F-2

It’s probably meant to be an Arsenal plane. With targeting done by a stealth plane.

VTAS III had one more small revival in the F-16 AFTI program. You could look at a target on the ground and the automatic maneuvering attack system. The computer would accurately toss the weapon while maneuvering. It would also be used in the air like the IFFC tested on the F-15. By the time the AFTI was used as a test bed for high off boresight missiles in the mid 90s VTAS was replaced by what ever helmet they had used on the A-16 in the gulf war. but tangent aside the military was still using VTAS in some form until 1987 when AFTI phase ii ended.

Yea dreams are for when your a sleep, I’m just such a poor sleeper

Originally they said they can’t do the J-10 because it was in frontline PLAAF service. I did find out though that the First lot of J-10 aircraft were much more basic then the later. CRT mfd, KLJ-3 radar (EL/M-2032) as opposed to KLJ-10 on later craft, overall very similar to the prototypes and at a glance the Lavi. These were later updated to the same standards as the other aircraft (J-10 and J-10A might be separate designations, with Deka implied might be the case with the J-11 as well). It would be awesome to have this bird since that J-10 AI model slaps.

The external model was good. The cockpit was wrong supposedly because they couldn’t get information on it as I understand. I would love for it to come back since it was part of the family. Note it was a 9.31 not 9.41.

https://skill-lync.com/student-projects/cfd-simulation-of-dassault-rafale-using-converge-cfd

I’ve always heard the Soviets liked the P-39 much more then the western allies and got some good use out of it. I’ve it becomes watchable near me I’ll check it out!

The mystery phantom, non knows were she came from, whom she calls her family, only that she says, speed is life.

I do believe it was a requirement for the F-15K to be able to operate with out them and they do fly without them for some air superiority missions. I know we are doing a US F-15E but if it’s ever economical it would be nice to have the option to remove them to simulate other users. You can see here some have it and some don’t. Of course it’s a US version but it would be nice to employ the same weapon according to different user doctrine.

In t in that same interview they said nothing had been submitted by any third party for review.

Interesting, I guess captor-E isn’t as secret as I would have though.

Would you guys consider a SU-30kn as an alternative to the MKK? It has the same cockpit as the standard su-30 but with the crt display replaced with a MFI-55. It uses a pesa radar and has a much larger array of weapons. It can also leverage work Deka has already done on multi crew. Of course it is the least sexy option, but it does seem to benefit from work done. Also I think this is what the DCS npc SU-30 is.

So this isn’t a request thread but more a general inquiry of curiosity. Currently no playable aircraft in DCS has any kind of electronic Scanned Radar, PESA or AESA. I was curious as to why. Now a common argument is that nothing like that exists in DCS,”. I don’t by this reasoning. Since flaming cliffs DCS radar model has evolved tremendously, ED and a number of third parties have drastically expanded what is possible in DCS, the Apache longbow will expand more. Evolving radar models have do a lot for both new AND older aircraft. Simply if the will exists I see nothing stopping a way to be found. Now of course many radars tend to be highly classified I seem to recall ED (I think) and another dev on another sim saying APG-79 on the hornet was to classified to model. But is that true for all AESA systems. For example for US mechanical scan arrays the newest radars I know of that we have ultra detailed information on are the original APG-63 and APG-66. However through manuals, manufacturer information, brochure, white papers statements (app-68 is 33% more powerful then apg-66) etc along with the radar equation. we can get a good idea of how say apg-68, apg-63(v)1 apg-70 should behave and it’s reasonable to construct a model of this in game, the current state not withstanding. Now AESA calculators exist like the one sited here. https://www.matec-conferences.org/articles/matecconf/pdf/2019/53/matecconf_easn2019_04001.pdf many of these variables are estimated (as stated in the paper), but would that be true of all current AESA arrays? of course we know there is more to a radar then just absolute range, but that applies to our mech scan radars. Some mech scans are even built with upgrade to ESA in mind and likely have similar modes and UI. so my question, which I ask entirely in good faith and only out of curiosity. Are ESA radars still to classified to add to DCS or is it just the “right” aircraft that would make it viable has yet to appear?

The reason not to have the F-15a with our flanker is the F-15a is a 70s design while flanker or any flanker with a radar is 1991 or later, by the F-15s had apg-63 psp or apg-70 and aim-120a. Microwave Journal Volume 47, Issues 1-6 2004

I think the block 60 is the basis of the F-21 and actually more capable then the 70, not sure if you could get documentation or not though. It’s almost 20 years old, but it exists in a weird place as a UAE aircraft that Lockheed is allowed to market on the condition the UAE gets a cut. The super hornet block iii is likely too new and apg-79 is widely thought to be too classified to reproduce in a sim. A block 1 or early 2 super hornet with apg-73 is widely thought possible, though it’s debatable if it’s different enough from the hornet to be worth it.

The rules are gunna really vary depending on the country, service branch and administration. Time isn’t the best thing to go by. The viper and hornet we have are from around when the F-14D retired.

Are you guys totally sure F2 is 2007? Because I’m pretty sure F1 was M only and the B and C entered service before 2007. I could be wrong though.

Yea F1,F2,F3,F4 are capabilities standards separate from the B,C,M designation. F1 was air to air only and only on the Rafale M because the French navy needed a new fighter ASAP. F2 is the first multi role standard.

If I recall the AMK typhoons are for a order that would supersede the current tranche four order. It would be included among other upgrades as a bid to replace thr German tornados. For the life of me I can’t find the source but I remember reading it around the new year.

Hello! I was wondering what version of Captor we are to get. Is it the initial Captor or the upgraded-D version with the power PC processors. I think the biggest difference in in the Air to Ground preformance so not to relevant for early access but worth knowing down the line.

“The normal performance of the engine can be increased by a so-called "war setting" (battle setting), which, however, leads to greatly increased maintenance costs and a shorter service life of the engine. Presumably, this additional output is achieved by increasing the temperature and pressure in the combustion chamber. In this way, an increase in the dry thrust of 15% to 69kN per engine and an increase in the afterburner thrust of 5% to 95kN per engine is achieved. For a few seconds, even up to 102kN thrust can be achieved without damaging the engine.” https://eurofighter-airpower-at.translate.goog/technik-triebwerke.htm?_x_tr_sch=http&_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en-US&_x_tr_pto=ajax,nv,elem

Wait do you still have this? It could be of great use.

I’m sure if they announced it they do. You do some CDF, get some brochure info for Avionics and some basic operator info your on your way towards a decent AI asset.

Yes I know, I’m excited for more AI air assets.

So what’s the deal with this? Is the AI J-10 dead? I know a J-15 and H-6 are still in the cards. Does the J-10 have a future in the assets pack? 08962BB7-3F25-44F3-8B32-80913070AFA6.webp