upyr1

I'd also toss in that I don't think DCS models fear and suppression. There should be a chance that a ground unit won't shoot at you at least when things start going boom.

My proposal to model wild weasels categorize all AI planes as weasels and non-weasels. A non-weasel would only detect the bearing of a radar unless the radar is assigned as a target other wise a non-weasel would "guestimate" using a radar look-up table. The table would have a type and the max range of the differnt radar states so that the pilot would know that if an SA-X is tracking me, it must be within X distance. I'd also toss in data from the map like the target is being covered by an SA-X. In short, simulate a human trying to decide if they should take the shot Then Weasles would have the range to the target and will also provide the data to non weasels. They would appear in the coms menu and call out the location of emitting threat radars. I figure if HB could get on board that this would be a simple way to get the F-4G into DCS.

A realistic way to get an E with HARMS would be to have some variant that I would term a Phantom 2K. The Israelis actually used the term for their upgrade in the 1990s that kept their Phantoms in service until 2010 or so. The Germans did an upgrade called ICE about the same time and the Turks have their Terminator upgrade. I think we could do a G if ED and HB were happy with modeling the APR-47 as something similar to the Viper's HTS with different symbology. I'll point out with the way EW is modeled in DCS the subsystems of the APR-47 that are probably still classified wouldn't be used if even there was enough open source information to do it 100% correctly.

That is true, you can't get the full Storm viper experience because there are weapons such as the Shrike the current F-16 doesn't carry Shrikes for example. This is why I believe the only F-teen done correctly (so far) has been the F-14 (The D would be nice). I fiugre you need at least 3 variants to do them right. An early A model, a storm bird (at least something that could double as a storm bird), and a late model.

Back to the thud I'm wondering if anyone has a tour of the rear cockpit

I think this would be nice for any mission builder, a menu where we could create and load airbase owner templates. For example on the Cold war map we might have one that is based on the East/west border while on a World War II map it might be based on the front lines for a given date. Of course we'd need the ability to create our own and share it

The Thud is on high on my list

Here is a follow up Some parts of the system I think would actually work with DCS as it is now. These components would be the most open

I just don't see this as an acceptable path for the G. What made the G was the APR-47 which enabled the crew to get the range of a radar. Some of the system I expect is still classified. Looking at the videos and other sources there are 5 basic components to the APR-47's displays. PPI- which shows the location and range of the detected radars. It sounds like it basically acts like the Viper's HTS though different symbology. I don't see why this couldn't be modeled. Attack scope- sounds like something in DCS Panscope- lower right screen shows the radars being detected by the Phantom. I'll label iffy. Osilicope- I expect is too classified Audio- I expect too classified. Even if you could come up with a perfectly workable G using open sources some of the APR-47's systems would never be used. Which is why I said that real question is wether or not something that was basically the F-4 with an HTS would be acceptable.

I'd love to see Skynet IADS become the default Another video with Starbaby, this time he is talking abit about the Weasel's RWHR system while it is clearly not enough information to do an FF module (I don't think we'll ever get that information), it does give us a clue on the basics of how the system worked and a starting point to EW changes. It appears that with the way EW is modeled now that only 2/5 of the EWO's tools could possibly be modeled as there simply isn't any ambiguity, and your RWR gets radars right all the time. with out these changes to EW modeling the closest thing to a G would amount to the E with something like the F-16's harm targeting system. With these changes, I think a G would still be iffy since you would need the data on the radar beams. As I stated before I don't expect anything beyond an AI G. Ideally I'd love to see ED make the following changes to the current AI. Differntiate between Weasels and non-Weasels. A Weasel would know the range to emiting radars while a non-weasel would only know the range if a radar has been assigned a target in the mission editor The ability to form mixed flights with weasels and non-weasels have weasels call out the location of radars

I have asked for this as well

Same. The basic problem with the f-teens is their long service lives there are 3 or 4 possible definitive variants.

A model i believe there's another good choice

As there are limits on the variants we will see. I was thinking it would be cool to have an option in the mission editor that would allow you configure an aircrafts weapon load out to match an older variant provided it would involve disabling payload options

What are the main differences between the 40 and 30? I am looking for shrikes

If we ever get another f-16 variant is think the block 30 would be a good option they entered service in mid 1980's and may be the definitive storm falcons

I was wondering if you could pin a faq thread that will cover what can be established as 100% fact. I am really concerned about what sort of support Eagle can do for these modules.

I don't know if there is any chance that there will be a settlement, and I have heard contradicting things about ED having any source code for the modules. Anyway if ED does not have the ability to support these modules and it comes clear that Razbam is completely gone, I would love to see them start development on new versions of these modules.

This is why I would only support the mandatory refund if the modules become unusable. Though if that happens I'd welcome ED developing replacement modules. (I'd be fine with in store credit)

If I were rich I would have paid for the development of the module,

Do you think there would be any chance that we could at least get an early model of the Fencer?

awesome photo

awesome

I follow up interview with "Starbaby", where he goes over the back rear cockpit and one about the front cockpit I figure there are two ways to get the G. The first is obviously the flyable model and the second would be as an AI asset. I'll address the AI Weasel first. The AI G would clearly be the easist to get. At the minimum this would simply involve Heatblur adding an F-4 with the ability to carry STARMS and HARMS. (To be blunt if that's the only way to get the G, I'd be fine.) If ED were to change anything to DC core for the AI G it would be two things. First would be to model the difference between a RWR (Radar warning receiver) and RWHR (Radar warning and homing receiver). They should have modeled this with the F-16 and the second would be to have the Weasel report sam locations (automatically or via coms menu) An improved IADs is needed no matter what. I'm not sure wether it is deadlier or not, due to the fact it isn't as well molded as it could be. The first issue would be as you pointed out have the SAMs turn their radars on and off. As well as proper stand by and reactivation time. We also need to simulate flak crews diving for cover when attacked. Then of course we got the various tricks will need to be modeled. Even if the improvements are only AI I've been asking for this for a while. I get it there is good reason we might never have a flyable Weasel or ECM plane but That's true which is why in this post and others I have stated that I'd be happy if we just got an AI G. Now as for getting flyable G here are the issues I see. Documentation is what is available, good enough? I don't know EW modeling- Right now there isn't a lot of ambiguity modeled, and there are a lot of systems I don't think we'll be able to get audio files for. Without ambiguity or the sound files the G basically becomes an R with an HTS and we don't use the systems on the right side of the cockpit. It won't be the full experience for the EWO's seat. You'd still end up with a SEAD powerhouse for the 1980s. Both issues bring us back to my suggestion for an AI G. At the minimum, we have an F-4 that has AGM-88s and STARMs; in the ideal situation, we have ED and HeatBlur work on an AI system that simulates a mixed ship formation with a G. The G would be the opposite scenario since there is a lot of difference in functionality but there isn't much difference in appearance

definitly