KlarSnow

Nukes have their own special terminology, if things are going nuclear, none of your conventional stuff applies. Again its also the kind of thing that the ENTIRE force would know is happening because you dont just willy nilly nukes, so it could be as simple as at time XX:XX nuke impacts will occur, in these areas or those. And thats it, no radio calls, nothing just everybody knows at time XX:XX this will happen, unless something goes wrong. please keep in mind that all brevity and how its used is designed with a larger force in mind with dozens possibly hundreds of individual speakers and listeners on the same radio frequency, there will be planning involved, not willy nilly Ima go here and drop my bombs left and right like what happens in a flight sim. In a big air war of that sort, Your bombs away call will: 1)not get heard 2)the people who hear it will not care 3)will take up valuable time that somebody else could be saying something more important. So again, how does your saying "pickle" over the radio in a DCS multiplayer environment tell anyone else ANYTHING that might change what they are doing?

USMC_Trev, just FYI you are talking to at least three people who have dropped bombs, we don't say pickle over the radio except as discussed regardless of whether its the correct brevity or not, because its useless except in specific circumstances... Like saying Angels or Cherubs instead of just feet when calling out an altitude. Maybe its different in different services or MDS, but I can't think of a single instance where I heard "pickle" on the radio as described other than what a couple of us have said in coordination with other elements. In and out of combat, with and without JTAC's.

If you truly want to start getting tactical with how strikes and bomb drops are coordinated, give supporting or other assets your target location, and your time on target (TOT). This info is HUUUUGE from an escort perspective, because it tells them WHERE to protect, and for UNTIL WHEN. Once they know that, escort or other things in theater, no longer need to hear anything from you unless something changes, such as the time of your impact, or that you are threatened along your route and need assistance. Your Time on Target can also be a window, IE HAWG flight will be engaging targets in vicinity of XYZ for the next 5 minutes, and then egressing south. That gives far more SA to airborne assets than you calling Pickle, Paveway, Etc, for each bomb release.

Get higher and faster, the missiles dlz or in range cue is roughly the same as your altitude in thousands of feet as long as you are going around mach 1, if you get faster you will get more range, if you are slower you will get less. You can shoot it beyond the in range cue as well, but the bandit will have an easier time defeating it if you do.

Yes it will cause a minor loft, but it’s not the same because the missile is immediately trying to correct to point at the target. The missile will barely gain any altitude at all. It still gives a very minor benefit, but upto you if it’s worth it or not.

Make resting g tolerance standard across everything (6G), make the g suit give you an extra g and a half (7.5G), then make an AGSM button that you have to rhythmically tap every three seconds while under G, this will also give you a an extra G and a half (9G with a g suit, 7.5 without). Also if you tap it too fast or too slow, you get less benefit, and if you hold it down you get a benefit for a few seconds, and then rapid blackout. The tapping only gives benefits for about 2-3 minutes, before your pilot becomes exhausted, and reverts to non AGSM G capability. Then you have to rest for minute or two before you can go for another 2-3 minutes at max G. There’s my maximalist suggestion, never going to happen cause why, also cause gamers would immediately make a macro to spam the AGSM at the correct rate and correct times. Also there is no convenient way to map a repeatable pushable button that won’t get in the way of most people’s control setups. Both makes it a known element and makes it player skill/ technique as well, much like it is in the real world.

Think, does my letting everyone in the world know i'm releasing this weapon add to their SA, in a tactical manner? If you are self lasing in an LGB, me doing my pop up attack 20 miles away... I don't give a crap about your bomb, you don't give a crap about mine its impact has no effect on anything I am doing, so the comm is just extra unnecessary chatter. if you were hitting something that directly impacted my attack, say a SAM site that is protecting my target, then I might care about your bomb release, but what I probably care more about is when it impacts and if it was successful. Knowing when you released the bomb or what type of bomb doesn't really tell me anything super useful. Magnum is a special case because the timing of the magnum call (and more importantly when it will timeout) can drastically affect the coverage, IE if I'm in a SAM mez and I don't hear Magnum at the right times, I would get concerned. I do however care about hearing the CAP call Fox 3 on the bandit contact that is closing on us while I am doing my A/G stuff. Lets me know that they have targeted and shot at that contact, and now I should have more time, also lets me know to expect a splash or kill call soon, and if not, well time to start thinking defensively.

Its a bomb, Pickle. There is no specific brevity for JDAM vs LGB vs Dumb Bomb. Pickle isnt even really what we say, unless you are trying to coordinate something in your formation, IE 3...2...1...Pickle, for a simultaneous release. Usually to a JTAC or some entity that cares, Weapons Away. if you are just dropping a bomb on a target independent of any other entity involved... you don't need to say anything. Normal comm for a release with a JTAC would be something along the lines of, nothing at release, then as we check away from the target "1 Away, XX seconds"[left to impact, understood but not said] If doing a strike with the formation (no JTAC or outside agency) you wouldnt call release unless it was relevant to what you were doing, IE somebody else is lasing, you need a simultaneous release or impact, or its somehow related to what somebody else is going to do. I think the most common things we said was "bombs gone" or "weapons away" or "2 away." To add a bit of knowledge on why Fox X calls are important and different from dropping bombs, Fox 1/2/3 calls are needed for In training telling another jet what you shot him with, so that the training aid (aggressor) can appropriately assess if he defeated the missile or not. Outside of training, and as part of tactics, there are contracts with AIC and your flight involving targeting and culminating an engagement, the Fox X call is an important part of all of that. So for example AWACS can know that contact X has been shot at with a fox 3, and so knows that if/when the friendly fighter turns around, he can still watch to see if the contact gets hit or not, where as if it was a Fox 1 he would know that contact would most definitely still be alive. Nowadays at least in western Air forces where the Fox 1 is pretty well deprecated at this point, I guess there could be an argument to be made that you don't even really need the Fox with number call BVR. For bombs, nobody but you and maybe your wingman really care about when the bomb comes off, and the comm will make no difference to anybody, especially if there is no coordination going on.

If you are maintaining a guns solution you are going to by definition be in lead or pure pursuit, you will have to turn a tighter circle and requisite higher g and aoa than your opponent... this will bleed your airspeed. Best way to think of this is that for two similar performing aircraft, sustained turn is lag, the instant you pull to pure or lead (required for guns) you have transitioned to instantaneous regardless of your airspeed or resultant rate, you will bleed knots compared to the same aircraft that does not. If you are fighting a rate fight and are co-energy with your opponent and pull him into the hud, you have just given yourself an energy deficiency which if maintained will result in an energy deficit and a loss of airspeed/closure.

Nothing from the harriers MFD’s and system layout other than having 20 buttons around the bezel will in any way transfer over to the F-15E. If you are talking about systems under the hood like interacting with JDAM’s, possibly... But the format and interface of the screen and how you do stuff is completely different. Other than that, there are approximately zero similarities in how the strike eagles MPD’s and systems work compared to the Harrier.

the pilot is always the pilot in command, he has the pilot wings, and is responsible for actually flying the plane, but yes both crew are responsible for the aircraft, especially in a tactical situation. Really the situation where there is a disagreement like you are aluding to doesnt happen very often, its always a plus plus game where the backseaters suggestion is 99% of the time adding SA and vice versa, not a disagreement about well we should crank left or not. IE usually when the backseater says something directive like that, the pilot has built up trust due to combined training so does it immediately, theres no questioning it unless its something that is patently dumb.

Cant specifically speak for the tomcat but in the Strike Eagle its very much a team effort, with different responsibilities at different stages and times. The pilot is the final button pusher on any ordnance leaving the jet, so in that sense you could say they are "executive" but woe betide the pilot who releases a bomb without his WSO's consent, anytime I've seen something like that happen its never ended well. Either the pilot thinks he has more SA than he does, or the WSO is behind and needs to catch up, either way, the bomb probly shouldn't have been dropped. Both aircrew are voting members at pretty much all times. If theres any doubt either aircrew can veto verbally a release, and you build up trust in each others skills that nobody is just gonna go rogue and do something without the other crewmembers consent. As far as tactics, its all known by both crewmembers what is or should be happening at any one moment, so you both back eachother up on what you are doing with the jet. If the WSO sees something and calls for a break turn, again, the trust is built up in training so the pilot will just break as directed immediately. I've voice actuated my pilot to maneuver against a bandit I was tally with but he wasnt and he just flew as directed until he got tally. As for how to deal with varying experience levels, if a backseater has more experience then they will push that SA forward, and usually the pilot does what the more experienced backseater directs. If the pilot has more experience and can pass things back for the WSO then the same will happen. Its all a plus plus game to be the best crew you can. There isnt usually a whole lotta disagreement between the two of you, its much more adding SA to each others buckets and staying as much on the same page as you can. As soon as you are not thats where crew breakdowns occur. For example adapting it a bit for the Tomcat in DCS if there were contacts in front of you, strike eagle crew contracts wouldn't really have much discussion about who you were targeting, you would both know from the brief/tactics study, which bandit was the priority, and the RIO would be automatically working and targeting the appropriate contact without any input from the pilot. Any alterations to that would come from the flight lead. Or if say the pilot saw something going wrong or not as expected (RIO targeting the wrong thing) He would then query it, then there would probly be some handoff comm of "targeted, your missile" from the RIO to the pilot, then the pilot shoots at the appropriate time based again on tactics. If it was complex or a lower SA moment there might be some discussion like "We got the right contact right?" "Yup right contact" as the RIO is targetting it, just to keep the SA up between the two crewmembers.

BRA in DCS from the auto awacs is usually in true heading, so will be close for NATO aircraft that have MAG displayed in the HUD/displays, but right on for russian aircraft that use true predominantly. BRA is always Bearing Range Altitude. Bearing from you to the target, turn to whatever number they told you in your HUD/HSI/whatever and you are now pointed directly at the target Range from you to the target, for NATO aircraft (IE they are talking in english) it should be in Nautical miles, for Russian aircraft (talking in russian) it should be in kilometers. Altitude, again for NATO aircraft, (speaking in english) it should be in feet for Russian it should be in meters. So in your example, if your current heading was 270 and you are in a hornet, you get the bra call you just heard 090 for 20, then the contact they told you about is 20 nautical miles directly behind you (plus or minus the few degrees difference of mag vs true) so turn to put 090 in the top of your hud, and you are now pointing straight at the contact they just told you about.

As I've said before and any cursory research on this matter will reveal, the only, ONLY F-111 that ever had any capability for the AIM-54 Phoenix was the B variant, which never entered service. Its nose and radar were specifically designed for the AWG-9/AIM-54 combo, that's why it looks so different from the rest of the F-111's. The radar in all the other F-111's had zero compatibility with the AIM-54, and limited A/A capability at best. The weapons manuals for these aircraft mention the Sparrow, so it may have been compatible, but was never carried operationally. Sidewinders were the only A/A ordnance carried operationally on USAF F-111's of any variety. The USN never operated any variant of the F-111 since the B never became operational. The viggen's "TFR" may very well be feature complete and accurate to the aircraft, but it is not anything like the "TFR" that the F-111 (and later the F-15E and some variants of the F-16/18 or the B-1B) could utilize. For Desert Storm, the E/F would be the two variants that are accurate, would also be the most likely to be the most modern that could be modeled. No variant of the F-111 was compatible with or capable of firing the AMRAAM. If the Aussies modded theirs up to carry ASRAAM to give it greater self protect capability than a sidewinder, sweet; but again, that's not something you are going to find the details on in a useable form for DCS. The F-111's original HUD was very much in a similar vein to the tomcat's, in between the old fixed reticle gun sights used on the F-4 and century series fighters while also giving more data in a very analog format. Again, not really familiar with how the Aussies modified theirs up, so it could very well have eventually gotten something more modern. Again, not gonna find a lot of detailed data on the specifics needed for modelling it in DCS.

Yes the 111B completed development but it never went into service, if you are looking for a realistic F-111 as it was utilized by the USAF and RAAF and wasn’t utilized by the USN for its entire career the Phoenix/AWG-9 are out of scope. The 111B completed development and was then immediately canned and they started over which resulted in the F-14. No other version of the 111 could do phoenix, or could really be considered an A/A platform. Regarding TFR, no we don’t have TFR in any module in DCS, not in the way the -111 does it. IE automatically flying a set terrain clearance with look ahead zero/zero visibility capability. The viggens “TFR” mode for its radar does not provide that functionality, it allows the pilot to manually clear terrain, but its nowhere near what the F-111 could do. Flying off a radar altimeter also does not provide the same capability. A jet or two in a museum does not full access to its docs and specs equal. you can find -1’s and a few -34s for USAF 111’s out there on the various manual purchasing websites. The Aussies hold a lot more of that stuff close hold for a jet retired in 2013, so other than aviation magazine snippets about “it had this or that capability” you probly aren’t going to find the details necessary to model the systems of an Aussie 2013 pig. While it would be cool to get one with all the latest and greatest toys, its far more likely to be able to get the data for an F-111A, E or F as the USAF flew them.

All of that is true but the fighter stuff. Only one of the f-111s could carry Phoenix, the B which never left the development stage. The internal gun comes at the expense of the internal bomb bay ( not that large to begin with) but also if you are talking the later models that could carry pave tack, you would lose that as well if you took the gun. Only air to air ordnance regularly carried was the sidewinder, although it “could” support sparrow, but I don’t think beyond test it ever carried them. It’s radar as operationally deployed was capable of air to air like the viggens, it “could” do it, wasnt really all that great at it. Regarding the Aussie stuff they buried their jets after they retired them, unlikely you would get any specifics needed to make their specific late 2000’s -111, something like a desert storm E/F however would probly be eminently doable

thats not link 16, thats the jet integrating link 16 data with its IFF system, there is no "standard" for how this stuff is displayed or integrated, just for how the data is passed around and how to hook into the network.

Yes it does work like that. F-16 does not permanently change the track, it only displays it as friendly while you are interrogating. The hornet does do all of that IFF/ROE integration stuff for tracks.

Just an idea/suggestion for Deka, or anyone else... Consider making long press options for the bottom 3 L/R OSB's on the MFDs in the JF-17, IE short press of a button will make OSB L/R3-5 activate, if you hold it for a second it will make OSB L/R6-8 activate (assuming the labeling scheme is 1-8 top to bottom). Maybe as an option in your extensive special options. Would make a lot of functionality easier/more intuitive for those with more standard 5x5 button MFD's, instead of having to work a shifting or mouse over option, if you have a thrustmaster or otherwise MFD panel already. Im sure with thrustmaster TARGET you can make something like this work without too much trouble, but it would be a pretty nice option to enable by default.

The datalink in the "other" sim is representing IDM a completely different architecture and type of network. Its symbology/standards/how it works and shows data are completely different and have no real bearing on what happens with Link 16/MIDS. They are not related in any way.

Bolded the second part of my statement from before. Onboard means your radar has detected the target, thus you can lock it and shoot it with a missile. Offboard is everything else that is coming purely through the datalink.

And yes specifically you should be able to share contacts without an AWACS around, just like the hornet can

Let me put it another way, the ONLY contributor to making the actual track go "hostile" (which should only appear on the HSD/datalink track, not a radar track) is offboard datalink data, IE from AWACS or if an F-18 labelled it hostile. All you will ever see on the radar display for onboard data is a white neutral contact, which you then correlate with the hostile track from data link if you have it, and a lack of IFF returns when you run it in your own ship, it will NEVER on the HUD or the A/A radar display change the way the radar track looks. It should always appear "neutral" you correlate all of this data on your own in your head, jet doesnt do it for you. So for example, if your wingman gets a NCTR ID, there is no way for him to populate that accross the link to you, he would just have to say over the radio that he has ID met on the target. And in your own jet if you get a NCTR hit, and it ID's the target as SU-27 or Mig-29 (assuming they add NCTR to the F-16 at some point) it will never make the track you are looking at on the radar go "hostile" like it does in the hornet. You correlate all of that in your head and then shoot the track.

Air force jets don't really subscribe to the HAFU/NTIDS symbology that the navy uses. Altho some elements are similar on the datalink (red/pointy = hostile track, yellow/square=unknown, green/blue/round = friend), the radar display does not integrate that into how it shows its contacts. F-15/16's don't run ROE and IFF the same way the hornet does, and the radar display will not change the entire track to a hostile track.

Notch filter is relative closure, not angles... angles reduce the relative closure, but helicopters already have such a low speed that they could be flying straight at you and still be in the Doppler notch for the tomcat.