Basher54321

USAF released an F-22A production restart assessment report from Feb 2017 for FY $16 Cost of 194 aircraft = $40.5 billion Non recurring Restart costs = $9.9 Billion So the US taxpayer could have to fork out for yesterdays news - the F-15X an aircraft that can't even play on the same field as F-22/35. Considering the USAF point blank did not want these the change of tune is likely politics related although David Goldfein was quoted as saying: He added that Air Force needs to buy 72 fighters a year to get to the amount they need in the future — and to drive average aircraft age down from 28 years to 15 years. And while Goldfein might want all 72 to be fifth generation F-35s, budgetary concerns likely won’t let that happen. “If we had the money, those would be 72 F-35s. But we’ve gotta look at this from a cost/business case.” he explained. “An F-15 will never be an F-35. Never. But I need capacity.”

Thought it started with Jack Donovan and F-100Fs.

For context - something else always dismissed as rubbish was the APG-66 - the info is from old Defence documents.

That time period specifically given as less than 3 miles visibility more than 50% of the year and a ceiling below 3000ft - perhaps misleading just saying most there but it doesn't really change the overall problem.

You are correct most still associate the MiG-23 with the MiG-23MS mostly thanks to the Red Eagles I expect - and your conclusion is not that far off. Both the F-15 and F-16 had digital radars in 1980 - the only fighters that did without checking - no they were not as good as digital radars 10 years later - but consider this the APG-77 in the Raptor is derived from the APG-66 family. Lastly similar to how the MiG-23 is associated with the MS, BVR seems to be associated with useless radar and missile ranges. In 1980 BVR only exists under very specific conditions not far removed from 1975. The real problem is how do you detect something on the deck over Europe in mostly terrible weather, then how do you identify that? IFF (Nope), IFF hacks like Combat Tree still depend on the target having a transponder on. GCI and AWACs are more of less out of the picture - and that is before you add in any kind of ECM capability.............. Many F-4s were slaughtered in the recreation of this environment. :thumbup:

Although technically they are Linux it is somewhat misleading trying to dump in all the free distros of Linux (which is what is being talked about here) with all the commercial enterprise versions that are controlled and updated by corporations and as such have to be supported and given updates etc to be viable. Unfortunately the various free distros of Linux are not viable having used them for about 20 years, I don't blame Eagle Dynamics if they state they will not be supporting it. BTW we can all nit pick faults with any OS we have a personal agenda against if you like!

2004 Alomi.S Israeli Mirage & Nesher Aces p47 UARAF lost 4 bases in Sinai with ammo depots - 2012 Arab Migs Vol 3 p218

In the late 1960s Israel captured a load of R-3S (AA-2) from Egyptian airfields in the Sinai - and not only tested them they pressed them into service (apparently) They found it comparable overall to the AIM-9B and thought both were better than the Shafrir 1. They also state it was inferior to the Shafrir 2 and AIM-9D. A lot were fired by the VPAF in an actual combat environment. A lot missed just like the AIM-9B, even firing it in parameters at a level flying target is no guarantee of a hit, these early missiles often went stupid or were easily distracted by minor heat sources (clouds etc). Of course for a computer game like this I expect they are pepped up a bit to keep the players happy.

If I go to C:\DCS World\Mods\aircraft\TF-51D\Doc there is a P-51D manual and Q start. Is that not there for you?

Yes, I want the F-4 prioritized ahead of other modules +1

Israeli F-4Es in the late 1970s did.

Amen to that my friend.

Not sure that is totally correct. The F.3 only had a small ventral tank and couldn't use that large Ventral gun pack at all. That diagram, shows an F.53 which I have only ever known as an export version of the F.6 (despite some sources calling it an F.3) and the only version to have that ground attack capability and under wing pylons. Some F.3s were used to prototype the F.6 and given the bigger ventral pack and an interim F.3A designation before it was changed to F.6. - and some F.3s were just converted to F.6 later.

In the late 1940s the RAF wanted a short range high climbing interceptor and it was also originally designed at a time when they were not sure if they would be getting an engine with Reheat (Afterburner) - that is why it was designed to fly Supersonic without afterburner (supercruise) Speed was the priority thus stacking the engines reduced the frontal area for a very low drag design - however the fact the configuration was never seen again (AFAIK) would suggest it was too much of a compromise. The belly tanks on the early versions could be jettisoned (IIRC) RE above - the only single seat Lightning that didn't have internal guns was the F.mk3 - however they could replace the missiles with an internal 30mm gun pack if required.

The Iraqi claims match with Iranian losses apparently so quite possibly - the Iraqi side were trying to to use particular tactics against the F-14s which often ended up in disaster but seems did work a few times. On the other hand one Iraqi ML pilot might have made the mistake of trying to dogfight an F-5E

The latest from the Libyan side including the official LAAF report into the incident is they were MiG-23MFs both armed with R-24/R-60/Cannon. (Iraq and Libya both modified MFs to carry R-24s in the mid 80s) There were a lot of merges in periods during the 80s between US Navy and Libyan MiGs and most ended peacefully. They operated ML and MLD types by 1989 however one thing that Libyan pilots claim is that whenever they got near the US Navy their radar and comms were jammed. The GCI controller claims in interview he tried to call the MiGs off - so more than likely that message never got through. A Libyan MLD would have been no better in that type of situation.

Possibly 42 USAF F-15C/Ds were fitted with the APG-70(V) at some point (which was a modified APG-63 pretty much). This covers the Desert Storm and Allied Force engagements and also mentions using APG-70 in the F-15C in 1999. https://ospreypublishing.com/f-15c-eagle-units-in-combat-pb

If anyone is interested there is some information from some Dutch pilots posted on here regarding how they have been using it recently. http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=61&t=54012&sid=d89ed8dabdc82b0831ebe4fefa55e16b

Not really seeing the relevance of trying to compare a strategic bomber with a tactical fighter - and your attempts to eyeball aero and RCS are completely irrelevant. What next a comparison with the B-2s internal fuel and payload! The F-35 had a requirement for maneuverability including a slow speed High AoA capability which is one reason it has those twin canted tails. (and no the Ho-229 is not up for discussion )

No that would include block 32/ late block 25/early 42/late MLU/ 20 / 15 ocu / ADF

Babak Taghvee who formerly worked in the Iranian defense industry on the F-5E/F projects recently did a report on a Oct 2017 Iranian exercise ( for Combat Aircraft) in Ishafan to test new weapons and tactics he says. Doesn't mention anything new on the F-14s but does state (with photo of 3-6036) that the Tomcat not part of the exercise was sitting on QRA with live AIM-7E and AIM-9Js.

Pardos Push from the man himself

I think the Mirage 2000 also has variable inlet cones which probably account someway for the top end speed at altitude - there seems to have been some requirement for a high altitude interceptor there. But yes the F-16 design team decided to ditch that inlet type and save weight instead - but still met the M2 requirement.

Not as good with hornet history sadly - but the change from yf-17 to fa-18 seemed almost as radical as going from legacy to super but unsure as to why - am certain it is the layout in the legacy even though i dont have the manual at the moment.

The legacy hornet might come under that category for one - the super is fbw only though. the f-16 has never had mechnical backup that is correct.