stopper of an issue we feel uncomfortable releasing with it and patching later on. That would not do this superb product justice.

And yes, it's not good that an issue like this found just before we release. But that's why we have a quality control department that tests the Release Candidate. Those last tests are done on special test machines that mimic our customers machines as well as possible. As testers tend to be experienced users their machines and installations often are different it is just possible the last test show a new issue. As was the case this morning.

Sorry.
 
Honnestly, beside minor frustration, I believe everybody here prefers to see that product delayed for bug fixing instead of rushed delivery without any checks.
I hope they take their time to release that beauty. The expectations from the comunity are way too high for them to screw it up. ;)

Now, if VRS could hurry a bit to release TacPack for P3D, that would be great...
 
Daube said:
Honnestly, beside minor frustration, I believe everybody here prefers to see that product delayed for bug fixing instead of rushed delivery without any checks.
I hope they take their time to release that beauty. The expectations from the comunity are way too high for them to screw it up. ;)

Now, if VRS could hurry a bit to release TacPack for P3D, that would be great...
Click to expand...

Right you are sir! Better to catch it at the last moment than release it into the wild and have an issue to deal with right off the bat. Take your time Aerosoft and give the
Big Cat a good launch! We can wait for all that Tomcat goodness! We'll all sit Ready-Five.
 
fsafranek said:
Right on schedule there, Mate. Not even released yet and it has begun.
Click to expand...

Indeed. But you have to credit their commitment to the cause of accuracy since their argument consists of a) use of outlandish hyperbole, and b) using another digital model (good as it is, mind you), of a different variant, as reference - as opposed to data, photos, etc. of the real articles.... :p87: Or not.

Anyway - take your time, team - I'm sure it'll be worth the wait.

cheers,

dl
 
Forgive the perhaps obvious statement, but since Tac Pack is an integrated part of the package and this package comes with a superb AI SU27 and TU95, do the AI birds shoot back? This would make interception far more realistic, in my opinion, than a scripted waypoint that gets breached.
 
The birds do not shoot back, and this is explained below.

I think there are two general ways of simulating military operations for the F-14. There is realistic in the sense of attempting to recreate historical events (maybe call that authentic), and there is realistic within the realm of plausibility (e.g. what would happen "if") where the core purpose can be distilled to virtual combat training.

This package leans towards the former, where the AI scenarios were created by reading through carrier logs and interviewing an F-14 driver with 4,000 hours flight time. On that end, two brief quotes I have from the conversation:

Flanker
"The Su-27 was a very dangerous threat! They had some serious firepower, Radar, and some amazing maneuverability, but for all of that, the majority would head for the hills once they were detected. Planes and aircrews are expensive, so they (the country of origin) were very reluctant to mess around with us and risk losing an asset."

and then there is this article:
http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=81971


Bear
"We would warn them off, telling them not to over fly the fleet or else! Rarely did they give us any trouble and on a few occasions, we let them over fly the fleet. We would get nice and close. Close enough to throw rocks at them, then we would communicate with the crew, either with hand gestures or playboy pin ups. One young tail gunner even sported an American flag and a sign that read, GO USA! He then dropped his trousers and pressed his ass against the glass!

Now, if they would not turn, we could try to persuade them by trying to disrupt the airflow over their wings or props. We would perform Thach weaves in front of them or make really high speed passes"

-------------

Hope that makes sense?


 
JohnC said:
The birds do not shoot back, and this is explained below.

I think there are two general ways of simulating military operations for the F-14. There is realistic in the sense of attempting to recreate historical events (maybe call that authentic), and there is realistic within the realm of plausibility (e.g. what would happen "if") where the core purpose can be distilled to virtual combat training.

This package leans towards the former, where the AI scenarios were created by reading through carrier logs and interviewing an F-14 driver with 4,000 hours flight time. On that end, two brief quotes I have from the conversation:

Flanker
"The Su-27 was a very dangerous threat! They had some serious firepower, Radar, and some amazing maneuverability, but for all of that, the majority would head for the hills once they were detected. Planes and aircrews are expensive, so they (the country of origin) were very reluctant to mess around with us and risk losing an asset."

and then there is this article:
http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=81971


Bear
"We would warn them off, telling them not to over fly the fleet or else! Rarely did they give us any trouble and on a few occasions, we let them over fly the fleet. We would get nice and close. Close enough to throw rocks at them, then we would communicate with the crew, either with hand gestures or playboy pin ups. One young tail gunner even sported an American flag and a sign that read, GO USA! He then dropped his trousers and pressed his ass against the glass!

Now, if they would not turn, we could try to persuade them by trying to disrupt the airflow over their wings or props. We would perform Thach weaves in front of them or make really high speed passes"

-------------

Hope that makes sense?
Click to expand...

John, thanks for the clarification. It does make sense and I suspected it was more of a show of force versus missiles flying. It will be great seeing Tac Pack mature and others incorporating it into their future builds. I still very much look forward to getting cozy with the Bears...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top