Kev2go

Also a shame in DCS we don't have quite the right block of F16C for 31st fighter wing stationed in Aviano. They had block 40's in the 90s and i think even to present day still do.

Ah yes "altis" and "stratis" from Arma 3

CMWS would definitely be documented in a later then 2009 operators manual. Although i failed to find a newer iteration of the operators manual , I did come across an UH60A/L intermediate aviation maintenance manual dated may 2014. CMWS configuration is listed and has a associated diagram where the new panels should be located in the cockpit. Cyclic grip is modified to include a manual flare dispense button. So yeah if a post 2009 maintenance manual covers cmws config I would imagine same would be for a more recent publication of uh60a/L operators manual if I was able to find it.

Exactly manuals normally account for stuff that aren't one off field mods. Ie a single uh1h aviation company carried a ircm on 1 deploymeny to el slavador but never again. Or how a small number of oh58d in operation prime chance were field testing a wip weapons system but the oh58d 1988 manual doesn't include kiowa warrior armed upgrades because it wasn't officially adopted and standardized until post cold war hence you need to look at later 1990s manuals to see weapons systems operation. So unless cmws was similar field mod/ early combat evaluation status on uh60a/L until 2009 i dont see why manual wouldnt account for it. Yes and these varying mix of features are normally documented. Ie the 2009 manual accounts for uh60a and L with different engine options including additional charts for 701D engines which debuted with UH60M Or maybe the developers simply made the choice to model a non cmws uh60L? Not having cmws isn't innacurate since not all birds had it even in the context of a 2005-2009 timeframe vs more recent period. The countermeasures panel you see on center panel within the UH60L community mod dates back to at least the 1980s. You can look at the 1988 manual and see how that panel is configured in a cold war era UH60A No but it's implentation is always going to be different since the other birds that have cmws are digital anyways and not analog like uh60L . Cmws implementation is not identical between aircraft that have them better to just have documentation of it rather then play guesswork and have some frankenstein interpertation So this means a later then 2009 iteration of the uh60a/L manual(s) needs to be found. Or some other supplemental documentation.

If it was available as early as 2005 then why isnt CMWS referenced within the published manuals for Uh60A/L? The Only changes i noticed when comparing the sept 25th 2009 UH60A/L publication compared to the earlier 1996 ( revised 2002) publication are replacement of AN/ASN128B with AN/ASN128D and additional performance charts for then new GE 701D engines for UH60A+ and UH60L. Cmws on the other hand referenced and described in the Uh60M operators manual. I would of expected the same with the Uh60A/L. So if there is no documentation available on how CMWS is integrated in a circa 2005-2009 UH60L how you could expect it to be modelled even if mod team had access to a SDK like 3rd parties do?

Perhaps post 2009 iterations of the uh60L had auto disperse, but not the the one represented via community mod since It is certainly a pre cmws bird. I can assume cmws addon for uh60L must be post 2009 refit as that's the latest manual I could find via google search and such system was still absent.

yeah don't feel incompetent for losing to Mig29's. It is a completely different generation of aircraft. better radar. better missiles, better raw performance and maneuverability. The only thing the phantom has going for it more loiter time and a larger payload in terms of ordinance quantity, but in general the odds are highly stacked against you. IF your flying in 1980s era cold war multiplayer servers that have lots Mig29's as Red air treat the F4E as a fighter past its prime that is instead relegated to bomb truck roles. however in Air to surface department it has limitations compared to aircraft of that time frame which i think will be addressed when a later variant of F4E refitted with DMAS is eventually added enhancing the phantoms air to surface capabilities.

Not really? In that video That fcr page looks about the same from what I remember in dcs f16, except of course the dcs Viper has color displays. The general software layout has been maintained. My experience flying earlier block f16s virtually pretty much validates what I'm saying that it's a very similar experience. You could hop in a block 30 and only really need to account some older HUD symbology ( if its ODS era or older) and getting used to not having newer features you had on the blk 50, namely lack of , HMD , datalink , and targeting pod.

IS the APG 68 v1 that much different the v5? not in terms of hardware but as far as user interface goes from footage i saw FCR page looks very similar if not identical for A2A/A2G modes. similarly just like the APG 66 v2 on F16A MLU jets the FCR functions all looked like APG68V5 minus the Enhanced ground mode which V5 didn't have which makes me think ED used the MLU manuals floating on the internet as one of thier sources for F16C block 50 module but i digress.

did block 30's get retrofitted with the V5 eventually? or did they continue to retain the v1 well into the 90s or even 2000s?

To offer some feedback the blackhawk canopy glass causes reflections at night. It makes it more difficult on the eyes to fly with Night vision goggles compared to other modules. I don't know if that can be adjusted but i hope it can.

Just like you found a MH60K manual floating around online a UH60M manual is out there. think I saw one on coursehero. I will agree that the MH60k despite being a older bird has more advanced features such as a multi mode radar and FliR . Better firepower too. MH60's can mount M134 miniguns for the door gunners where as conventional army aviation only had M60 or M240 machineguns for their Blackhawks. The only advantage that comes to mind with Uh60M is the blueforce tracker integration for situational awareness and more power with GE-701D engines. But this isn't surprising the 160th soar had typically have more sophisticated variants of helicopters that regular army aviation uses. Ie compare features described in the aforementioned 1994 mh60k manual to Uh60L manuals in the a similar timeframe. Limas are almost entirely analog. Edit: As for the film blackhawk down I thought those were mh60L? I recall from the brief cockpit shots that were shown in the film it looked like Mh60L interior shown here:

Not to take away from your point about Northern plains being a more likely alternative then Fulda but the entire plan of 7 days to River Rhine is very fanciful. It seems very improbable to expect to reach the Rhine in a mere 7 days even with the use of nuclear strikes against Nato forces stationed in Germany ( with the added caveat it was in response to a 1st strike by Nato) , let alone to push past West German Border and reach Paris in another 7 days. Somehow i find it difficult to believe that a Soviet Spearhead through western Germany would outdo the pace of Hitlers blitzkrieg into France. IT comes off as a "bridge too far" type of scenario if played out. Plus it also depends what year a cold war gone hot scenario is entertained. The further you push into the 1980s the less favorable things look for the USSR having hope in besting Nato. The further into the decade USSR has to contend with US forces gradually becoming technologically superior along with quality of US army being brought back into a 1st rate fighting force (" army of excellence" program correcting the post Vietnam woes). The USSR has having more issues of its own with its declining economy and the questionability of warsaw pact ally readiness not to mention the politics shifting towards Detente in 1985 with Gorbachov at the helm thus further reducing the probability of any hot war scenario. But had the soviets treated central Germany as a sideshow and focused on cutting off sea ports wouldn't this mean that REFORGER units and supplies could still be airlifted to airbases like Ramstein? I read that Reforger units had thier vehicle in storage pre positioned in various places because it would take too long to ship entire Mechanized and Tank brigades from stateside. So the plan was to airlift the crews into Germany and then once in country they would be sent to POMCUS facilities to retrieve their vehicles then move out to reinforce the frontlines. OF course the simple answer is you cant maintain enough pressure Northern Germany and Fulda just Nuke the airfields so this doesn't happen, but then that would force escalatory response from Nato.

Not necessarily. this isnt the 1950s timeframe.

Its a bit misleading to only ever consider the US air force units pre positioned in Europe on a permanent basis Unless its under the expectation that either victory or ceasefire between 2 sides will end a conflict after a extremely short duration, you have to recall the # concept of reforger. Whilst there was only 3 F15C squadrons in West Germany as part of 36th Fighter wing in Bitburg AFB, There was a 4th F15 squadron , 32nd TFS stationed in Soesterberg AFB in Holland. 9th Air force had priority to send its assets to Europe IF things actually kicked off against Warpact. as part of 9th airforce Langley AFB had 1st tactical fighter Wing ( 27th, 71st, and 94 TFS) and at Eglin AFB 33rd Tactical Fighter wing ( 58th, 59th, 60tth TFS) that were equipped with F15'Cs. As part of 12th Air force the 49th fighter wing ( 7th , 8th, 9th TFS) at Holloman AFB was equipped with F15A's and those had instructions for Europe in event of war as well. So in total that's 9 additional F15 squadrons that were almost certainly going be seeing deployment to reinforce the aforementioned 4 squadrons stationed in Europe.

the flight model changed alot in 2.0 and feels much more responsive but also feels as if the helicopter has much more lift as well. Was the older Uh60L mod flight model simply underpowered for the GE 701C engines? or is this a Uh60L updated to reflect a Uh60L reffited with GE 701D engines ? IF so the choice of pilot model reflecting contemporary period uniforms would make sense as opposed to early GWOT period when olive green flight suits were still worn.

I think its fair to assume the F16CM and F/A18 L2 pods are based on litening 2 AT ( or at least the l2 ER. The L2 AT based on public sources is basically just an ER with improved datalinking functions) even if its not explicitly stated in the manual. just becuase functionality wise they all have 2 levels of FOV and 9 levels of digital zoom. Razbams av8b Litening2 pod isnt called the Litening 2 G4 but we can deduce its that particular model from the additional features it has compared to the old litening 2 pod which had the same limitations as L2 pod all those other modules.

For me PiP mode is a gimmick that adds unessesary complexity Lack of a wide fov in tv mode makes it less usefull for loitering overtop targets for CAS. This something rl pilots have said litening 2 is better at. Except of course without the degraded image there is no incentive to use sniper over litening except maybe or a2a or if you really want multi target track.

Snipers TV mode has better resolution then its FLIR yes but it only has 1 FOV if you don't count the additional XR processing. which is unfortunate.

even without using any of x1-4 level of zoom on the Sniper pod. the image quality on Narrow FOV still feels lackluster. In its current implementation The only quality image IMO is with XR processing mode but it requires an area or point track and multiple seconds for the image to process so it cannot be slewn around all the time without the image looking like a blurry mess.

the 4x4 MFD is supposed to be 524x524 not 256x256. https://www.astronautics.com/pdf/product_brochures/F-16_4-Inch_MFD.pdf even so like these videos others have posted of MFD recordings ( so not stretched from recording software) i wouldn't be able to tell they were 500 something pixel image. when you have small displays you dont need as high resolution. anyone who has actually tried to sport any noticable difference for thier nakeyed between 1080p and 1440p on thier 7-8 inch smartphone screens will know this is true.

the CCD/ TV image quality of litening 2 G4 didnt improve based on public sources. IT was already 1024x1024 on litening 2 AT. with L2 G4 the FLIR resolution was improved to 1024x1024 to match the CCD resolution. so i dont see how allowing additional zoom levels would not keep the images blurry to the point of uselessness unless there is some under the hood similar to xr type processing going on.

if using anything past x4 zoom was useless why did the engineers even bother giving later models of the litening 2 even more digital zoom ( x16 on L2 G4 versus x9 on L2 AT) versus improving digitally enhanced zoom to look less pixelated within the existing 1 -9?

i personally think the GPS cutoff should be changed to an earlier date then 1994 at least for some platforms. the 1st gulf war is generally lauded as the first space war, due to the use of GPS aided navigation, even if it wasn't ubiquitous like it is today. A paper did mention that at least some F16C/D's ( i believes these would of been block 40's) were equipped with GPS receivers, and it did mention that in 1990-1991 3 additional satellites were launched to allow US forces 24/7 coverage in that particular region.

yeah this a core featurea that needed. ITs really lacking that in HSD page we dont see any information on Datalink contacts when cursor is hightling them or when selected in the HMD we are only given altitude and not any distance to target, Like someone pointed out even A10C and F/A18C have such features, so its not even setting a new bench mark by adding a feature never seen before.