mattebubben

And also another thing to note. That the use of these kinds of Countermeassure pods was not uncommon for strike aircraft during this time period. For example the Panavia Tornado (Strike and ECM variants) (Germany,Britain and Italy) All used a Countermeassure pod that is the continuation of the Pod carried by the Viggen. So giving up a Pylon for a dedicated Countermeasure pod was not all that uncommon. It was just less of a issue for the Tornado as you had a few more pylons so all aircraft could carry one without loosing armament (as the Tornado is a larger aircraft) Where as for the Viggen they adapted the tactics so not all aircraft would need to carry a pod.

Sure (and i have read that part of the manual) But i was thinking more that we dont know how many packets are released at once. So we dont know how many groups of chaff you can dispense before you run out. That part of the Manual only tells the time it takes depending on which of the automated settings is used. So it does not really give any hints on how many Manual Chaff releases you can do before the Pod is empty. That part of the manual was more about the Automatic Countermeasure System / Settings then it was about the specifics off the pod etc.

Correction 56 flares (but 26 Cartridges with 2 flares in each cartridge) And also while we know of many Chaff packets (if these numbers are accurate) i could not find anything how how many Chaff packets are released at a time. 1 at a time or 2 at a time of 5 at a time. since that makes a Huge difference in how long it lasts and how many time you can release chaff.

Well my understanding is not that they have added Ripple Quantity settings. But rather. The Practice Rockets fire 1 rocket at a time. (and the pods are pretty much the same as far as i can tell) So it should have been possible to wire Real" rockets to fire one at a time as well even if that was never procedure / was never done. My understanding is not that they have added fictional Ripple Quanity Controls. But rather you can either have the Practice Rocket setting of one per press or the live rocket setting of FIRE EVERYTHING!!!. But this is just my understanding of the situation so i could very well be wrong.

Only number ive been able to find is 540 Chaff Packets and 28 Flare Cartridges (each Flare Cartridge having 2 flares so 56 flares total) Thats the only number ive been able to find so far cant say if its 100% correct or not. And as i dont really know how many Chaff packets are launched at a time(or how large each packet is) i dont really know how many chaff discharges one would get. (with the Flares it could either be 2 flares per discharge = 28 discharges or 1 per discharge = 56 but my personal guess would be 2 flares per discharges). But either way you should have enough seeing the procedure was around 1-2 passes and then run for home (as you should be able to get the ordnance off in 1 or 2 passes).

You only need to sacrifice 1 pylon (as the pod has both Chaff and Flares and it has plenty of it) (you can carry two chaff/flare pods but one has plenty enough) but you also have a jammer pod that you can carry (so if you want both a jammer and chaff pod) but then again having 3 or 4 BK 90s or AGM-65s dont make a massive difference. Id rather carry 3 and get home then carry 4 and either not getting back to base or not getting all missiles off. And also you have 7 pylons but only 4 are capable of carrying Air-Ground Weapons. (Centerline is for external outer wing pylons are for Air-Air missiles only) But using low level flying and speed should give you a pretty good chance to avoid most missiles.

yes but the TIR message just means you are in range. It does not mean the missile has locked on a target. So just follow the same procedure as you would without having a radar lock. Put the target on the Cross in the upper middle of the hud untill you get a good tone and at that point if you are within range etc launch.

Yea. The teasing of the New Mig-29 Visual model has me thinking it might not be "too" far away. And i cant wait for the Mig-29 do get its New Visual model as well as its new FM. Since of all the FC-3 fighters the Mig-29 is the one i like the most so would be nice for it to get some love finally.

Well are you sure that is a bug? Is the ASP supposed to have Calculated Impact points for the cannon in the Air-ground mode (as its a pretty early system im leaning towards a probable no) It might be one of those early sights where you manually have to adjust the sight deflection depending on speed ,range and dive angle.

But even Brazilian F-5Es did not come with the ability to carry 4 Air-Air missiles as standard. And if some Brazilian F-5Es did have the ability to carry 4 missiles before the EM modernisation then it must have been done with a seperate upgrade soon before (as it was a upgrade that was not available untill atleast the early 21st century)

As others have already stated. Even with the radar on (and a radar lock) you still need to get a boresight lock (putting the target right infront of the seekerhead untill it sees the target) Only difference with having a radar lock is that it gives you range information. When we get the ability to slave the seekerhead to the radar things will be different but atm you always need to put the enemy on the boresight for the missile to see him. and a radar lock does not effect that.

It was a change that was done when it was given its new 6DOF cockpit. IRL it seems the Mig-29 only has that Hud repeater mode for the display and does not have the Data link mode it had before. So this was changed to limit it to the Realistic Mode. So this is intentional and Realistic. (atleast from what i and fellow forum members have been able to gather)

Well also the Gr.3 is a whole different machine (and it has a different nose mounter seeker system) so its completely different from the AN/ASB-19 carried on the Gr.5(Gr.7 and Gr.9) or Av-8B. The Gr.3 carried the Ferranti 106 and it only had a laser range finder + Laser tracker and not a Camera system as well like the AN/ASB-19. But they were very different systems. And also the Gr.3 pilots were well aware that the Laser tracker was unable to guide LGBs (as its a very different system and was never intended or thought to be able to lase for LGBs) and in the Falklands campaign they relied on Troops on the ground designating targets for them. And it could be Litening compatible depending on what Date of AV-8B NA they decide on simulating. If they want to simulate it as it would have been equipped in the 1990s then it probably wont have a TGP but later then that it should have it. So while the IRL AV-8B NA can use the Litening it did not do so from day one. So we will have to wait and see.

And also im pretty sure (from what we have heard) that they are ALOT further along then that. So if / When we see pictures from the viggen it wont just be a early Model =P. I foresee it probably being mostly finished visually (with most likely most current work being FM/System related + Polishing / Optimising)

Indeed. And that is why no matter ones initial opinion you should always try giving a module a chance (first by looking at videos talking to ppl that have it if that does not put you off then buy and try it) As my mother told me a thousand times when i was a kid. I cant say i dont like it if i have never tried it ^^.

the AN/ASB-19 (nose mounted sensor/optic) is not able to Lase (as has already been stated) It has a Automatic Laser Scanner that will scan the area covered by the TV camera and look for any spots that are targeted by a Laser. So if there is a Targeting laser (either Ground or Aircraft Based Laser) designating a target or point of ground then the Scanner will see it and can automatically lock onto the designated target. But it can not lase itself. And the Pilot can use the TV Camera Part of the AN/ASB-19 to look around for targets (and lock/track them once a target has been found) and it can be used together with the AGM-65s (atleast to find targets dont know if it can slave the AGM-65 seeker to the target) but mostly its used to aid with the use of unguided munitions (Rockets,Bombs,Guns etc) by finding / designating a target on the hud and giving accurate range information/calculating targeting solutions. but to guide Laser guided munitions it will either require a Targeting Pod or a buddy lase (JTAC or otherwise). Some informations about the AN/ASB-19 can be found in the PDF below for those interested There is also a WIKI page for the AN/ASB-19 for some more info in addition to the PDF. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/ASB-19 NN0533.pdf

Yea the Centerline Gunpod was only used for some of the earlier Gun less Mig-21 Variants and Thus when the Mig-21 got the Internal gun it was no longer needed. And the link you posted Specifies that the Gunpod is on a Mig-21PFM (that has no Internal gun but could carry the GP-9 Centerline Gunpod) And if you look at the list at the top it also lists what Mig-21 variants could use that Gunpod. And the Mig-21Bis could not carry this Gunpod. Since it has a Internal gunpod there are no mountings (or wiring) for the gunpod and also where would the gunpod be placed? as the location it was mounted on the Mig-21s that carried the gunpod is now where the Internal gun is placed.

What joystick do you have?

Yea this would be a very nice munition to have ingame. It would be perfect for light armored vehicles (letting you save AGM-65s for heavier armor) as any type of BMP/BTR or Arty vehicle would probably be no problem for one of these guided rockets. (Its just a modified Hydra 70 with Canards and Laser seekers) It uses the same warheads,fuses and rocket engines as normal Hydra 70s (with a guidance section including the canards being mounted between the warhead/Fuse section and the Rocket section) And im just suprised a munition like this had not been developed and adopted earlier as it feel like such an obvious solution (and its a perfect weapon for the kind of fighting that the US has done so much of since 1991) And i would be surprised if this weapon system (or one like it) does not become common place either within nato or world wide (with the russians most likely developing something similar for their 80mm rockets) As its Cheap (as you can just modify existing rockets or buy new once as they rather cheap compared to other weapon types) And very effective against small targets that you might not want to waste a LGB or AGM-65 against (or other expensive guided munitions).

Well its simply down to Preference why im not that interested in the F-14 and reasons why i like the F-5E. First. I dont really like large / heavy fighters but prefer small and nimble fighters. F-5E - F-14 1 - 0 I dont really like / want a Two seat fighter but prefer a single seat one. F-5E - F-14 2 - 0 I want a 1970s fighter that would make for a good opponent for the mig-21Bis F-5E - F-14 3 - 0 I prefer a land based aircraft over a Carrier Based one. F-5E - F-14 4 - 0 and some more points. And also there is the Fact that the F-5E is my Favorite Jet aircraft ever made by the US so its an aircraft ive always liked. I understand the ppl that do want the F-14 (and many of my friends are amongst them) And i certainly wont try to tell anybody not to get the F-14 if they want it. Its just not a fighter for me and thats the simple reason why im not sure i will get it. And If i were to get the F-14 it would only be if my friends wanted me to be a RIO for them and then i would get it in order to play with my friends and not to fly it alone. But the F-5E is something i will buy for me to enjoy and not for my friends sake. And i foresee a large number of F-5E vs Mig-21 Servers will appear in MP when the F-5E comes out which will allow for good fun with old school fighters (and is where both of those fighters will be the most enjoyable in the fighter role atleast) If you want to go Head to Head with the FC-3 Fighters on the 104th server then yes the F-14 is better suited. But if you want to do som dogfighting in 1970s jets the F-5E will be tons of fun. And if you want to do light strikes with the F-5E the 104th will still be enjoyable (since with some training and learning the operational procedures and range/dive angle calculations bombing with the F-5E should be pretty accurate since accurate bombing existed long before CCIP and CCRP bombing came around. And the F-5E will still be a very deadly fighter up close even against more modern fighters. (as the US Navy F-5E/N aggressor aircraft have proven for many many years)

But then again the F-16A was much more expensive. And many customers kept getting the F-5E even after the F-16A was available . the F-16 in the 80s cost around 5-6 times that of a F-5E. And what would you rather have as an airforce? 10 F-16As or 50+ F-5Es? the F-5E was from the outset designed as a cheap affordable export fighter and was never designed to be top of the line (just good enough to get the job done while keeping a low price tag and being very cheap and easy to maintain etc) while the F-16A was a Top of the line aircraft. I could try to make you guys more familiar with the systems of the F-5E and its Pros and cons but we really should bring that discussion over to the F-5E Threads.

The F-14 is much further away then that (only word ive seen so far has said either late this year or "early" next year)

And at that point only the edges of your cone is scanning those altitudes. so at closer ranges you really need to play around with the Radar Elevation to make sure you see everything within range.

So just because an aircraft only has 2x Air-air missiles its a Trainer? Even if it only has 2x Aim-9s its still a very capable (the 70s/80s) little multirole with the abillity to carry a very decent bomb load (greater then the Mig-29 or Mirage 2000) And it also comes down to this. Just because you dont think its worth your money does not mean everybody else comes down to the same conclusion. If you dont think its worth your money due not suiting your playstyle etc then dont buy it. But dont tell someone who wants to buy it not to just because of that, if they think its worth their money then let them. Just like i wont buy the F-14 because its not an of aircraft im interested in and id rather spend my money on other aircraft (like the AJS 37,F-5E and F-18C) But that does not mean i will tell anybody who is interested in it not to buy it or question them as to why they would want it. We all have to make our own decision as to what we think is worth our money. But we cant make that decision for others as they might very well have other desires / Criteria as to what they want in a module.

So just because you only care about Dollar for capability you will only buy the most capable products capable. But thats you. Most ppl dont share that view. And also in a slight Irony... Dollar For Capacity is the exact reason why the F-5E (and the F-5 in general) became such a hit all over the world as a affordable Multi-role aircraft. Since at the time (1970s-1990s) it could do much (if not most) of what more advanced aircraft like the F-16A could but at a Fraction of the cost. But lets bring this back on Topic and about the F-14.