Rainmaker

I would have to know more context on what ‘panel’ was talked about. I’m gonna take a stab it’s the JHMCS? I left the jet before full implementation as far as the combat-fleet side of the house goes. IIRC, the control panel IS on the right side, in front of the oxy comm panel that sits just in front of the map case. It went where the AERP panel used to be. It may be on the outer side of the racks by the crew liner, I’d have to research a bit. In either case it, 1) wouldn’t be visible in the screens released so far as it would be out of frame 2) In the real jet, would have dedicated electrical connectors underneath, so no, it can’t really be moved around. Blank panels, yes, but not ones that have control switches on them. In Klar’s defense, he sits back seat IIRC, so no cool-kid toys for him at the present.

No, actually, that's a pretty fair representation. To take it a step further, chip a lot of the paint off the knobs, and add some paint nicks in the back plates that emit some extra unwanted white light and then add a lot of desert sand in all the crevices that never seems to completely disappear no matter how long you have been out of the sand box. Structural parts rarely get replaced as there are quite frankly, no replacement parts just sitting around to replace them. Paint touch-ups don't happen that often either. Console plates are hard to come by too, and are an incredibly low priority to replace unless they start hindering pilot usability, and that is most frequently under nods and has to do with the excess white light emitted from the back lit panel notes above.

Just FYI, unless the model is a pretty big throwback (pre 2000), the AHRS and VTR panels located behind the engine control panel do not exist. Being as though the NVG lighting is there (2001ish), it’s a bit of a mix/match on dating at the moment.

:thumbup: Thanks!

Mic switch is outdated, as is the CC reset button :) Where the pic come from?

While everyone is busy with current events and hiding indoors...

Haha. That’s cool. Just wondered if anyone around here remembers not having that...or gogs...or FDL. Hell, I feel old too now. Sounds like we got to the airframe about the same time then. :beer::beer::beer:

History will tell you that being IFF reliant does not bode well for preventing blue on blue incidents. There have been a decent number either by air to air or surface to air engagements where IFF has been a contributing factor. It’s proven to not be the best way of doing business.

Just curious, were you around before the DMS when it was the old RMR tapes?

Hey man, if you like ridin’ red rockets into battle, that don’t bother me none. :D

The dude would argue with a brick wall. Also...yellow tails are poo. :)

Disabled external tank pressurization is pretty common and extends outside carrier based aircraft. -15s, -16s, -18s are all that way, and it’s probably not limited to those three. I don’t know the exact reason, but if I had to take a stab at it...it would be because of one or more of three possibilities. - To maximize ECS airflow to things like avionic equipment - Just not needed due to low fuel flow rates. In addition to point, external tanks building pressure tend to push gas out of the stand pipes and piss fuel due to the slow xfer rates of gas out of the tanks. - I would say “danger” could be a possibility, just because pressurized tanks on the ground around people poses risk, but it has to be done for ops checks and theirs no real emphasis put on it being “dangerous” when we did it...but it’s a possibility I guess.

There’s a lot of real-world weapon effects when we start talking nukes that most don’t even consider. Nuke blasts and clear canopies don’t mix very well. You’re better off being far enough away that you never hear those calls unless it’s over SATCOM.

It's doesn't require the F-35 helmet as you describe. Matter of fact, much of the stuff, to a bit less fidelity, you are listing already exists on Gen 4 HMDs. In many aspects the old stuff is well ahead of the new stuff in terms of active implementation into the aircraft. With that being said, much of it came later than the suites ED tend to model, but it's not reliant on the hardware that you are describing.

That might have even been before the 8 mil tape days. Very nice. Weird that the narration called them the first bombs of the second gulf war though. Presume they are referring to Desert Fox or whatever that one was called. I know there are plenty of crews with old tapes. Wish more would show up out there Hell, combined, there were over 4,000 dropped in about 3 months in ‘03. Also ironic that the callsigns became the expenditure callsigns we used in ‘03. Why we ever coded those and the squawks is beyond me. What a hot mess. Legacy crap left over from the “norms” of OREs that was never actually used when it was done for real. Then we went back to doing it the same way again at home station. We’re silly that way sometimes.

I think I got ya now. i went back and looked at everything all over again. Based on where I think you’re coming from and what you are looking at, my guess would be that you should ignore the screenshots and go with the video. Just a guess here, but I presume they made symbology changes between the first screenshots that Wags took and what’s being released. From the looks of it, you shouldn’t see the conversion to triangles anymore. I would guess they were goven updates info on the correct symbology during testing so it was changed.

As above, when the contract becomes a “target” of the radar.

Sorry, yes, I should have worded that better. There is small-scale datalink with flight members creating their own host network. It is missing Link16 “big network” capability that would normally include your AWACS and other C2 nodes and the rest of the coalition (that either talk the same 0s and 1s or can be bridged). Again, the white triangles are just a form of target symbology, they are not meant to identify friend, foe, etc.

Triangle does not indicate hostile. Triangle indicates a tracked target, not a hostile. Different jet, different symbology, you can’t necessarily associate the two. Also, other sim does not possess DL...so don’t necessarily make those associations either.

Probably worth noting at least, there is the ability for the ownship radar scope show correlated and non-correlated “friendly” contacts and label appropriately, just not do the same to label a hostile. Just to clear up possibly confusion that may happen.

Don’t let that desert summer heat get ya down man! :) Could be worse...like Bagram.

C/Ds use “fast packs”, same principal just internally designed a little differently. E’s can fly without CFTs. It’s still done, at times, but it’s not a wartime config. There’s a lot more underlying limitations that most just won’t understand. Have to install a few additional fairings, vortex generators on the airframe, etc...but that’s getting a bit into the weeds.

I’m not 100% up to speed on the way things are currently. Some things were kept paper as well as having digital versions. 1. Papers don’t crash and don’t need battery power 2. Can be easier to flip through pages in a hurry than to try and scroll through electronically. Probably still a lot of situations where there are both still.

Yep. TCTO, I-TCTO, OTI...all still used. No reason to change IMO. You’ll still see the TCTO number identifiers in the front of all the manuals.

One thing we finally got on board with was flipping to digital manuals, TOs, etc. There’s still a few, or were a few, that were still kept on paper like EPs for example. For those that have access to the stuff now, it’s one complete book, so the TODAs no longer have to post changes, do pen and inks, page changes, etc. it all comes from a digital library too, so update one and it updates to the current version unless folks are working off downloaded copies.