Kev2go

the phase 2 IIRC was specifically addressed improving A/G capabilities specifically around the SAR resolution. However USN Hornets do not make full potential use of the phase 2 upgrades, as they do not use more advanced Software the USMC F/A18D's for thier recon role, when Using the ATARS pod. Thats probably where the "comparable to F15E SAR mapping " claim comes from. Wheras the navy didn't have such requirements , and thus superior A/G mapping improvements wasn't a thing for the Navy until the APG79 on Block 2 Super Hornets. Id also thrown in the date of introduction doesn't necessarily matter, but the level of technology. I mean you look at the sort of Radars Russians had for the Mig29/SU27, and are primitive compared to the generation of radars US had in the 80s. Hell they weren't even planar araay. You also look at the KJL-7 and for example its max radar range is only to 80NM, not 160.

But like you said radar uses newer software, considering that all Hornets eventually had APG65's phased out for APG73's, and all those old surplus AGP65's were what went to the av8b Plus program.. Plus ( pun not intended) its also possible that Av8B also had certain hardware components replaced through the supply chain. So eventually Av8b APG65's would basically become APG73 Phase 1's, once other 3 excess APG73 parts ( the exiter/reciever, Target signal data processing component , and power supply) would trickle down through the supply chain Which makes things not so easy to ascertain. https://www.gao.gov/assets/nsiad-96-49.pdf to quote from page 8 " In a March 11, 1994, Acquisition Decision Memorandum, the Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology concurred with the Navy’s approach to accelerate the F-18 radar upgrade from APG-65 to APG-73 radars in order to provide the resulting excess APG-65 radar assets for the REMAN program. Three of the six basic components that make up the APG-65 radar system are common to the F-18’s APG-73 radar and will remain in use in the F-18 aircraft. The remaining three components (the radar receiver/exciter, target data processor, and computer power supply) will become excess assets available to the REMAN program."

the radar dish of the APG65 had to be downsized to fit into the nose of the av8B. SO whatever the RL detection numbers may be i would still bet on the APG65 equipped hornet have had a slight advantage

it should be. that Gif footage is in fact a Strike Eagle radar. From the documentary Desert Storm; the Air assault. And as from that white paper which cited that information from the the Dash 34 weapons delivery manual unlike the Hornet the Strike Eagle has at least 8 mapping sizes not 3.

An interesting white paper regarding APG70 that gives us some insight of capabilities. published in 1997. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235082355_Automatic_Target_Cueing_and_Operator_Performance_with_Enhanced_APG-70_Synthetic_Aperture_Radar_Imagery "The F-15E Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) in High Resolution Map (HRM) mode has the capability to produce patch maps at eight different coverage sizes, ranging from 80 nautical miles (nmi) to 0.67 nmi. The 0.67 nmi map corresponds to an image resolution of 8.5 ft/pixel, which is currently the highest level attainable on the F-15E (Nonnuclear Weapon Delivery Manual). In order to provide the type of higher resolution imagery needed to support the application of ATC/ATR technologies, the Theater Missile Defense (TMD) office (ASC/FBXT) sponsored the development and testing of a new high resolution capability with a "smart" sensor management system for use with the APG-70 radar. The APG-70 was modified to include a New High Resolution Mode (NHRM ) with a patch size of 0.33 nmi, which corresponds to an image resolution of 4 ft x 6 ft (hereafter referred to simply as 4 ft). The smart sensor system will use the APG-70's SAR mode to search cued locations and locate likely targets using consecutive SAR patch maps of increasing resolution."

Yea time to revive this thread given A/G radar is now a thing in DCS. Strike Eagle's has a good Surface Radar for its generation of Radars. Should have more advanced Air to surface mapping modes, and higher resolution sar compared to a USN F/A18 Hornet ( because USMC F/A18D's use a more sophiscated software, for the recon role) From another thread regarding Strike Eagles Surface Radar

mostly hyped about the A/G radar capabilities. Given that the Hornets A/g SAR map still leaves much to be desired, the more sophiscated A/G mapping modes, and higher resolution sar will be welcome

not to mention the radar antenna is larger in shape for the APG73. But also considering APg73 hardware components are newer than the APG 68 v5. https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/198745-f-18-vs-f-16/?do=findComment&comment=3785121

PRF does not have the option be changed manually in the APG68 , Its automatic cycles based on radar mode. IIRC HI PRF is only able to used on VS mode, but even then it interleaves with MPRF . otherwise RWS/,TWS are M PRF only

Even MSI aside, looking at Radar alone AZ/EL and Radar Spot Mode are some nice additional radar functions in the APG73 that APG68 does not have.

the first F16's A blocks were somewhat limited as Strike aircraft. Besides Iron bombs/rockets, the only guided munition they had were AGM65 mavericks. The Hornet might of had a benefit of few longer years of development and went into operation with higher tech avionics ( namely Hornet program basically set the bar of what became known as a "glass cockpit) but Navy had vaster requirements for air to surface as well as air to sea role. Like Hornets were capable of employing datalinked Man in the loop walleyes, Had a Targeting pod, Harpooons, and SEAD weapons like Shrikes and HARMS. SO even Day 1 Hornet was more versatile overall as a strike aircraft. This also goes for in Air to Air role since it could carry Aim7 Sparrows and due to having Link4A datalink to connect with navy E2 awacs. So the Tomcat was not the only gen 4 platform in the navy capable of carrying radar guided missiles or having Datalinks, whereas for the Air force F15 had total exclusively on BVR combat until F16's got Amraams in a post cold war era, and neither had datalinks before LInk16. F16's didn't really drift into becoming proper mulitirole aircraft until the F16C's which introduced the glass cockpits, and even then specifically i would say it was Block 40/42 with Lantirn being a thing, is when the Viper could considered a definitive all weather multirole fighter.

Litening is realistic at least when carried Centerline, for USMC based loadout. The only config where its unauthentic for a US operated hornet is Station 4 mount ( cheek station), which is only used by some foreign operators like the Spanish Air force. So no i wouldn't want the litening removed, nor would i expect it to be.

cough F16CM block 50 using lau88+ triple mavs , cough, AGm88 on stations 3 and 7 ( which can carry but not shoot due to lacking the wiring) , cough now Agm154 on what was supposed to be a circa 2007 ( which at that time frame would have been software tape 4.2 or 4.3 cough ) now turns into a tape 5.1 hybrid So perhaps apkws on a longbow isn't really that fantasy in retrospect, just maybe somewhat anarchonistic, but that is assuming there arent any truely substantial additions/ changes by 2015 that a virtual pilot wouldnt notice in a 2010ish apache. I mean this isn't necessarily to say that because the F16's isnt such a purist aircraft that the Ah64D shouldnt be, but rather to point out in contrast to certain fixed wing modules.

. For the record i wasn't implying the Ah64E was using APKWS in 2012. Sorry if it came off that way. Interesting that the AH64D's got them first rather than the Ah64E's. But regarding integration i think this post nails it on the head.

we have more of a 2010 Apache. ( see the discussion regarding 2002 manual being original publication but having inserted changes to later dates) As discussed we have some features listed that would not have been added till 2008-2010ish. Also for contrast I do have seen a AH64D block 3 ( before rebranded as AH64E a year later) manual from 2012. From a purely avionics/ software point of view ( ignoring any physical changes to engines etc) an early AH64E may as well just be a Ah64D block 2 with level 4 UAV control capability, and some minor changes to comm's/signal processing, and a more smartly integrated CMWS ( no physical panel anymore) Considering AH64E succeeded the Ah64D , and tha Guardian is replacing the D's, I don't see legacy D models getting any notable upgrades, especially since all D's today are being gradually converted to E's. Also to note APKWS would never replace hellfire's, nor was it meant to APKWS doesnt have as long range as hellfires nor are they suitable for tank busting. They work great against unarmored or lightly armored targets, but playing with the A10 and Harrier they are unsuitable ( even with spam) in killing main battle tanks, or any hardened targets.

https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/245510-a-10c-suite-nomenclature/?do=findComment&comment=4427063 https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/245510-a-10c-suite-nomenclature/?do=findComment&comment=4425788

I mean he did that video to just prove a point, not that that would be ideal to operate aircraft in that manner . However i dont think "higher ups" up always know what goes on the cockpit...... or ruin a pilots career over it. Or is this also officially authorized procedure? Installing videogames onto your aircraft ? Or watching a movie? Or what about carrying toilets on aircraft? or alcohol?

thats irrelevant minus minor nuances in software suite. TBH even Snoopy ( who maintains A10C) said that A10C II is a hybrid of various software suites, and not a single specific suite of an exact year. If it wasn't for APKWS or GBu54, our A10C II would be mostly representative of software Suite 7B ( circa 2013 when the Scorpion HMD was integrated) however even then its still lacking some suite features such as a software page pertaining to CSAR of that particular suite to name one. Or take the circa 2007 F16C which would have been tape 4.2 or 4.3 is now getting AGM154, and ARC210 radios which apparently are tape 5.1 features ( however there are other 5.1 features that aren't getting implemented) . So even our viper is now something of a hybrid.

The onus is on you to prove your statement You started off with: So please stop with the bamboozling because you have not done anything to prove that that footage the other user linked of the Sniper was a at a time when Vipers were pre CCIP. No viper is operationally using sniper pre CCIP. its as simple as that. Especially the 2nd video since it was sourced from here. http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1306 The S3 software is irrelevant to this discussion . S3 software with tape 4.2 pertains to integration of being able to use SNiper with HTS pod as well as some link 16 functionality. The above videos had nothing to do with testing HTS with Sniper, or showing off Link 16 tgp sharing or other functionality with other aircraft. So the lack of the above demonstration doesnt do anything to prove the footage was "pre ccip" viper flying with sniper

So again the only vipers that would have been using Snipers pre CCIP ( and thats a maybe) would be the ones testing and evaluating the Sniper before it entered operational use. The Sniper Does not enter operational use for F16's until 2006. And that was Software tape 4.1, And no by 2007 All F16C blk 50's are not all using Snipers, as there are still images of F16's with Lantirns flying in 2007. Again so you have no way of knowing the above footage was pre CCIP, and frankly I have demonstrated especially given the timeframe and dates of the videos that these would have been CCIP vipers. Again this has no relevance, but before making such statements, actually have proof to back up what you are saying. Just admit you were wrong.

FYI that's footage from an F15E from an actual combat op against isil. It's not a viper. https://theaviationist.com/2014/09/30/f-15e-strike-sniper-atp/ Anyways Please read again. I was able to verify the second was regarding the ATP-SE if you look at the original source i posted. Again remember no F16 is using Sniper targeting pods operationally Pre CCIp upgrades. However the first CCIP kits were delivered in 2001 even when seeing 2001 footage of test evaluation squadrons with Sniper during its testing phases, those could very will have been early evaluation CCIP vipers. http://www.defense-aerospace.com/article-view/release/6069/first-f_16-ccip-mod-kits-delivered-(july-27).html So no my friend you are dead wrong claiming pre CCIP footage.

Some more footage for contrast. Below is test footage from 2001 when the Sniper pod was still going through testing and evaluations. Here one does see a difference in resolution quality.

? these videos were posted 2011 and 2013 respectively. The latter example , appears to be the advanced Sniper ATP-SE from test flight as that was going operational in 2014, and the imagery is quite good. Sharper than 1st gen of Sniper. Adn given the nature video was originally sourced from. It was in fact about the ATP-SE model. http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1306 Sniper XR/ATP went into initial IOC in 2005 ( think it was Strike Eagles got them first) , and starting in 2006 was already being issued to F16CM's block 50's. ( aka post ccip) So i don't know what you mean the above Sniper pod videos being "pre CCIP". It fits into operational use within the timeframe ED has decided to represent. Especially given as the Sniper Pod was not being integrated until the F16C CCIP upgrades with Software tape 4.1 . a 2007 Viper would be running Tape 4.2 or 4.3. Though now of course we have something of a tape v4 and 5 hybrid at some point given AGm154 integration but i digress.

Guess we will need a Super cobra or Zulu Viper to have a American attack helo with a2a capability.

We are already getting a post 2002 Ah64D block 2 in spite of what ED said initially. Note the cockpit screenshots and the new listed features. https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/news/2021-02-26/ MPNVS/MTADS, is being added, which was not not being fielded until 2005 at the earliest ( even then it wasn't common until a a few years later) . We may as well already have at least a 2008-2010ish Apache given we are also getting CMWS. Although not verified in planned features, nor dohave Gunner seat screenshots just yet, I would however bet we are likely to get the TEDAC display rather than the ORT display given the MPNVS/MTADS, and given the timeframe of when CMWS was coming into place.