mattebubben

Well i think part if the reason why there is so much info being dug up and posted on the forum is that pretty much any Swede that has an interest in aircraft (and especially someone that grew up between the 70s and the 90s) has a deep love for the Viggen. And i think most feel like me in that they want to help spread that love and get others to love the Viggen as much as we do ^^. So translating and getting information about it to you unfortunates that does not know the Glory of the Viggen is the least we can do if it result in just some of you getting it and reveling in the beauty and power of the Viggen.

I just got my MK-IVs =>. And so far i love them. The size is perfect i can use them comfortably no problem. Only done an hour or so of flying (Ka-50) but so far no comfort problems at all. And they are so smooth and precise =>.

Well in order to put the F-5E in 2.0 they would have to patch it (to add the F-5E) And without a doubt that patch would also include the other updates that are in the stable etc (Mig-21 patched,Mirage 2000 patched etc)

And the reason for a lack of in flight pictures of JA 37s carrying Aim-120s is most likely not because they could not. But because i suspect there was a lack of Dummy Aim-120 missiles. Most of the Viggen pictures you see with missiles in flight is with Dummy missiles and not live ordnance (there are some with live weapons but most are not) So the Viggens would likely only have carried Aim-120s during real missions and not for training (except for life fires ofc) So they would not have been carried as commonly. (as not to drain the flight hours for the new missiles that were supposed to be kept in service for a long period of time) And its also a fact that they would probably have wanted to use up the Skyflash missiles already in service (for routine missions/training etc) and save the Aim-120s for a real combat situation (or for use on the Gripen that could not carry Skyflash missiles)

Viggen with 4x Aim-120s (+ 2x Aim-9)

There appears to be a bug with all missiles at the moment (not related to the mirage 2000 its on the ED side as it effects all missiles)

Well when it comes to the RB75 we had two different RB 75 variants. the RB 75 and RB 75T (T for Tung Meaning Heavy warhead) The T had the heavier warhead (much like some of the later AGM-65 variants) but the RB 75 had the normal warhead. (with the 75 being for AT work and lighter targets etc and the 75T being for bunkers / Bridges or heavy targets in general) but they both used the same seeker and as far as i could find they were both delivered in the same first batch of 500 missiles in the late 70s. Or Atleast that is my understanding from the sources i have been able to find. And About the RB24 its the J im interested in. As the RB24 (RB24B) is easily recognized as a Aim-9B. Where as its less certain with the RB24J. The RB24J could either be a Aim-9J (as some sources state) or the Aim-9P (probably a P-3 as others state) And there clues that point both ways. the biggest reason that point towards the Aim-9J is the designation of RB24J (but since the Aim-9P more or less an evolved Aim-9J its not definite proof) Where as one of the things that point towards the Aim-9P is the dates. Sweden received the first RB 24Js around 1977-1978 (which is the period where the Aim-9Ps started entering service around the world) Where as the Aim-9J entered service in the early 70s and was overtaken by the Aim-9N around 1973-74 (not clear how long it stayed in production) so its not certain the Aim-9J was still in production during the time period when Sweden Received the RB 24Js where as we know the Aim-9P was. And its unlikely that The Production line for the Aim-9J would have been re-opened or kept open for an export order when the Aim-9P was in production at the same and was intended for just that kind of export. when it comes to the RB 24J its not a huge problem either way (if its a 9J or a 9P though ofc the 9P would be better) but it would be interesting to know either way. And for the RB 75 it again does not matter alot of the game since its already been stated we will get both A/B mavericks. But again it would be nice and interesting to find documentation on what variants were actually used.

Not strictly related to the aircraft itself. But do you have documentations on some of the weapons. Since for some of the weapons (Mainly RB 75 and RB 24J) many sources differ as to what variants they were based on. Ive found sources referring to the RB 75 as both a AGM-65A and a AGM-65B (and some sources seem to hint that both were acquired) as well as sources refering to the RB 24J as an aim-9J or a Aim-9P. do you have any access to any documentation that could clarify this matter?. And when it comes to the RB 75 do you know if there was ever a second batch of missiles ordered/delivered after the first batch in the late 70s (since in that case it would increase the likely hood that we had a mix of AGM-65As and Bs)

its to be the Determined. Depends on what F-14B they are making. Its Air-Ground Capabilities will vary depending on if its an early or late F-14B. (Edit: To slow)

You should have realized by now that this thread gets derailed after about 3-5 Posts. and every time it gets back on topic within 3-5 posts its usually derailed again.

On second thought i cant get it working...

Thanks for the guide. =P But how do i change the Lat long before i start Aligning (to where they correspond with real location of the aircraft) You explained how to check the location but not how to change it if its not the correct one. Since that is one of the main problems i have (and the reason why i cant get set up correctly to start with) =P I know how to start aligning etc but i dont know how input the correct coordinates to start with. Edit: I figured it out after watching the second guide =P. But it would be helpful to have had that info in the start up section.

Great news =).

ALL ABOARD THE HYPE TRAIN!!! Time to destination = Soon™

Again it was an optional. So some Users chose to get the INS (for additional cost) but others (most) did not get the INS (as with the way it was used it was not needed for most customers). And we are getting one without the INS (as was the majority).

No the Swedish Drakens were pure fighters they dont have any guided Air-ground ordnance (or much of air-ground ordnance at all) My guess would be thats its used to control the radar. (just like the AJ/AJS 37s Stick that is located in the same spot since the RB 05 controller is on right side of the cockpit) This is the Radar Control stick on the AJ/AJS 37 Viggen.(as well as the SH/AJSH recce variant) And since they look similar and are located in the same place my best guess would be they have the same purpose. Ive only seen this stick on some of the Draken variants (does not seem to be present in the earlier variants and might be limited to the J35F/J variants) And since the AJ 37 was being designed as J35F (the Last Production variant) entered service my guess would be they took the radar control stick from the Draken. And the cockpit pictures is most likely from a J35F or J35J (the J35J being J35F2s that were upgraded in the mid-late 80s)

INS was a Optional customer choice so there are some F-5Es that have INS but it will not be in the module we get. (from everything that as been said atleast) So i dont know the reason behind the letters INS on the Warning panel in the Manual. But i do know there is no INS in the F-5E we are getting.

It has an IFF Transponder. But no IFF interregator. AS in friendly aircraft / IFF systems can see the F-5E as friendly. But it can not ID other aircrafts through their Transponders. But realistically this was never a problem not a limitation as it was a Visual range only fighter (no bvr missiles) so you had to see an enemy before you could fire at him and if you saw him you could ID him. Only problem is since alot of missions in DCS (especially MP missions) are unrealistic (with all sides having the same aircraft types) making a Visual ID is alot harder. So while it was not a worry in real life it will be a problem on some MP servers. And also IFF systems even recently have never been as effective / reliable as they are in game. Nor do they work like they do in game where they automatically know everything 100% of the time) (Since IFF interrogators can only interrogate compatible systems that use the correct code/Setup so for example AFIK a Mig-29 using a standard Russian or Eastern Export IFF system cant show up as a Friend to a F-15 using a nato IFF system so you still relied either on having AWACS/Ground Control etc determine friend or foe by using the info they had or you had to get a Visual ID) So its an Unrealistic Scenario/setup that will punish the F-5E a bit when it comes to Air-Air.

Thats the saab AJ viggen (AJS has the same cockpit only some dials replaced etc) This is a Draken.

Its easy. If you want a earlier generation of aircraft and a good opponent of the Mig-21Bis. Then the F-5E is a great choice. If you want to fly Missions against the Mig-21 with within visual range then you will have great fun in the F-5E. The F-5E will also be a fun little strike aircraft and will have a decent bombload etc. But for someone that only wants to do Air-Air MP on servers like the 104th then the M2000 would be a better choice. I have the M2000 and i will be getting the F-5E. Because i love the aircraft and i love the within visual range combat that the Definite F-5E Vs Mig-21 severs will give us. The choice between the F-5E and M2000 all depends on what you want. As they are both amazing aircraft that give you different things.

It depends what you want out of the module. If you want to fight in MP against modern fighters like F-15,Mig-29 and su-27s then id suggest the Mirage 2000. If you want a modern BVR capable aircraft with the ability to IFF enemy targets by using the radar then the Mirage 2000. But if you want (or would be equally OK with) to go head to head in visual range combat with mig-21s then the F-5E will be great fun. If you want to do air-ground missions with simple systems that demand more of out of the pilot in order to be accurate id suggest the F-5E. They are both great aircraft and will both bring alot of fun times. But it depends on how you want/Intended to use them. If you want to do Air-Air work on the 104th MP server (or similar No weapon restriction all sides have all aircraft types Mp servers) then the Mirage 2000 would probably be more enjoyable.

wellimaswedeandevenihadtroublefiguringoutwhatyoutypedsinceyoumadeitallintoasinglewordwithoutseperatingthewordswheretheyshoouldbeseperated. Its not really a matter of knowing the language if you dont type using any recognizable form of grammer and dont seperate the words as you type them ^^. Im would be more then happy to set up a Swedish for beginners course for the pilot candidates ^^.

Yea the Placement / Size etc can make it appear like a RWR. (especially for western eyes) But the RWR display of the Viggen (as you might already know) is integrated around the Radar Display. There are 6 Oblong lights set around the edge of the display (just outside the radar display but within the "compass") Those lights together with Audio warnings make up the RWR system.

And Dick Lord might be the best name of an Author ever xD

And it also depends on the scenario backround/orders. For example if the mirages are just out on a CAP or are alone near enemy airspace when the migs show up they would likely avoid combat /run (as there would not be any severe consequences for them to do so) But if the two mirages where escorting other aircraft (especially if they aircraft they are escorting is to slow to run) then the Mirages would likely engage and do what ever they could to buy time (and depending on the importance of whatever they were escorting they might go as far as to be ready to die to buy that time) But with nothing important to protect or orders to do otherwise most pilots would retreat and wait for backup rather then doing an attack with such bad odds. (and that is also how most pilots tend to be trained in modern times) Since there is no point in wasting Pilots and Aircraft without reason.