F-2

Sure, I have the manual. I don’t think it would be hard to track down other stuff if you really wanted it.

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth40474/ here’s the cockpit mock up, sure looks similar. Radar was to have been AWG-9.

Yemen, I don’t know about Russian SMT, I assume though they could if they wanted to.

From what I have the most significant change the SMT adds is the Kh-31A. Beyond that it’s pretty similar, though still a useful capability.

I have the Yemeni SMT radar manual. RWR HUD and air frame are the same. If only we had the mfd stuff lol

https://airsciences.org.uk/archive-library-collection/ apparently they are the keepers of Harrier Fa.2 documention.

Does anything in dcs carry r77-1 in real life? I’m curious how different the missile performs.

Between the Tornado manual and above papers we should have the capacity to have a really accurate AIM-120B. C5/6/ and maybe 7 should be a bit less but still very good based on documentation we have.

What’s interesting is we have good data on the C5 engine and propulsion and CFD on the Rocket. One would think it would actually be easier. http://www.zaretto.com/sites/zaretto.com/files/missile-aerodynamic-data/AIM120C5-Performance-Assessment-rev2.pdf https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA355385.pdf

Development of a Air-to-Air Missile Simulation Program for the Lethality Evaluation.pdf paper on aim-120b Journal of the Korean Aerospace Society The ship has sailed on more modern stuff, it’s part of DCS and not going any place. Given what I know of another F-16 Block 50 sim I don’t buy that it’s too secret.

Speaking of which someone on the secretprojects forum just bought a AIM-7F guidance section and an APG-68 when NG cleared one of their where houses.

I found who had the APG-68(v)5 qualification report. https://books.google.com/books?id=2gASAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA222&dq=apg- 68(v)5&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&source=gb_mobile_search&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwipjcywqY 6GAxX_KlkFHcCEDT04ChDoAXoECAsQAw#v=onepage&q=apg-68(v)5&f=false it might answer any outstanding questions on the radar. I asked them to see if it was still export controlled as I know a few people who have personal ownership of physical APG-68 sets when the Northrop Grumman museum cleared out, some internationally. If it’s all sorted out I will send it your way with supporting documentation. I last was updated on the 26th.

apparently you can get AASM hammer working on the fulcrum.

I think some of the later modifications do have two seaters with Radars. I think Peru’s do.

I can’t think of too many fights in the gulf war that the R-73 would have made much a difference. The only one I can think of is this but notably heaters where never used by either jet so I’m unsure. https://theaviationgeekclub.com/usaf-f-15c-pilot-explains-how-he-was-able-to-shoot-down-an-iraqi-mig-29-without-firing-a-single-shot-in-the-only-real-turning-fight-of-operation-desert-storm/amp/ one interesting thing is they were able to prevent the Fulcrums from using R-27. according to page 23 of this Rand report one Serbian Fulcrum fired an R-73 at a NATO aircraft in the Kosovo war but missed https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1365/RAND_MR1365.pdf

Honestly while I find the Fulcrum somewhat inferior I definitely think it holds it own. It’s performance relative to the Flanker seems right.

I see. Well I don’t picture an anti documentation, pro here say approach getting you anywhere. Best of luck to you though.

You absolutely need documentation, are flight models made on vibes? How would you even distinguish conflicting accounts on aircraft performance in bfm? https://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=1836&start=30 https://theaviationgeekclub.com/f-16-vs-mig-29-when-the-mighty-viper-dogfighted-with-the-fulcrum-for-the-first-time/amp/ F-16 vs MiG-29 energy maneuverability from test report (F-16.net https://www.key.aero/forum/modern-military-aviation/5509-raaf-vs-malaysian-mig-29s https://www.smithsonianmag.com/air-space-magazine/hornet-v-mig-5996629/#:~:text=Weapon-wise%2C software-wise,of 50%2C000 feet per minute.

Strange with all the available documentation on the Fulcrum no one can seem to point to how it’s under performing.

Technically there is no Russian MKK. They have a small number of Su-30m2 but those are MK2. The Su-27sm is also MK2 based. MK2 as far as I can tell is China only with some late J-11A using the avionics. Obviously though it is similar but I think some things are different.

9.15 demo! I think this would have been the Ultimate Fulcrum.

We’ll see if this has anything useful

Is the 150km mode able to actually look on and fire? I have the Zhuk-ME manual and it has a long range 120km mode for 5sq meter targets but actually engagement range is 80km similar to N019 (but probably much better track). Antidotally the J-10A is said to dominate the Mk2 in BVR with the same missile.

I think the MKK has been spotted with the Pylons for PL-12?