Once again, thank you for all of your efforts. Your webpage is also an amazing resource in addition to your videos and I'd recommend bookmarking it to all who take the F-4E module seriously.
Well, human error is a thing. For instance, several Arab pilots crashed into the ground during the various wars versus Israel. However, this scene is more of a killsteal attempt from War Thunder :D
Thank you for this and all the previous videos. Your work is a very interesting source of information for me. You have helped, you are helping, me immensely on these matters.
Thanks for the videos, very informative. The AI voice is better than I thought possible and in any case, it’s better than no video given the useful data provided. If possible, maybe a little bit slower speaking speed would be great.😅 Take care not to burn out 😉 Again, thanks for your passionate work 👍🏻
Thanks! So far no burnout; most of the scripts date back to last year's Phantom Phamiliarisation series :) I'm not sure I can control the speed. In the worst-case scenario, the script is what I use as an article (in reality, the process is the opposite: article first, then copied into AI TTS). That being said, I have found a way to improve the pronunciation of Azimuth: "*Aussie Moose*": flyandwire.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/aussie-moose.mp3
Great as always. I like the AI voice. Your accent is a bit too fast for me and I sometimes struggle to understand but this is perfect. I agree that it lacks some personality though.
The tomcat we have in game is not the 1974 Tomcat, but rather the 1997 F-14A/B. Just a little not when you said that the F-4E is almost the contemporary to our tomcat. (But I can see how it might have been meant differently)
Uh.. yes, and? I did not say they are contemporary of *the Tomcat in DCS* but, ad verbatim, "are almost contemporary of the F-14 Tomcat.". The -45MC has upgrades introduced around 1974, the DMAS even later. The first Tomcats were introduced in 1974. I don't get the point of your comment, Kron. Whenever I use the DCS Tomcat as a reference, and the timeframe is important, I specify the discrepancy, see here: th-cam.com/video/1M2KERT3T44/w-d-xo.html EDIT: the original post was "The tomcat we have in game is not the 1974 Tomcat, but rather the 1997 F-14A/B." without any other explanation. Hence my confused tone.
*Who?* Jokes aside, I haven't used it much besides some testing, since it overlaps with my dedicated role. Imo, it is much better now, both in features and overall flow. However, I recommend other creators to have a better feeling of how it works.
@@NoBrainSilent 2 seater, radar seems very realistic, beautiful design and cockpit, Jester 2.0, Afterburner looks awesome, more worth than the F-15E Strike Eagle
The F4E DCS has been given isn't even the best variant of the phantom , japan has the F4E Kia with upgraded radar and air to air missiles and germany has the F4E ICE with the upgraded radar and AMRAAMS
That's correct, but they got them so late in the life of the Phantom that the opposition was no longer MiG-17 and MiG-21, but Su-27 and MiG-29, and other bluefor aircraft were late F-15, Eurofighter and so on. If you put the F-4E in its historical context, I say it is one of the most capable versions of the Phantom ever produced, although I prefer the Navy versions.
Unpopular opinion. Jester sucks. I can fly co-alt, hot on a target with neutral antenna elevation and jester wont see. I can see it now. "skill issue", "git gud', "the radar is supposed to be bad." I know. I don't have friends to fly with. Fuck this module. Which is a shame because it is really well done. The radar is just completely unusable for me with Jester. On the other hand. When people let me in the back, I am able to use the radar and achieve locks.
Hey, I think it's more of a "you are doing it wrong". In primis, co-alt matters little. Depending on the altitude and radar settings, the MLC may intersect and draw in a ton of clutter. Where you be able to see the contact yourself? If yes, record a video where you reliably can and Jester can't and send it to me. Hop in my Discord, we can have a look at it there. In this case, for a co-alt, I would raise the antenna to match the bisector of the radar cone, this would limit the returns a bit. I personally don't use Jester and fly from the back as if I were in IFR conditions, basically. Also, you said you don't have friends but also play as a WSO? Which one it is?
@@FlyAndWire you know people that I occasionally fly with. No one that I particularly care for. This community can be pretty toxic. I'll upload a video and show you what I'm doing later. I'm going on vacation!
I also just got the module and am finding myself quite confused. I'll get a ewr report or say 15 nm. I'll go low and point in that direction, I'll set the radar to the alt it mentioned in the ewr and hope to hear "target" but instead I hear "missle 11 o'clock " as it smacks me kn the lips. I fhis confusing.. how can he see a missle but not a update on the aircraft location? Also he causes me quite abit of anxiety calling out Sam's like his life is on the line, meanwhile, it's on our side.... Willing to learn but currently frustrated.
@@bradw1808 OK, you are rushing too much imo. Start by engaging something that doesn't shoot back, or at least without missiles. It is better to take it easy, figure out the dynamics and then escalate. Use the mission editor to set up something ad hoc. Ref Jester, he may have seen the smoke trail from the missile, or reporting the threat's bearing from the RWR. If you are confused, record a video or save the track and we can have a look at it. Feel free to hop in my Discord server, it is a much better discussion tool.
I’m not really enjoying these videos. The AI voice is impersonal and boring and the background video is just a bunch of unrelated DCS action. Specific demo scenarios of the concepts being discussed are needed. Rather than just an AI info dump.
You can mute the video. Feel free to volunteer to record voicing; I can use some help in that regard. About the background, well, it's a very general introduction, no concepts are being discussed here; it's fundamentally an extended bullet list. Btw, you have probably missed the hour and a half of content about the F-4E I posted almost a year ago and the first video about the APQ-120 covering the baseline parameters. The videos dedicated to specific topics have all the scenarios you want. Maybe check before posting :)
I’ve seen your other videos, they’re generally very good. But as a way of constructive criticism, if any CC, is capable of taking it….. I was pointing out the AI voice and the rushed bullet point format is not working too well. It’s neither a great tutorial nor an amazing F4 preview. So what is it?
@@skyrider6227 "AI info dump" sounds more like spitting on someone's work than "constructive criticism," and now you are backtracking, hinting that I can't take "constructive" criticism. 2/10 not impressed. I don't do previews. As explained in my previous video you have surely watched, I have two parallel series: one about the APQ-120 and the other about A/A. The former covers the details of peculiar features and functions. The latter their employment. This video is not rushed; rather mentions and touches on most of the notions later discussed in-depth, giving them a sort of contiguous flow. Quick example: the basic search routine. The MAP-B is discussed in the APQ-120 episode. There's not much to say about APX and ALR, but now you have an idea about how they can be linked together to provide SA (like, who has thought of spamming IFF to extend radar range? I doubt many). Also, please tell me how the goal of this video is not clear after listening to the last part: "Summarising what was discussed so far, the APQ-120 is a relatively short-range radar capable of air-to-ground operations and self-defence rather than search and intercepts. The workload for the WSO is considerable, and the proficiency and good coordination of the crew members are crucial. Often, in fact, contacts will present themselves close to the engagement range, and geometry and manoeuvres will have to be computed rapidly and efficiently. Unfortunately, the game’s current state, with EW, omniscient AI, and awful GCI in primis, gravely worsens the experience, and we can only wait for updates in these aspects. Given these premises, to maximise the odds of success, the crew must be capable of interpreting a situation and quickly acting and manoeuvring. Examples from various sources will be considered and used to discuss the avionics, geometry, and crew workflow. The goal is to provide the necessary elements and theory to eventually transform lengthy considerations into seconds-long effective decisions. Although many tactics and procedures will be discussed, they can all be grouped into two categories: intercepts with a lockon and intercepts without a radar lock. [..]"
I know, I know, NOTAM should be "Notice to Airmen". Mea culpa :]
Thanks @TrickerDCS !
😂😂❤
FWIW it was changed in 2021 to "Notices to Air Missions". (JO 7930.2S)
"DCS, being a game..." truth to power!
Once again, thank you for all of your efforts. Your webpage is also an amazing resource in addition to your videos and I'd recommend bookmarking it to all who take the F-4E module seriously.
Two chasing MiGs in the background colliding with each other bring tears to my eyes. Yes, this is exactly the kind of AI in DCS.
Well, human error is a thing. For instance, several Arab pilots crashed into the ground during the various wars versus Israel. However, this scene is more of a killsteal attempt from War Thunder :D
Thank you for this and all the previous videos. Your work is a very interesting source of information for me. You have helped, you are helping, me immensely on these matters.
Good stuff, I'll need to rewatch it later under more relaxing conditions. 😅
Thanks for the videos, very informative.
The AI voice is better than I thought possible and in any case, it’s better than no video given the useful data provided.
If possible, maybe a little bit slower speaking speed would be great.😅
Take care not to burn out 😉
Again, thanks for your passionate work 👍🏻
Thanks! So far no burnout; most of the scripts date back to last year's Phantom Phamiliarisation series :)
I'm not sure I can control the speed. In the worst-case scenario, the script is what I use as an article (in reality, the process is the opposite: article first, then copied into AI TTS).
That being said, I have found a way to improve the pronunciation of Azimuth: "*Aussie Moose*": flyandwire.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/aussie-moose.mp3
had 0 idea that voice was AI narrated until i read the comments. whats everyone crying about?
Peolke just need to complain… they are just not happy with their lives
For real dude. Had no idea. The voice sounds perfectly fine.. idk why they’re crying about it 🤦♂️
No it sounds like an autistic robot
Great as always. I like the AI voice. Your accent is a bit too fast for me and I sometimes struggle to understand but this is perfect. I agree that it lacks some personality though.
Now if I could get above 9 FPS with this module that’d be great
great vid :)
The tomcat we have in game is not the 1974 Tomcat, but rather the 1997 F-14A/B. Just a little not when you said that the F-4E is almost the contemporary to our tomcat. (But I can see how it might have been meant differently)
Uh.. yes, and? I did not say they are contemporary of *the Tomcat in DCS* but, ad verbatim, "are almost contemporary of the F-14 Tomcat.".
The -45MC has upgrades introduced around 1974, the DMAS even later. The first Tomcats were introduced in 1974. I don't get the point of your comment, Kron. Whenever I use the DCS Tomcat as a reference, and the timeframe is important, I specify the discrepancy, see here: th-cam.com/video/1M2KERT3T44/w-d-xo.html
EDIT: the original post was "The tomcat we have in game is not the 1974 Tomcat, but rather the 1997 F-14A/B." without any other explanation. Hence my confused tone.
And how does Jester Jr come into this?
*Who?*
Jokes aside, I haven't used it much besides some testing, since it overlaps with my dedicated role. Imo, it is much better now, both in features and overall flow. However, I recommend other creators to have a better feeling of how it works.
@@FlyAndWire ah, good to know, thanks!
Didn’t jester mention his dad in one of the F14 campaigns? Why didn’t they make jester 2.0 his dad?
I have no idea, I've never played a SP campaign since they are pilot-oriented. Which campaign was that?
is there anybody left to actually purchase this module?
Yea.. thinking about it a while
@@clean713 Why so ?
@@clean713get it man
@@NoBrainSilent 2 seater, radar seems very realistic, beautiful design and cockpit, Jester 2.0, Afterburner looks awesome, more worth than the F-15E Strike Eagle
@@clean713 Oh I understood he doesn't want to buy rhe module anymore, hence my confusion.
The F4E DCS has been given isn't even the best variant of the phantom , japan has the F4E Kia with upgraded radar and air to air missiles and germany has the F4E ICE with the upgraded radar and AMRAAMS
Those are definitely not the "best" F-4 variants, and even saying "best" makes very little sense.
@@FlyAndWire these F4 variants had pulse Doppler radar with look down and could carry AIM9L
That's correct, but they got them so late in the life of the Phantom that the opposition was no longer MiG-17 and MiG-21, but Su-27 and MiG-29, and other bluefor aircraft were late F-15, Eurofighter and so on.
If you put the F-4E in its historical context, I say it is one of the most capable versions of the Phantom ever produced, although I prefer the Navy versions.
Unpopular opinion. Jester sucks. I can fly co-alt, hot on a target with neutral antenna elevation and jester wont see. I can see it now. "skill issue", "git gud', "the radar is supposed to be bad." I know. I don't have friends to fly with. Fuck this module. Which is a shame because it is really well done. The radar is just completely unusable for me with Jester. On the other hand. When people let me in the back, I am able to use the radar and achieve locks.
Hey, I think it's more of a "you are doing it wrong". In primis, co-alt matters little. Depending on the altitude and radar settings, the MLC may intersect and draw in a ton of clutter. Where you be able to see the contact yourself? If yes, record a video where you reliably can and Jester can't and send it to me. Hop in my Discord, we can have a look at it there. In this case, for a co-alt, I would raise the antenna to match the bisector of the radar cone, this would limit the returns a bit.
I personally don't use Jester and fly from the back as if I were in IFR conditions, basically.
Also, you said you don't have friends but also play as a WSO? Which one it is?
@@FlyAndWire you know people that I occasionally fly with. No one that I particularly care for. This community can be pretty toxic. I'll upload a video and show you what I'm doing later. I'm going on vacation!
Yeah, I know what you mean. Enjoy your vacation; we can check where you struggle when you are back :)
I also just got the module and am finding myself quite confused. I'll get a ewr report or say 15 nm. I'll go low and point in that direction, I'll set the radar to the alt it mentioned in the ewr and hope to hear "target" but instead I hear "missle 11 o'clock " as it smacks me kn the lips. I fhis confusing.. how can he see a missle but not a update on the aircraft location? Also he causes me quite abit of anxiety calling out Sam's like his life is on the line, meanwhile, it's on our side....
Willing to learn but currently frustrated.
@@bradw1808 OK, you are rushing too much imo. Start by engaging something that doesn't shoot back, or at least without missiles. It is better to take it easy, figure out the dynamics and then escalate. Use the mission editor to set up something ad hoc.
Ref Jester, he may have seen the smoke trail from the missile, or reporting the threat's bearing from the RWR. If you are confused, record a video or save the track and we can have a look at it.
Feel free to hop in my Discord server, it is a much better discussion tool.
I’m not really enjoying these videos. The AI voice is impersonal and boring and the background video is just a bunch of unrelated DCS action.
Specific demo scenarios of the concepts being discussed are needed. Rather than just an AI info dump.
You can mute the video. Feel free to volunteer to record voicing; I can use some help in that regard.
About the background, well, it's a very general introduction, no concepts are being discussed here; it's fundamentally an extended bullet list.
Btw, you have probably missed the hour and a half of content about the F-4E I posted almost a year ago and the first video about the APQ-120 covering the baseline parameters. The videos dedicated to specific topics have all the scenarios you want. Maybe check before posting :)
I did not even notice the ai voice on this one
I’ve seen your other videos, they’re generally very good.
But as a way of constructive criticism, if any CC, is capable of taking it….. I was pointing out the AI voice and the rushed bullet point format is not working too well. It’s neither a great tutorial nor an amazing F4 preview. So what is it?
@@skyrider6227 "AI info dump" sounds more like spitting on someone's work than "constructive criticism," and now you are backtracking, hinting that I can't take "constructive" criticism. 2/10 not impressed.
I don't do previews. As explained in my previous video you have surely watched, I have two parallel series: one about the APQ-120 and the other about A/A. The former covers the details of peculiar features and functions. The latter their employment. This video is not rushed; rather mentions and touches on most of the notions later discussed in-depth, giving them a sort of contiguous flow. Quick example: the basic search routine. The MAP-B is discussed in the APQ-120 episode. There's not much to say about APX and ALR, but now you have an idea about how they can be linked together to provide SA (like, who has thought of spamming IFF to extend radar range? I doubt many).
Also, please tell me how the goal of this video is not clear after listening to the last part:
"Summarising what was discussed so far, the APQ-120 is a relatively short-range radar capable of air-to-ground operations and self-defence rather than search and intercepts. The workload for the WSO is considerable, and the proficiency and good coordination of the crew members are crucial. Often, in fact, contacts will present themselves close to the engagement range, and geometry and manoeuvres will have to be computed rapidly and efficiently.
Unfortunately, the game’s current state, with EW, omniscient AI, and awful GCI in primis, gravely worsens the experience, and we can only wait for updates in these aspects.
Given these premises, to maximise the odds of success, the crew must be capable of interpreting a situation and quickly acting and manoeuvring. Examples from various sources will be considered and used to discuss the avionics, geometry, and crew workflow. The goal is to provide the necessary elements and theory to eventually transform lengthy considerations into seconds-long effective decisions.
Although many tactics and procedures will be discussed, they can all be grouped into two categories: intercepts with a lockon and intercepts without a radar lock. [..]"
@@FlyAndWirewow you cannot take any criticism without getting upset can you?