Blaze1

I think the Raptor has an extendible radar reflector, which when deployed protrudes from underneath behind the weapons bay. If my memory is correct, it looks a little bit like a sausage on a stick.

Hi badger66 If you're referring to the cycle timer (the small bar that moves up and down on the right), my understanding is that it provides the pilot with visible feedback on how the system is operating. In a high threat environment with many emitters broadcasting, the cycle time will slow down indicating that it requires more time to process all the signals its receiving. I hope that helps

Hi John The AN/ALR-69 is supposed to work in the E to J bands with some C and D capability also. Some ATC radars operate in the L and S band, so it won't be able to pick those up. As bengo mentioned the ability to display ATC radars that are within its frequency domain (I mention display and not detect, as it should detect these emissions), will be down to how the software has been programmed and what mission files are currently loaded. As long as the system can recognise an ATC radar, it can be programmed to filter it out and not display it. On the off chance that an ATC radar functions in a way similar to a threat radar in search, the RWR will display its presence, either as an unknown emission or as an ambiguous emission. Cheers

Your not allowed to film the cockpit displays, or there is a process that must be followed, clearances to do so etc?

A tactic that may be used in real life, is to have two aircraft each using two different laser codes. LGBs on one aircraft are programmed to one set while the bombs on the other aircraft will receive the next set. Both aircraft release a bomb with a suitable interval between them. The first bomb picks up the initial laser code and guides to its target, as it hits the laser code is changed to that of the second bomb, which is than able to guide to the second target.

That seems plausible, as you mention care must be taken with bomb spacing and timing. :thumbup: If you find a link for that video let me know :). Cheers

I'm not completely positive about this, but I think in reality two LGBs would probably be dropped with differing laser codes, otherwise the second bomb would try to guide to the laser spot of the first and this might cause it to run out of energy before reaching its target.

The Az/El page for the APG-79 is actually very similar to that of the APG-73. The differences are the implimentation of electronic attack functions, to take advantage of traits specific to AESA radars and the radar Field of Regard curves. All the other options are pretty much available to APG-73 equipped Hornets with the latest software updates.

Thanks for the update Cali. The F-15E community seem to have been neglected of late with regards to upgrade, as a large proportion of the airforce budget appears to be aimed at the JSF and other platforms. The E's didn't even receive the APG-63v1 radar that the F-15C and Korean K use. The Singaporean F-15SG's have the APG-63v3 I believe, so its refreshing to seen the E with a new AESA radar, this has been a long time coming.:)

Yep. Many aircraft use this method to prevent engine stall when launching missiles.

Hi Stretch:) EW is usually an area that has plenty of scope for development for sim designers, but due to the classified nature of the systems being simulated, developers perhaps have to mainly build upon theory and any available reports on systems. As for the modes/indications you listed above, those aren't classified per se and really just indicated the status of the jammer as far as I know. Things such as the jamming mode and technique, the status of individual frequency bands (whether in standby or transmit), whether jamming or countermeasures dispensing is inhibited, if the pod is in receive mode etc are displayed.

As has already been mentioned, there is little on the A-10C that is classified, even the RWR isn't fully classified. As a clean aircraft I would guess that 99% of it is unclassified. The missile warning systems detection capabilities would be classified but not in terms of pilot operation. Operation of the RWR from a procedural standpoint is mostly unclassified, however there are details (mostly transparent from a pilot operation point of view) such frequencies and PRFs that are classified. Details on the function of the jammer e.g operating modes and performance is classified. Weapons performance including ranges, warhead effectiveness, seeker effectiveness are classified. Despite this there is still plenty of scope for ED to develope a very good simulation. As for the Litening pod I don't know if there is anything classified about it. The capability of it to track targets will be a function of the optics design and the algorithms embedded in the software. These technologies will certainly be export controlled and proprietary of Northrop Grumman.

Operational A-10's aren't cleared to fly with MERs, also I don't think the USAF use MERs any more.

My understanding is that the A-10C has CCIP and CCRP computed bomb delivery modes. Loft and toss aren't submodes but rather alternative methods of delivery through CCRP. I think its alittle like using CCIP for level and dive deliveries, the delivery mode is essentially the same, but the way the pilot commands the aircraft is different.

With the exception of the classified material, don't be so sure that ED won't get some of the other manuals it needs;).

Chappelle has more pitch in his voice. Hammer is definately Samuel L;)

:lol: Hi 'Samuel L' Looking forward to more 'furious anger' from those great training guides:thumbup: Cheers

I was wondering what all the commotion was about as I confused the Producers Notes for the Training Guides. I thought you were all jubilating over old news. The Training Guides look fantastic and should be a real aid in learning such a complex sim. BTW, I heard that Hammer was "a mushroom-cloud-layin' motherf$£"%r, motherf$£"%r! Everytime his fingers touch 30mm, he's Superfly T.N.T., he's the Guns of the Navarone!":smilewink:

According to article the PE upgrades began in 2006, but wasn't there a cockpit upgrade program prior to that date with the A-10A+?

I don't think so. The capability exists I'm sure, but I believe the display will only indicate threat azimuth. I think the F-35 will display both azimuth and elevation data, by providing threat symbology to the pilots HMDS.

Do you know when the cockpit upgrades began?

:thumbup:

AN/ALR-69. What do I win?;)

I've just be wondering, does anyone know if A-10A's with the original/similar specification cockpit to that seen here: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/95/Fairchild_Republic_A-10A_Thunderbolt_II_cockpit_2_USAF.jpg are still in service with the USAF?

Nice post mvsgas. I've never actually seen any footage of the inlet spike in action. The actuation mechanics look quite complex and in motion its almost as if the device is breathing.