Vampyre

McDonnell F-4 Phantom: Spirit in the Skies: Jon Lake, David Donald: 9781880588314: Amazon.com: Books McDonnell Douglas F/A-18 Hornet and Super Hornet: An insight into the design, construction and operation of the US Navy's supersonic, all-weather multi-role combat jet (Owners' Workshop Manual): Davies, Steve: 9781785210549: Amazon.com: Books Amazon.com: F/A-18 Hornet: A Navy Success Story: 9780071346962: Jenkins, Dennis R.: Books

If you didn't notice 740643 Is a DMAS bird. You won't see it on the initial release but I'm willing to bet it will be in the release of the DMAS/ARN-101 F-4E. As for the 457th TFS, I'm pretty sure I saw a skin from that squadron in one of the recent videos.

Thanks, it's fixed now.

Interesting little tidbit there at the end of IFE's recently closed out "What would you like to fly" thread. So, not Italian or even European but was involved in a recent European conflict. I can't think of any Asian or South American types that fit the clues which means it's probably American. What is recent for European conflicts? Even though it was almost 30 years ago, Balkan Conflicts maybe? I doubt it is the Ukraine war or the Greece/Turkey clashes in the 70's. American- F-117, F-15C probably. Could be a transport like the C-141B Starlifter though I doubt it. Maybe a Helo like the CH-53E Super Sea Stallion or Maybe an AH-1W Super Cobra.

I remember this crash. I was the platoon commander for China Lakes Auxiliary Security Force at the time. We were tasked with responding to any aircraft/weapons incidents within 100 miles of NAWS China Lake to provide security to the areas/assets affected. It was early 2009 if I remember correctly. The jet crashed almost vertical and piled into a big crater. The pilot ejected out of envelope and ended up hitting the ground near the crater. The NAWS CO had us stand down after our initial surveillance of the area and we ended up having the Air Force take responsibility for the security of that one.

Not true. The point of stabilizing fins, particularly large stabilizing fins are to provide stabilization in flight. Weapons requiring spin stabilization typically are unguided and have small fins specifically for imparting the rotational force or, in the case of most gun and cannons, have no fins but require rifling in the barrel to spin the round as it is fired. Fins that create spin also impart drag which reduces range. Spin is undesirable for weapons like guided bombs. Spin is of particular importance for unguided rockets, most CBU's and smaller missiles like the RIM-116, many SACLOS radio command guided missiles and various dumb bombs. Pertaining to the GBU-24, the offset rear stabilizers are not there to promote spin, the pop out surfaces needed to be of a wider chord on this particular weapon to provide better flight dynamics for its intended low altitude release parameters. The Air Force found that the larger surfaces caused clearance issues on the aircraft it was intended to be used on so the fins were offset symmetrically to allow for the fitment of the wide chord stabilizers. This offset, and the resulting spin, has a negative effect on the range of the weapon but, fortunately, the proportionate guidance system used on the GBU-24 was capable of dampening the rotational forces once it had a laser to lock on to. Basically, the offset stabilizing fins were a compromise to make it work. For Snake Eye, they don't always spin the same way or sometimes even spin at all so I think that has more to do with manufacturing defects in the fin kits or irregularities in the bomb build up than with any spin stabilizing intent. I wouldn't expect that kind of randomness to be high on ED's priority list.

I think this should be in the map wish list part of the forum located here - https://forum.dcs.world/forum/339-dlc-map-wish-list/.

All of them... and yes, the RF's as well if they are made.

Will do.

Nice find.

Unfortunately, I currently do not have access to any S-3B manuals and haven't even touched one since 2006. The operation and timing of the weapons bay doors would be located in the one of the principals of operations manuals, the relevant maintenance manual or, if you are lucky, the NATOPS manual. The outside switch for getting the doors to the load position was located just aft of the entrance hatch under a hinged door. There was a toggle switch for if you had power and a socket for a speed handle if you didn't. The outside switch was a safety feature to keep people from being crushed between the weapons bay doors and the engine when loading the weapons. As for the ordnance loading, I was rated as an Airframer and I know what I know because I was a QAR and was assigned as a load team member for weapons dets before my QA days. I had a tendency ask a lot of questions to our AO's. I liked to know the how and why.

The point is that the Naval Phantoms were used in Southwest Asia in a primary air defense role and goalpost moving doesn't change that. Naval Phantoms are useful on any map within the DCS environment regardless of historical significance which, in this case, is there too. An argument against naval Phantoms is effectively a moot point as the F-4E is already a done deal and Heatblur stated from the get-go that they were going to be making both naval and air farce versions. Never were the Iranians going to be without a Phantom.

The Marines of VMFA-323 and VMFA-531 flying off the Coral Sea in support of Operation Eagle Claw might take issue to being called ridiculous. They were flying F-4N Phantoms as the primary fleet defense of the USS Coral Sea. They were augmenting CVW-8's VF-41 and VF-84 flying F-14A's off of USS Nimitz.

Well, you should be getting a German Tornado from Aviastorm, and Heatblur will be bringing a naval Phantom (possibly an F-4J/S) to DCS in a few years. Just throw some third party skins on them and voila... they are still not British. With some luck maybe someone will do a French Jaguar as well... The French do seem to be better in this regard with a Mirage 2000C (with technical support from the AdA) and four versions of the Mirage F1 in the digital museum that is DCS. Razbam had indicated the possibility of future development of a Mirage 2000-5, Mirage 2000D and the Mirage IIICJ as well. Just tell the MOD that they are being bested by the French... that ought to get the gears moving.

The S-3B Viking weapons bay opens to the loading position during weapons release. This should not be possible in flight. The loading position can only be achieved from outside of the aircraft using the ground override switch on the belly of the aircraft. This is how far the weapons bay doors should open in flight. This is how far they open in game at the moment. The Weapons bay doors open entirely too fast as well. If my memory serves me, it should take eight to 10 seconds to open and close the doors from the cockpit. Notable currently in game weapons missing are the Mk-83 LDGP, Mk-82 Snakeye, ADM-141 TALD, AGM-84D/H, AWW-13 Data Link Pod and AGM-65E/F Maverick. The AGM-65D/K Mavericks should not be included in the loadout as they are not US Navy weapons. There are also weapons that should not be used from the weapons bay. Notably, the Mk-20 Rockeye as the pop out fins of the Mk-7 dispenser will impact the weapons bay doors. The Rockeye should only be used from stations 1 and 6. If added, the Mk-82 Snakeye should also only be available on stations 1 and 6 for the same reason.

You will get to see the Spey in action if you end up getting the A-7E from Flying Iron when it releases. The TF-41 is a modified RR Spey made specifically for the A-7 Corsair II. The Spey's reputation is that it has a lack of responsiveness around the boat but plenty of thrust in both the A-7E and F-4K/FG-1.

Never really been a fan of the Su-25T, specifically because it was only really a prototype. I would rather have a MiG-27K instead as it was a production machine and used similar TV/Laser targeting technology. I also wouldn't mind seeing a bog standard Su-25... I wouldn't purchase it but there are plenty of other people out there that would enjoy it.

I too enjoy a good recce mission. It would be nice to have RF-4B/C Recce Phantoms. The USMC B for carrier operations with post SURE upgrade with updated navigation, sensors, ALQ-126B DECM and slotted stabs. A USAF C, preferably a late 70's-80's RF-4C, with ARN-101/DMAS, G-139 LOROP pod, UXD-1 Laser recce pod, AVQ-26 PAVE Tack (39 A/C), ALQ-119/131 DECM pods and, towards the very end of their service lives, some machines carried AIM-9L/M. I doubt it will happen though. Early B from 60-early 70s. Two post SURE upgrade RF-4B's Note the PAVE Tack on the belly of this Alconbury bird. Bergstrom AFB 67th TRW I'd go for a RA-5C or Recce Voodoo as well.

Assuming you have updated to 2.9, it will be listed as LPWS C-RAM under air defense for the US. Make sure the historical filter isn't messing you up as well.

It would be nice if there were a way to select the type of seeker the Shrike had in a similar way to how we select fuses on the iron bombs in the rearm and refuel menu.

The brown band is for the live motor and the yellow band is explosive warhead. If it were inert it would have blue bands. We did a sinkex from Kaneohe Bay and our missile had a red radome. On cruise, the live rounds had grey radomes.

The red radomes were training/test shots. Warshots had the light grey radomes.

We also used the AGM-84H/K SLAM-ER in addition to the E. I never actually saw an AGM-84E CATM shape so I don't think they were used much after 1995.

Yes on the Mk-83 and yes on the Mk-20 fins in the weapons bay. As far as the CBU-78's are concerned, I'm not sure. I know the light and medium attack guys used them but I have never seen them mentioned in any of the manuals for the Viking probably because they were weapons designed to be used outside of the S-3's mission scope of Sea Control. The S-3's visual bombing sight was... suboptimal, to say the least. It was either a tape crosshair or grease pencil mark on the pilots windshield, so less than manual depression which is why it was not really used on anything smaller than a ship. I know the CBU-99 was used for certain though. Also, when dropping weapons from the weapons bay, the doors open way too wide. They could only open that wide when using the door switch on the belly of the jet. From the cockpit they would only open about half as wide as they do in game... just enough for release clearance. They also open way too fast. EDIT Just went and looked and it seems that the CBU-59 was used at some point.

It should also have Mk-82 Snakeyes. If they are dropped as retards then they should only be dropped from stations 1 and 6 usually on TER's. When we dropped them from the weapons bays the fins were disabled and they were treated as regular Mk-82 LDGP's. EDIT: We never dropped Mk-20's from the weapons bays either.