Blaze1

Not sure if it's as quick and dirty as that Spurts. I think HB need a minimum level of technical information before they're prepared to model a system. I could be wrong, but I'm of the belief that HB's minimum level can be reached before venturing into the classified domain.

I disagree with the caveat that it would depend on the level of fidelity the developers are seeking to model. ED are developing the APG-73 and APG-68 for the Hornet and Viper respectively. Both radars are still in service and feature some classified modes of operation.

Excellent thread! Newer fighters such as the Rafale and Typhoon feature auto trim on the roll and yaw axis. I think the reason it may not have been done until then perhaps down to complexity and cost as Curly mentioned.

I think I may have a copy of the -34 somewhere. If memory serves me it's TO 1F-105B-34-1-1. The classified/formerly classified manuals would be TO 1F-105G-1, I believe this was previously titled TO 1F-105G-1A. These manuals dealt with systems used to employ the AGM-45 Shrike and AGM-78 Standard ARM (STARM). There's also TO 1F-105B-34-1-3, which covered classified weapons such as the Sidewinder. I'd be very surprised if all of those manuals haven't been declassified or wouldn't be with an FOIA or MDR.

Thanks.

Out of curiosity GGT, what were those problems?

While TO 1F-15E-25-1 Nuclear Weapon Delivery Manual, containing details of nuclear weapons programming is a classified manual, there are also unclassified supporting documents that describe the nuclear armament displays and switches.

Nice video Skip. The pilot used the emergency landing gear handle, so perhaps it was a hydraulic issue preventing normal landing gear extension.

The EPAWSS upgrade will see the adoption of the F-15SA/QA/EX etc style tail boom fairings:

Great info Curly!

Are there any APG-68(V)9 customers?

"STARSCREAM". You've got to love it.

I've just discovered this part of the forum, despite being a member for many years! I've got to say there's been some excellent information posted.

That won't be a problem.

It's strange how redundant descriptions/procedures are at times left in manuals even after numerous iterations.

I believe ED's source was the stores limitations section from the supplemental flight manual. This section proves carriage, jettison and delivery limits for the stores.

Very uncommon, the reason being is that the aircraft shown is the new F-15EX which will be taking over the C/D role, so the aircraft shown (initially at least) isn't a Mudhen. I'll edit the image to included the model.

F-15EX

Hi Talon Karde I'd have to disagree with the bolded part of your statement. While specific ECM techniques and the performance of said techniques when a applied to individual platforms is classified, there is plenty of information available about how "classic" ECM works.

The F-14 equivalent to the AFTTP is probably the tactical manual/s and while the F-14 did get NATIP manuals very late, I think it was a little too late for the Air NTTP (ANTTP) which is the navy/marine equivalent to the AFTTP. Regarding the TACMAN, it's possible that even the earliest versions (with AIM-54C technical data) are still classified. An FOIA request could be useful though, but it's likely Heatblur may have already tried or need a reference.

My understanding is that the difference between the SWIP and SWIP Block I aircraft, was that the former had the original metal wings, whereas the latter had composite wings. The SWIP Block IA was fitted with updated navigations systems and a new HUD, but it never entered service.

Interesting points GG.

I see. If the issue was just about discovering (from official sources) whether the AIM-54C used command inertial guidance, then that's easy, the info is out there. If finding out unequivocally whether the AWG-9 triggers the Phoenix's active radar, whether the missile does this autonomously or whether either could be the case depending on circumstance, is the unknown.

I think Naquaii said it was a no-go from the SMEs, otherwise I assume they'd have implemented it. Also what type of official documentation are we talking about and in what detail. If for example a NAVAIR website mentions the -54C using command inertial guidance in some brief description of the weapon, would that be acceptable or are Heatblur looking for detailed technical reports specifically?