Kev2go

p4/5 arent rear aspect anymore. they are using all aspect seeker heads. So yes whilst you have older generation rocket motor and still have Aim9P body aerodynamics. the p4/5 have all aspect seeker heads. from what i read P4 is based on Aim9L seeker head, wheras the p5 has Aim9M seeker tech with improved flare resistance. not sure what exact color schemes the p4 or p5 should have if it varies from year to year since there seems to be variation, the only reliable way to tell is to have a close enough look at the tip of the missile to distnguish via more pointy seeker head, and maybe the color of missile head. aim9p4 Aim9P5 p4 or p5 http://thecombatworkshop.blogspot.com/2017/10/sidewinder-overview-part-iv-aim-9jnp.html

either way that is still a big upgrade over what we have EXP3 of the F/A18, where in DCS even at under 10NM an aircraft parked on the runway is just going to look like a blob again not sure what distance this SARmap is made it is but this clip from gulf war era you can indeed make out aircraft shapes on this APG70 sar map recording. jelCkVe.mp4

If we are getting a late model phantom such as dmas modded version included , I'd expect it should be capable of arming all aspect winders. Considering they served till the 90s. According to documentation all aspect aim9p4/p5 is compatible with same aero3b launchers that rear aspect aim9p( and earlier are mounted on) . And also lau105s documented for aim9l/m in F4E manuals. Sounds like it would of been quite limited in combat given that even mig21,s were getting r60m, if that was the case, although i think muntions are generally included in DCS regardless of how common or uncommon it was as long as its documented. in 2005. Hornets would no longer be using AGM62. and virtually no Hornet would have ATFLIR given thier low availability at the time and prioritization for Super Hornets. Also an image of a f4g with Aim7F Same a2a weapons capability as the f4e.

although Il happily be using Aim9P4/5 or Aim9L/M for general multiplayer servers

In theory 184 Long should be capable of jamming low band low frequency radars. So for Example a EWR like the P12 should be jammable. Though i havent tested to see if there is any noticable difference.

none of the USAF F4's ever got pulse doppler radars AFAIK. They retired with some updated version of AN/APQ 120 pulse radar. Only navy phantom F4J/S had that with the APG59/AWG10 series.

Really would it still be? i dont want to hear how the F4G is too classified when its now obsolete technology, when it been retired this long and when it was replaced by F16C block 50's, and when HTS became integrated. blk 50s became a proper SEAD platform, which of course we have as a module in DCS, and especially when today the F35's EW capability massively suprass those of the F16 , and its potential for SEAD is only limited by not having harms

SO heatblur doesn't clarify the block of by DMAS modified phantoms... but that would mean a F4E block 48 or later, since according to the Technical order 1F4E 626 ECP mod 2917 was only applied to aircraft 71-237 to 74-1653 which also means the TISEO EO sensor in the wing. So is it safe to assume the DMAS modified phantom will be F4E block 53 that Belsimtek had planned?

welp its official

so this particular aaa has been added into DCS but i havent noticed ED add a Radar director for it

After an F4E block 53? Maybe a F4J and/or F4S phantom ( besides being a naval version has a PD radar) but otherwise thats it.

yeah i think i will do that. ED needs to do some adjusting on thier end with how CCD mode currently is.

Yes i know thus they basically have super hornet avionics. they have the UFCD. and the lower AMPCD is the larger type in use, both of which are on the Super Hornets. The only legacy avionics thing that remains is the older F/A18C IFEI panel versus the Super Hornets new EFD display for its specific engines the DDI's are of the sort used on the F/A18A++ Hornets of the USMC, however they don't display symbology and alphanumeric in grey/white. Still use Green Font, even though the displays are technically full color capable like AMPCD. So if tere is any lack of ability of displaying a moving map on these newer DDI's. It is likely a software limitation not a technical limitation of a display.

i hope its the F4E. Besides a F4E block 53 was what belsimtek was working on before that project got put on pause. Better to do that ( even if you start 3d and system modelling) from scratch because of documentation research being already done, and SME they would have already been in contact with, are available.

So so for the A10C and F/A18C depending on the maps that have scaling issues. Syria: I know for example the Hornet isn't supposed to display a moving map beyond 40NM setting as per its documentation. But it doesn't do so for any of the moving maps save for at 10 and 5 nautical miles on Syria. And its supposed to because the map is just a blue screen The A10C II only displays the Moving map on 10 and 20 nautical miles on he Syria map, which also otherwise emits a blue screen. Marianas : F/A18C hornet : Map only works on 10 and 5 nautical miles A10C II : 5, 10 and 20 nautical miles Nevada NTTR Map: Fine for the A10C II, all ranges, F/A18C: Moving map displays at 40NM, 20NM, and 5 Nautical miles. for some reason 10 NM mark it is again a blue screen Persian Gulf F/A18C : display moving map at 40 - 10 NM, At 5 nm blue screen A10C II : all ranges except 5 nautical miles Caucasus map = Fine A10C moving map works 5 through to 160 Nautical miles. F/A18C : at 40NM and below

yea that would be awesome

its documented in the A10C dash 1 manual in a 2012 publication. ( its still up on scribd) Having the ability to delete markpoints certainly would no longer be a anachronistic feature if we have Hog with Scorpion HMD, as that came in 2013.

actually i realized its not so much the displaying in greenscale vs greyscale as i thought For whatever reason since the last few updates the EO mode of targeting pods redering are so bright by default that i just cant read information on them unless i drastically adjust brightness knobs It always wasn't like this

indeed. Disapointing that ED cant even be bothered to include SAM threat rings into the A10C TAD page when that TAD feature isnt even needed to be SADL dependent but based on pre planned information like you already have included in other modules like Viper and Hornet.

Even though this display type is more akin to a Super Hornet Im gonna go to using this mod because I find it harder to view FLIR page from the Hornets old DDI's. versus other modules that have LCD colour displays with FLIR in greyscale.

ED cant even get a delete mark point function added on the CDU even though its noted in the dash 1 manual.......

Im not talking about Module. Yes everyone know it is old simplified FC3 module. I am talking about how it should perform. also remember some of the last air superiority eagles made had APG70 of Strike eagle. and also remember the APG63 PSP then got a upgrade to the APG63 v1 sometime in the 90s. So no I wouldn't expect a 90s - 2000s era eagle to have less processing power than the APG68.

F15 also has a radar that uses MPRF. its just like in the Hornet the radar is better as pilot can Interleave MPRF with HPRF or manually decide to use a dedicated mode, wheras the viper only used MPRF full time. and can only used HPRF in VS mode. So the F15 is by no means limited. ON paper the APG63 PSP should be better than AP68 in pretty much every way. even more so if it were APG 63 V1.