Kev2go
-
Posts
3910 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Kev2go
-
-
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.
-
yeah it would be nice if this got added. RECCE pod interface is described in the F16 MLU Production Tape M3 pilots guide.
-
On 3/3/2025 at 5:08 AM, Dragon1-1 said:
Except "as real as it gets" is actually an appropriate description. The FC3 F-15 is said to be the best F-15 simulation out there, and that's true. Because the last non-ED F-15 sim on the market is Jane's F-15 from 1998. Not a high bar to clear. So it really doesn't get any better.
Of course, HB are aiming higher than that, and I agree, too. I don't want made up systems, I want the real stuff, modeled according to real physics and engineering.
Someone forgot about that 3 letter sim that used to only be f16's has a full fidelity f15 With datalink since late last year.
-
3
-
-
On 5/16/2025 at 1:45 PM, polosat1y said:
Belsimtek, before merging with ED, was working on the AH-1W. They even showed some cockpit screenshots, and there was a lot of discussion about it back in 2016 or so. It was even listed on their website.
I’d be really surprised if the next bluefor helicopter isn’t the AH-1.
i recall it was supposed to be the AH1F after BST had initially been toying with the idea of doing vietnam era AH1G for UH1H engine commonality or something, and being bummed that it wasnt AH1W. Then of course it was put on indefinite hold.
-
3
-
-
4 hours ago, Northstar98 said:
Agreed with all the above, though personally, I'd put more focus towards missing air defence equipment (Cold War-era MANPADS and radars).
One thing though:
The Chieftain Mk 3 in DCS isn't a Mk 3 - it has the ranging gun deleted, it has a laser rangefinder, MRS, an upgraded engine and the new NBC pack. If it was intended to be based on the Mk 3, that would make it a Mk. 7/L at least.
oh didnt take note of that just read the label. Dont know why they call it a mark 3 then if its retrofitted to a later standard even if it was formerly a mark 3 tank. i assumed the mark 3 was chosen becuase it was a tank that was sold to Iran and used in the Iran iraq war.
-
Given Cold War Germany i think a whole slew of ground assets are needed. Sure there are plenty of Anti Air assets that can fit for a 1980s time frame. but i think there is need to have 1980s Nato/Warpact Infantry and armored assets to fit the era.
Soviet Union/Russia
T55 within DCS is only really fitting for GDR, but in turn there is not an appropriate T72 variation for that faction. Should be T72M and/or T72M1. The T72B was not used by GDR. For Soviets the T72B object 1985 was in service before the end of the cold war but T72's were only used with Category B soviet army formations. They are lower readiness units ( 70 – 80%) that were either stationed in military districts in Russia or lesser important parts of Warpact, and were not deployed as part of Soviet Forces in Germany. All of such divisions were of "category A". 95% or higher readiness and equipped with better equipment. T72 was a mass mobilization tank replacement of T55, whereas Category A units as part of Soviet forces in Germany were either equipped with T64 or T80 tank variations which had previously replaced T62 tanks. Sure the T80U is in the asset list as well , but according to CFE treaty document of 1990 only 420 were in service " west of the urals" at the time but as far as i could tell they were not actually deployed to East Germany. In Contrast to the 617 T80BV's that were in service or the 3020 T80B's in that exact year. In short the T80U barely fits into the 1980s so earlier variations that were produced and put into service in earlier portion of the 1980s and in much higher numbers should be added.
BTR80 and BMP-2 are fitting for 1980s frame APC and IFV respectively but for an earlier portion of the 1980s Btr70 was also in service in this timeframe. Older model BTR like Btr60PB was still used by GDR so its also worth considering as a asset. BMP1 exists but a BMP-1P variation would also nice to have and fitting for early 80s.
The CWG trailer showed off Btr70 and the T62M ( a modernization of the T62 which from exterior can be discerned due to laser rangefinder and applique armor package on turret and upper front plate) , but this vehicle AFAIk was only issued to Soviet military districts in the far east and combat deployed in support of Soviet forces in Afghanistan conflict. So whilst period accurate for the 1980s its not part of Group of Soviet forces in Germany. Since the T62M like BTR70 was not part of the recent patch I can assume asset is not ready but will be added at some point in the future?
Soviet Motorized Infantry- early to late 80s, SSSH 68 helmet M69 pattern uniform. Ak74 rifle.
Soviet Airborne Infantry - SSH68 helmet options are M88 (afghanka) BDU, or KLMK oversuit, 6b2 or 6b3 body armor. AKS-74 rifle
The UK
Chieftain mk3 is in the assets but this is rather early variant for a 1980s timeframe. Cheiftan Mk10 and maybe Mk11 should be added for the UK along with the Challenger 1.
UK infantry 1980s - Mk6 helmet, DPM BDU, L85 rife.
The US Army
Humvee exists and the model looks like M1025 which can fit into the 1980s timeframe but could use with a 3d model update, but it is a very late cold war vehicle, being relevant for the 2nd half of the 1980s.
M151 jeep. prior to the humvee being put into service this was the non armored utility vehicle in service since the late 1950s. It is relevant for early to mid 1980s timeframe of the map.
Has M1A2 and M1A2C, which are anachronistic for the 1980s. M1A1 would probably be easiest model to make since the M1A2 existing model could be used as a basis for the M1A1. All the M1A1 3d model needs is the deletion of the CITV. Most M1A1’s produced had mounting ports for CITV so that part of the model could stay. Apart from that just maybe adjust some aspects of the Skin/ markings for the time period. M1A1 was produced since 1985 but not deployed in quantity until reforger 1988, so it’s a late 1980s service tank.
M1 ( 105mm) is also aught to be included for early 80s to late 80s. although i think M1A1 should be priority in being added first just because that asset would fit into 1990s scenarios such as GW1 and early GWOT period.
M2A2 Bradley exists as an asset. But they did not start being issued to units until FY1989. So like T80U it is a very tail end cold war vehicle that was not yet issued in substantial quanties. M2A1 or even initial M2 Bradley 3d model aught to be added for an earlier portion of the 1980s. Such earlier model bradleys did see use in 1990s conflict such as 1st gulf war, since US army had not converted its entire fleet to M2A2 standard yet even by 1991.
M113 exists as an asset but is dated and could do with a new model.
M60A3 already exist as an asset appropriate for the time period but is old 3d model and could do with updated model. Smoke dischargers are of the wrong sort for what the US army used in the 1980s so that would need fixing anyways.
US Infantry models – early 80s – M81 woodland pattern BDU, M1 steel helmet ( m81 cover), PASGT flak jacket or M69 Flak jacket , M16A1 rifle. ( note whilst 82nd Airborne had PASGT Helmet and PASGT vest in 1983 during invasion of Grenada, most other units in early 80s still had older gear or a mix of old and new during that transition period)
US infantry model- mid to late 80s - M81 BDU, PASGT helmet and PASGT flak vest, M16A2 rifle.
For West Germany Leopard 2a4 exist as an asset, but this a mid to late 1980s vehicle. Leopard 1a4 exists an asset and of course various Leopard 1 models were in service in the 1980s still making a notable portion of the armor forces, but Leopard 1A4 is an aged model that could do with a remake or new model.
West German Infantry - M62 helmet (very similar to US M1) Olive green BDU.and HK G3 battle rifle.
Sources on NAto and WARPACT Table of organization and equipment
https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/2426107/soviet-tanks-in-gsfg
https://www.scribd.com/doc/149485971/Nato-Order-of-Battle-1989
https://orbat.info/history/historical/nato/warsawpact.html
-
7
-
-
MH60L of course would be a far more versatile choice then Uh60L for DCS purposes because apart from more advanced avionics such as radar, FLIR, partial glass cockpit 160th SOAR can configure them as gunships, so it would give virtual pilots more to do than just slingload supplies or deliver troops with. But GL finding documentation on this particular variant needed to make a study sim level simulation.
-
2
-
-
On 3/4/2025 at 7:49 PM, Jackjack171 said:
I voted for the M. If done right, this could roll over to the MH-60S for the Navy. The current UH-60L mod painted in Navy colors, is kind of abhorrent to be honest (can't unsee that damned antenna) and the cockpit just doesn't cut it. I see that others have posted about the historical benefit of having the Lima and I get it. But the throwing of lipstick on a pig and calling it an MH-60R/S is just cringe. IMHO, if you want to talk versatility, then the UH-60M/MH-60S is the way to go.
BTW, in Black Hawk Down, the aircraft in the movie had a glass cockpit. Not sure about the IRL bird!IN black hawk down those were the Mh60L. the modified more advanced variant the 160th SOAR flew. The regular army UH60, the UH60L was basically just a UH60A with updated powertrain and more powerful engine. Although looking at the DCS UH60L mod its a 1996 or later version given the presense of AN/ASN-128B GPS doppler system and AN/ARC220 radio, and an/avs7 clip on monacle hud system for night vision.
-
3
-
-
If its the cobra i hope its the Ah1W not the Ah1F. Whiskey can still use TOW's for those who want an olderschool missile, but it can carry the Hellfires too. Plus wingtip Aim9's or AGM122 sidearm.
-
4
-
-
The L would be an L " badum tsss"
attempt at pun aside. I really do think Uh60M would fit better along what we have in terms of helos Like Ch47F,Ah46D and Oh58D all having glass cockpits.
-
1
-
-
On 1/24/2025 at 2:08 AM, evanf117 said:
as far as im aware our F-5E, being an F-5 that was sold to the Swiss and then bought back from them for aggressor's would have had the guns and radar removed, so i dont know why ED is trying this "realism" line when our F-5E still has a radar and functional guns
unless you have a different reference material then i do, the 2006 natops which covers F5E/F/N variants the F5N still has a radar installed with operation of APQ 159 described. Only some F5F's did not have radars installed and the above aforementioned manual has cockpit diagrams for radar and non radar installed F5F. The only thing missing from making it an F5N proper is the lack of digital radios and INS which is what the swiss had, which is noted in the manual to describe the difference between the F5N and the older F5E aggressors Navy had. There was no explicit mention of removal of guns, and the manual still had diagrams of how they are installed, and instruction on how to do aerial gunnery with with the gunsight and/or aid of radar.
-
On 1/24/2025 at 9:00 AM, Dragon1-1 said:
It's more or less same deal as INS vs. EGI in the Viper. The specific Viper we have has the INS, but many jets in that time period had an EGI already.
It would be nice to be able to remove Link-16 and JHMCS. GPS can be removed by setting your mission to an appropriate date, AIM-9X can be restricted in the loadout, while JHMCS can be swapped for NVGs by the player, but I don't think this can be forced.
sure GPS updating can be removed by date forcing nav system to fallback to INS only, but the new nav system can't be removed ( unless ED plans to do both variants). The pre EGI jets have different nav system with a different physical panel.
-
2
-
-
On 1/20/2025 at 3:54 PM, Raven (Elysian Angel) said:
Yes, but I understand resources are limited so that's why I asked what the cockpit differences are. The F-15E having EGI didn't bother me since you can set the mission date at a point where no GPS is available - perhaps I simply don't know enough about the real aircraft but I never noticed anything in the cockpit (panels etc) that looked out-of-place for an early-'90s bird - luckily we had the older UFC at launch.
So if the cockpit of the MSIP II F-15C was exactly the same between late '80s and mid-2000s (and that seems to be the case), simple checkboxes in Special Options can achieve something that would otherwise take a new cockpit with certain panels removed and/or moved around.with the exception of the flight stick yea. looks about the same.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, draconus said:
Please don't spread misinformation. Current FC F-15C radar take into consideration: mode, gimbal limits, antenna momentary direction, range, target RCS, radar PRF, target aspect (relative speed, doppler gate), looking up/down differentiation, ground clutter (notching)... but it lacks some modes (ex. supersearch), fake targets, etc.
He has point the F15C radar has fixed detection ranges in the sense it doesn't take into account probability of detection.
Unless somethings changed recently and i missed it in the patch notes.
-
1
-
-
On 1/19/2025 at 8:01 AM, Raven (Elysian Angel) said:
No it’s due to RAZBAM’s decision to model an early iteration first and then slowly incorporate more functionality and more modern systems (digital UFC, newer TPOD etc) as they progress through early access. And it was that process that was indeed interrupted.
But I applaud the approach they took and I wish ED would follow suit: start with an early ‘90s version first and then add in the shiny toys while allowing people the choice which era they wish to represent through Special Options.
Yes, exactly. In the end that’s what a lot of people here care deeply about: proper context outweighs having the latest toys.
I get what your saying but F15e that razbam was modelling wasnt even all that early. Like day 1 ea. The f15e variant came with egi navigation suite. So that alone made it unsuitable for gulf era, unless you turned off the gps within the ufc functions, and then just kept in mind armament limitations for 1st gulf war.
Suite 4 + was supposed to be the baseline. And this was a circa 2003-2005 era aircraft. At a time when it got datalink and jdam integration( with plus version) with features from later iterations that were planned to be added down the line. Of course not all baseline suite 4 features got a chance to be completed but that another topic.
But to get back to your point of course the ideal solution to make everyone happy is either having multiple iterations of the f15c ( eg msip 2 circa gw1 and a msip 2 late) or having a checkbox what features are enabled or not
-
1
-
-
21 hours ago, mkellytx said:
The Israeli's seemed to like the CCIP well enough to use it quite a bit. It's also pretty interesting that the Gray Eagle pics with Mk84's and FAST packs were at Elmendorf and Kadena. I can see how in the CW gone hot in Europe how the PACAF guys would maintain that capability.
As for DCS, I'm okay with not getting the capability day one, but think it would add a lot when maps included some of the more well-known historical missions where the capability was/would be used.
IF you want to cite missions like the Iranian reactor strike its worth recalling for the sake of context the timeframe and version of F15 used. Israelis had only the F15A at the time, and when most aircraft didn't have targeting pods, precision guided muntions, or a good enough a/g radar, ccip delivery of unguided bombs was fine.
Circa 2005, having only unguided bombs utilizing ccip or cdip makes you more limited, and is no longer considered the peak of a/g bombing capabilities. It of course is still nice to have then just a pure a/a platform.
Even though in the usaf bombing in the eagle wasn't done, I'd think an f15c would have better bombing ability then the f15a just due to assumption it will have sarmap capability. According to f15's radar development roadmap apg63 psp was supposed to get " high resolution" radar map in 1987. In turn according to forecast international they stated apg63v1 carried over operational modes of the apg70.
So I don't know for certain if the usaf detuned the air to ground capabilities of apg63v1 given f15c's missions is air to air or if strike eagle tier sarmap resolutions were retained, but the implication of what I read from forecast international seems to to impy the latter.
Of course i haven't found a recent enough manual from time frame of apg63v1 was in use to self verify with certainty that's the case.
-
2
-
-
28 minutes ago, bies said:
MSIP II started in 1985, not 100% of the fleet has been upgraded instantly, first in Europe. Before 1985, original F-15C had obviously original old stick. Non-MSIP II Eagles were used by National Guard quite some time after 1985.
I don't think the old f15c photo I shared was a non msip 2 bird since it has mpcd.
No what I mean is original msip 2 birds didnt have have advanced stick. I think It's a 1990s upgrade to the msip 2. There are various in incremental changes that don't differentiate an original 1985 msip 2 versus a post gulf war version terms of nomenclature but in terms of functionality some stuff like flight stick got replaced later.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Also not sure how prevelant ins+gps or egi was circa 2005.
I found some photos from a 2008 airshow and this f15c still has the original ins panel.
Maybe not all birds had it?
https://www.airliners.net/photo/USA-Air-Force/McDonnell-Douglas-F-15C-Eagle/1370483
https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/6288723
-
2
-
-
On 1/17/2025 at 2:19 AM, bies said:
Please make also late Cold War/Desert Storm original 1985-2004 MISP II - either as separate variant or at least as selectable tick in editor - removing Link-16, JHMCS, GPS-nav, AIM-9X, few APG-63v(1) functions. To fit Iraq map Desert Storm and Fulda Gap divided Germany map as we already have all the proper era enviromet, and AI air/ground/sea assets from late Cold War. And both sides, NATO and Soviets/WarPac flayable modules. And as it was the most important part of F-15C career.
To be a counterpart for 1980s MiG-29 9.12 Fulcrum and all other late Cold War DCS modules like Tornado IDS, A-6 Intruder, A-7 Corsair, Su-17, MiG-21bis, Mirage F.1, Tomcat, Mi-24 Hind, Gazelle L, Bo-105, Kfir, FC3 Su-27S, Su-25A etc.
Already in 1985 F-15C MSIP II received Programmable Armament Control Set (PACS), Multi-Purpose Color Display (MPCD), AN-ALR-56C RWR, AN/ALE-45 Chaff/Flare Dispenser, TWS radar mode, Non-Cooperative Target Recognition (NCTR), AIM-120A integration and wiring, new F-15 Advanced Control Stick Grip (ACSG) etc., cockpit already looks the same as mid-2000s, so adding this variant would be relatively easy, just removing few newer things.
⁹
I'm not sure if the new stick grip was added initially. The 1980s manuals I've seen have msip as having original stick grip like in this photo
-
2
-
-
On 1/17/2025 at 10:25 AM, Harlikwin said:
And we have the F15E for A/G.
For now. F15E may as well be abandonware if the ed razbam dispute is not resolved. Forget about even getting it feature complete out of EA. Right now even basic bug fixes and maintenance aren't even being done on it. There's no guarantee a future patch won't break the jet at some point.
So if anything this just leaves an A/G gap left for the eagle as a platform. Having only dumb bombs won't allow f15c do everything a f15e would but the versatility is welcomed. The more versatile an airframe the more enticing it is to a broader audience. Aka more sales.
-
2
-
-
9 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:
Warthog pilots do train for air to air, though, and the systems for this are modeled in DCS. It's not an air superiority fighter, but neither is it an easy kill. It can also hunt helicopters and other slow movers, and is in fact better suited to it than the Eaglejet, for which helo hunting can be bit of a white knuckle affair. We get Sidewinders and the funnel gunsight, even including the training mode (check out the Iron Flag campaign to have some fun with it), so we should get bombs on the Eagle.
It also makes sense from to have a module have more versatility. Having a/g even if it's just dumb bombs using ccip/Crrp would still be nice to have. But I'm guessing apg63v1 will have some form of sarmapping which would allow greater usability for dumb bombs
If it's documented in dash 34 they are using then I hope to see it simulated.
-
1
-
-
if A/G capability is in the manual it aught to be modelled. Pretty sure F14A never actually saw use in combat with dumb bombs or zunis either.
-
7
-
-
17 minutes ago, KarateCriminal said:
There were 2 data link systems installed in the F-15. The JTIDS system which the mentioned 390th aircraft got. The rest of the fleet got the lower cost Fighter Data Link. I think you are mistaking the V1 and the V2. The V2 was an initial AESA which only about 18 of the Alaska based F-15s got. The rest were upgraded to the V1. Late production 15Cs got the APG-70 but these were replaced with the 63V1 to free up the parts for use in the Strike Eagle
im not mistaking anything I am just working under assumption we are getting APG63 v1 and not AESA Apg63 v2, and therefore am expecting JTIDS system. The other 3 lettered sim's F15C manual references theirs as the JTID eagles. The Sit page format is similar to F15E's FDL Sit page.
-
1 hour ago, KarateCriminal said:
Only a handful of jets got V2 (around 18 if I recall). V3 is just a bit too new for the year we are getting. Would be amazing though.
apparently only squadron with APG63V1 and datalink was the 390th from Idaho. 20 aircraft.
https://skytrailer.nl/eagle-squadrons/390th-fighter-squadron/
Navigation updating with FIX taking - question (pre GPS era testing)
in DCS: F-16C Viper
Posted · Edited by Kev2go
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.