F-2

AIM-7R was prototyped and tested but never employed. Its seeker became the ESSM seeker. Supposedly the IT seeker was AIM-9m equivalent but a third the size. their was a mysterious AIM-7N which was said to be a AIM-7F upgrade for F-15 MSIP produced in limited quantities. I can’t find much of anything on it. AIM-7Q was an Active/Semi Active/IR missile that predated AIM-7R. There isn’t much on it but I strongly suspect it was the AMRAAM fall back mentioned in some GAO reports.

Maybe…

Yes but it’s different from their other flankers https://twitter.com/RupprechtDeino/status/1035157953270169600

Interestingly they are all centerline, I had an article saying the MKK could carry PL-12 on all stations because of a better mission computer. Maybe the J-11 is limited by the computer? The F-15 had some limits when it first got AMRAAM.

Looks like the JF-17 cockpit is very accurate for the J-10B/C

I meant to write shouldn’t be!

This is a really good idea, I imagine it would be tricky to implement but I just want to voice my support. Certain maps do have their power plants on them, Nevada has the Hoover damn, though that isn’t and should be destructible (would be an awful disaster). Perhaps looking up substations and making them destroyable and having localized lighting on the map be effected? I’m just spitballing.

That’s excellent but you can send a FOIA to DTIC with terms you want searched. For example I sent a request asking them to search some terms related to Soviet aircraft and they sent this https://www.mediafire.com/file/n272j3f5twukeww/FOIA+UL+Bib+2023-36-1,FOIA+UL+Bib+2023-36-2,FOIA+UL+Bib+2023-36-3.zip/file you can see they can search the whole DoD not just their website. if you ask they to search certain aircraft or systems you will get a similar list and can focus your request there.

You could ask DTIC to run a search of documents in the DOD database based on keywords, for example “ECM” “EB-6” etc and they will search and give you a spreed sheet telling you if a document is classified, export controlled, etc. also even if a document is classified, they still have to review it for you.

Apg-63 got JEM NCTR in MSIP II around 1986 which is a close contemporary of APG-70, I would think the two are the same. I don’t remember reading the last build F-15 with APG-70 had any differences in air to air capabilities.

Yes FOIA does apply to the military, they can refuse of releasing it will be harmful to national security but they are legally obliged to review it. I even posted three documents they are not classified.

Some pictures have emerged of J-11a with pl-12 being carried centerline. SU-30mk2 have been carrying them the last few years.

The radar uses the CW horn not the missile. APG-66 uses a CW horn while APG-68 for example can illuminate a target without one.

Yea, after this I went looking on a web archive of the old Rolls Royce website they cite in the paper but I can’t seem to find what they used to model the engine performance. I do have some numbers from a GAO report on the F414 which is probably the closest thrust class engine. I know the EJ200 has much greater power supersonic but perhaps they are similar subsonic?

If they are not too many people have shared them. what I’ve come across AD0526139 Evaluation of ECM Pod Performance with Various Formations (Phase 1) 5/1/1973 TACTICAL FIGHTER WEAPONS CENTER NELLIS AFB NV 109 pages ADB186362 U.S. Japan FS-X (FSX) Program Technology Bibliography: IEWS (Integrated Electronic Warfare System) 126 pages ADB199302 U.S. Japan FS-X (FSX) Program Technical Abstracts, Volume 2, Subject: 17. Integrated Electronic Warfare System (IEWS). AERONAUTICAL SYSTEMS CENTER WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB OH FS-X PROGRAM (JAPAN) 5/1/1995 6 pages I haven’t gotten any of these in my hand to date though I’m working on the last two if someone wants to try for the first. also some radars have lots of detailed information in the public domain. N019 has a book on it, modeling it in a very detailed way would make it comparatively easy to model its reaction to electronic interference.

https://archive.aoe.vt.edu/mason/Mason_f/VTechT3Shrikewithvideos.pdf a design project. Estimated performance of an EJ200 but a different inlet and nozzle. If it’s close to accurate, holy cow.

Some articles on Rafale capabilities and the Rafale M COG DT0_position_CDG_Rafale.pdf

http://www.artist-embedded.org/docs/Events/2007/IMA/Slides/ARTIST2_IMA_Cornilleau.pdf MDPU, used in Rafale and Mirage 2000-9 (UAE enhanced-5)

Yea I believe so. That said I’ve found a lot of good info since I posted this. We would probably need to do CFD but I do have engine performance and a lot of other stuff.

Su-27 is 1.85 isn’t representative of high G maneuvering. a comparison of T10 and production Su-27 the Tsagi report also uses the 1.6 figure for performance. The manual show the 1.85 is only in limited conditions. The 2.40 number, I’m not sure if that’s for the hornet or super hornet. I know the super hornet is crazy high and over 2, but maybe the legacy bug is too?

Paper by Su-27 designer with some useful info for calculating aero performance Fo.pdf

I don’t know if it will be possible but this is a very interesting request

https://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/pdf/87983main_H-1243.pdf F-15 CL max is 1.6 whats the Mig-29 for comparison?

https://www.sto.nato.int/publications/AGARD/AGARD-CP-548/AGARDCP548.pdf page 101 basic aerodynamic info on Rafale A Some other interesting papers http://kovy.free.fr/temp/rafale/pdf/Rafale_demonstrator.pdf https://www.sto.nato.int/publications/AGARD/AGARD-CP-593/27chap22.pdf Phd thesis with m53 and m88 thrust curves http://elodieroux.com/ReportFiles/ModelesMoteurVersionPublique.pdf https://jglobal.jst.go.jp/en/search/anythings#{"category"%3A"0"%2C"keyword"%3A"Rafale "} some other papers that might be of use. Will look into getting more of them https://jglobal.jst.go.jp/en/search/anythings#{"category"%3A"0"%2C"keyword"%3A"Rafale "}

There is quite a lot online, manual, Radar, some aero stuff. The first prototype used a stock F404 the other two used an uprated one similar in power to the -402 but they achieved it differently, the partially completed fourth used an 18000lbf one, possibly the same as the Gripen. F-20 is funny. I would say I would want someone to drop everything and develop it but I’d try it immediately if it did come to dcs.