PhantomHans

The forums could really benefit from this update. If we could also make ignored users posts show up in the search that would be fantastic. They are ignored for reasons I don't want to see their BS.

I want to point out that "focus" isn't like TWS in a more modern jet. @Zabuzard does using the "focus" command make Jester keep a closer eye on the target or just keep the cursor over it?

I had to research it, but that seems like the type of upgrade I was talking about. It makes me wonder why they didn't try to reintroduce it in the late 70s, especially if it could allow the existing APQ120 to be retained. For the record I'm not suggesting that this would have kept the F-4E relevant as a fighter but rather that it would give it more "teeth" when pressed into a fighter role or when forced to defend itself on an A-G mission. More situational awareness of potential threats, etc.

That's assuming you can even GET the documentation. However I would be all in favor of getting an APG-66 F-4, I have to think that an F-4F module featuring the classic West German cold war birds (a little bit unique to the standard F-4E) and the later ICE update would be a great combination package for the new cold war map. The F-4F's are even weirder in that, as far as I am aware, at some point they got AIM-7 Sparrow capability added, but never actually GOT the AIM-7 Sparrow since the West Germans never bought any (and neither did the united post cold war Germany either), at least according to the old Joe Baugher website. What I was originally getting at was wondering why there wasn't a low cost radar upgrade from the late 70s or early 80s. Basically a cheap, simple, light pulse doppler radar, trading off scan range and volume where required for a much clearer picture. With how many F-4s held on until 1990 in US service, plus all the NATO and allies, I feel like it's something that might have sold if the cost was kept in check. But if that wasn't something that could be done cheaply enough, obviously not going to be much of an interest to the USAF with their fancy new F-15.

I'll second this one. I would very much like the ignored users never to appear anywhere, or to see that an ignored user posted, or to see their profile pic in the main forum menu.

Ahhh see I was thinking during the cold war. Like a late 1970s or early 1980s update just to get pulse doppler retrofitted. Even if the set couldn't do TWS, had a shorter range, or smaller scan volume, pulse doppler seems like it would be so much more capable particularly in the low level ground attack role the F-4 found itself in. Make it more able to defend itself. By 1991 it doesn't make sense to me to upgrade it unless you just can't afford anything else. But yes I guess money isn't unlimited.

Ahh lemme check... Yhea, I really don't care what you think.

Like I said, I am in favor of getting them added, or at least the functionality added, but they should not be accessible without editing a file in a manner that would break an IC check to keep them off the servers. Basically, I'd like HB to make a functional display and keybinds for the AGM-88 and AGM-65, and add a keybind switch so we can flip between AIM-54 and AIM-120, but not make any of it accessible unless a file edit is made.

I figured a large part of it had to be cost. Thing is, with the F-4 still being a major component of western air forces until 1990 (or even beyond) it seems like an APQ-120 replacement to give modern pulse doppler capabilities, even if at the cost of reduced range or horizontal scan volume for example, would have been a huge hit.

So, I just have to ask, why wasn't the radar ever updated by most end users? If I understand correctly, the F-4J and S got a pulse doppler radar. But the F-4B,C,D,E,F,G, and N, other than those few later updated with modern radar by foreign users, did not get any updates. As a side note, I understand the B,C,D, and N had a different radar than the APQ-120 but other than perhaps longer range due to the bigger dish I understand it to be quite similar? I have no idea what the British F-4K/M had. Seems kinda odd to me though as the radar is the one part of the jet that, at times, really seems to be lacking and hasn't been improved by the time of our E model.

I built my F-14A in 1/72 scale, so, uhmmmm... I did nothing and left it clear.

I'm excited for both of these. I know the Early-A model is promised from the start, but in order to keep development going on the B(U) I would crack my wallet open if that's what it took. The 14D even without the IRST would be great but I think, sadly, HB have made it clear that they won't even try, because this is DCS and we don't just make stuff up. (Unless we're building an F/A-18C Frankenhornet, ignoring features and capabilities in order to leave them off of our F-5E, F-15C, or F-16C, or just plain making stuff up so we can F-35.) This brings me to a request for the future F-14 updates... I would love to see some stub features added in that could be accessed through the use of mods that were intentionally made to break the IC checks to keep them off of the servers. For example, for us to have the ability to enable AIM-120s, AGM-88, AGM-84, and AGM-65s, in a manner that gives us a little functional control over them but keeps them out of IC servers. The Tomcat was tested with AIM-120s on the outboard hardpoints, IIRC with and without the twin launch rails, and it worked although it was not adopted. The AGM-88 was tested on the F-14D prototype, and from what I understand, also worked although not adopted. Given the new found strike role for the Tomcat later in it's life, adding AGM-84 or AGM-65 under the outboard hardpoints seems possible, if there was unlimited money, although obviously those weren't even tested. Could still be a fun option to have especially for building interesting and unique missions.

More callouts for missiles like that would be great. Would they have called it "pitbull" in the Tomcat or would Jester have been more likely to say "First ones active...Second missile went active...Thirds active...Fourth, they're all active now."

https://airandspace.si.edu/collection-objects/helmet-flying-protective-type-hgu-30p-or-vtas-i-united-states-navy/nasm_A19800073000 Well, maybe a world second. VTAS on the F-4J/N/S Phantoms came in September 1972 offering the same missile and radar (starting with VTAS II in 1975) slaving capability.

This should be implemented FAR FAR FAR more often on order to help fill in the various gaps in available aircraft...

I'd like a way to reactivate the old F-4 in the mission editor. I'd like to have F-4Gs appear in a mission, and while the old AI F-4 could carry the AGM-88 the new one can't. Hopefully some day we get an F-4G but until then can I bring the old AI jet back?

For me that's a giant wall of bookcases with about 300-400 kits still in boxes awaiting completion. There's plenty finished but still, I know I'll never build them all.

If the situation with ED and Razbam can be resolved such that I feel safe spending money on DCS again, I would be willing to purchase a "Sweden Assets Pack" in order to pay a reasonable price for AI J-35, JA-37, SF-37, SH-37, etc. 1/72 scale AJ-37 and SK-37s were on my last purchase of model kits...To go with the 1/72 Heller JA-37 that I will probably never get around to building...

I think @doedkoettand @TOViperare both raising good points here. Without enough details, and enough information, the JA-37 could turn into something that's merely a lookalike rather than a good representation, but at the same time, FC level modules are still in use and are still great fun to fly. Having said that, I think the problem I have with the current AJS-37 IS the lack of the JA-37 in any shape or form. Flying missions out of Swedish airbases without fighter escort, or, with USAF F-15Cs or F-14Bs flying alongside as my escort, feels quite unusual and wrong. For the time being, I am using a mod to turn AI AJS-37 into AI JA-37, but it still isn't quite all it could really be. So I'd really like to see any JA-37 in the game, be it AI only or, preferably, at least an FC3 level module.

This looks great and I will buy it, but I also want you to know that I am also yelling at you for not remaking the Fleet Defender campaigns that took place on the Kola Peninsula map. I am trying my hand at doing it, and I am NOT happy with the result...It's quite clear to me that I am NOT cut out to be a mission builder or campaign maker...

Imho sorely needed even if it has to come as an FC3 level module due to lack of documentation.

We can add this to all the other stuff I don't understand about the AJS-37. I get that it's essentially a late 1960s jet with upgrades. I can understand things like lack of a gunpod, but the weird rockets and the lack of internal countermeasures surprises me.

@Zabuzard Wonder if you can enlighten me on these? I watched some tutorials and read the guide .pdf but still have no answer.

What are the Zonar M70 variant of the HEAT rockets used for? Obviously the HEAT warheads are better for tanks, the HE-Frag for soft stuff, but the only reference I can find to Zonar seems to be that it's a proximity fuse. So why is it on a HEAT warhead rocket? Is this to get the correct standoff for the charge to form and penetrate better or am I misunderstanding the Viggen weapons?

I have been doing the tutorial for IR Mavericks. Everything works fine if I ONLY approach the target from the direction of my initial launch. If I try approaching from ANY other direction, the IR Mavs act as if the keys to slew the seeker are backwards and will not lock targets. I have tried changing master mode selecting and unselecting missiles etc but nothing fixes it. Any suggestions?