Kev2go

the F5E's in USAF and USN aggressors squadrons didnt have RWR or CM even post cold war in the 1990s. That feature was not existent until the US navy buybacks of Swiss F5E's going into retirement. Enter the US navy F5N circa 2006, although the Swiss F5E's did have INS and Digital Radios. the F5N section of Natops manual references Aim9M/CATM-9M combability for wingtip pylons. But navy apparently also started removing guns from F5N's.

Would have added Digital radios, INS, and ILS/VOR as part of the wishlist because thats what a swiss F5E or US navy F5N ( buybacks) were fitted with. information on these systems should have be readily available in the reference material developers had at hand when F5E module was initially developed. I assume as such since ALR 87 RWR and CM are included.

Guess this needs to be wishlisted since no radar improvements with the "remaster"

Aim9M/CATM-9M is only referenced as a valid loadout for the F5N wingtips in the NATOPS : NAVAIR 01-F5AAA-1 published 2006. Aim9L isn't mentioned but i would assume if F5N rated for 9M it could mount the 9L even if its not explicitly mentioned.

it would be nice if the F5E got an updated radar simulation. I kept hearing Heatblur was supposed to offer thier pulse radar simulation tech to ED? So it could be adapted to ther modules like the F5? With how the Swiss F5E model was shown off with the new dorsal antenna on the 3d model it was also speculated there would be additional features like Digital radio and INS. guess not. But it makes sense why the cockpit was not shown off until the release of the F5E "remaster", people would of realized they are only paying for a visual update, something you got for free with past modules like A10C or Ka50. ED used to only charge money if the "upgrade" included a new variation with some new extra features.

Yeah no radar fix yet. Looks the same.

The only thing i found regarding platform upgrades to remaining agressor F5N's all pertain to updated avionics, such as replacing radar display scope for a multifunction display. Based on the photos it appears to also have GPS aided navigation and its own Nav page, but its definitely a later upgrade as its not in the 2006 natops. Otherwise the only valid air to air armament are only for the wingtips.

I don't think this ever actually implemented. its not in the USAF F5E dash 1', Dash 34's or natops F5E/F/N manuals.....The above excerpt is just from a defense contractor's website trying to advertise upgrades for potential users of the F5 Tiger platform. https://www.tigercenturyaircraft.com/products The only "upgrade" from that list that i can tell was documented in USAF and USN F5 manuals the W6 LERX or IHQ, which is what F5E-3 models were installed with from the factory, but the above defense contractor advertises a retrofit program for older airframes pre F5E3. Otherwise its like the similar sort argumentation was made by the community to include stingers on the Ah64D, stuff that could theoretically be added, but wasn't by ED because US armed forces never actually used such a modification. a X4 sidewinder configuration would make more sense as a community mod.

would of loved to see an upgrade to a proper swiss F5E/ USN F5N type which would be same as now, just with new digital radios and a INS. This is the version that should have been modelled to begin with as aggressor F5E's in the US air force or US navy didnt have RWR or countermeasures mounted. ALR87 rwr are a development/variation of AL46 meant for the swiss air force, abd the US would not have these until the the US navy manage to arrange some buybacks from the swiss circa early 2000s. Although with the new external model already having some changes to airframe like the new dorsal antenna associated with the new radios, so it would be unusual to have these external 3d model additions without planning to change avionics of the internal cockpit.

Yeah swiss f5e,s have new radios and a ins, and usn navy aggressors operated them after purchasing them via a buyback in the 2000s and redesginating to the F5N. So documentation on the INS and UHF SE-052 radios is available in NAVAIR 01-F5AAA-1 (2006) if they wanted to model them in the remaster. It is indeed strange to have a new antenna if there are no plans for avionics changes. It should be noted dcs f5e for all intents and purposes was almost a swiss f5e or usn f5n because it had the alr87 rwr and countermeasure system, but lacking ins and different radios. The earlier agressor f5e's in the usn prior to the buybacks, or the ones operated by usaf for aggressor use didn't have rwr or countermeasures. https://www.militaryperiscope.com/weapons/sensorselectronics/electronic-support-measureselectronic-warfare/analr-87/overview/

Its been a while since i viewed the manuals but i dont recall usaf or usn flown f5e/n aggressors having option for 4 aims ? The us aggressors also didn't use external refuel probe being a thing for those models. So which foreign operated f5e is this new updated model based on? a new antenna i notice on the extern model so I assume new radio(s) in the cockpit where arc 164 is currently installed?

If its not a AH1W "whiskey" cobra. i would hope to at least have the AH1F cobra. late in thier life you had them refitted with more capable APR39A v1 RWR, and GPS recievier. Like seen in this national guard AH1 cobra footage recorded in 2001. The GPS bolted into the left side of the dashboard is referenced in the 1996 revision of the Ah1S manual and the 2001 Ah1F publication.

Yes i also mentioned this less common configuration existing with Uh1's based on information i found in electronics configuration manual and was the configuration of the image i had posted earlier. A Wisconsin national guard Uh1V with its cockpit photo being taken in 2008 . 200 Uh1V is still significant enough of a number. Its 181 more then the total amount of Ka50's produced, and yet that exists as a module in DCS, even in spite such a small number of aircraft also having varying configurations. . Ive also found photos pf whats claimed to be Uh1H with less common Uh1V type configuration, but with radar altimeters removed, since these retired from military service. https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/10597054 https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8520588 No one is saying uh1h is a frontline aircraft post cold war, but thats the time setting the dcs huey is already represented in. AS already established we have upt until 1990s era features included into the DCS uh1H , so arguing that a huey should not get Xyz feature because it represents an era of non combat frontline use in the post cold era just doesn't fly.For the sake of usability it would of just made more sense to have an option for an/asn175 cugr since it is a standalone GPS device, Not to mentioned you already have a tail end of the 1990s aircrew judging by the body armor the door gunners wearing. Even the dcs mi8 module got a integrated ns430 addon, and that's just a off the shelf civilian GPS not commercially available until 1997. It was not an official adoption issue of Russian military. At least the ASN 175 was officially adopted and installed in UH1H/V's, rather then just being a 1 off field modification out of a pilots personal pockets who wanted better navaid, or only something retrofitted post military retirement and only used in civil aviation. The ircm mount isn't mentioned in the Uh1H/V 1988 ( or later) manuals, although i haven't come across any earlier ones to compare. Either this feature was deleted by 1988 or it was a field mod that was only tried in the aforementioned deployment, and never updated in the UH1H/V manuals . Ive only read about ALQ-144 IRCM installation referenced in the EH1H/X 1983 manual( 1989 revision) which is the dedicated EW variant of the UH1H. The An/Apr39 for something that was allegedly super common doesn't appear in many photos or video recordings taken of UH1H/V's in action. The below image image is from Valkenburg taken on 21st of November 1990. These birds were going to be flown to the ports in Rotterdam, the last hub before being shipped off to the Gulf for ODS. I can only make out 1 of these hueys appearing to have APr39 sensor mounts installed. Not really fair to try to compare wish listing of features that can be added with a hypothetical Uh1H model update ( and aught to have of been originally included) such as ASN/175 CUGR standalone GPS in a UH1H huey cockpit to the equivalent of asking for a totally different helicopter like the Uh60. Like its not controversial to just have multiple configurations of the same helicopter/ Oh58D has a legacy configuration with IRCM, or the 2011+ era configuration that replaced IRCM with CWMS and also includes L2M ( drone ) functionality. Just like Mi8 module if you own the NS430 addon, you have checkbox for whether to mount the GPS receiver or not. I Dont have a 2015 Uh60A/L manual on hand but looking at the 2009 publication of the Uh60A/UH60L operators manual its still basically the same helicopter avionics wise as what in the Uh60A/Uh60L 1996 manual (2001 revision) with the exception of the AN/ASN-128D doppler GPS replacing the ASN-128B Doppler GPS. The CDU for the nav system have the same format, its a marginal upgrade. The only other difference that comes to mind is that Uh60A's eventually( UH60A+) are refitted with the 701C engines that Uh60L were installed with from the get go. The 2009 publication includes performance charts for both Ge 701C and now GE 701D engines, so presumably some Uh60's were upgraded with the engines from the UH60M, but otherwise retaining the old-school avionics.

Hope the f5e remaster has the new radios and, and the ins system of the f5n ( still technically an f5e as they were buybacks from the swiss)

Here are some examples of a UH1H with APN 209 radar altimeter mounted in same place as in the DCS UH1H. according to the latter video title this UH1H was part of 3rd battalion 159th aviation regiment ( which is a aviation unit of the 101st Airborne) THis article from 1999 mentioned AN/ASN175 was going to be retrofit in the majority of remaining UH1H/V helicopter fleet, which coincides with the introduction of the same body armor the door gunners are wearing in the DCS UH1H (PRU61A) https://armyaviationmagazine.com/images/archive/backissues/1999/99_06.pdf page 41 of 45

Foreign users generally have thier own separate manuals. Like For example the F16AM MLU dash 1 and Dash 34 is floating out there for Chilean air force or the F16C block 50 dash 1 and Dash34's for the Hellenic Air force. All of the stuff i founded regarding Uh1H was taken from the Uh1H/V manuals published specifically for the US army, not any foreign variant. All of the stuff i mentioned was officially available for US army US regardless how common or uncommon it was. it should also be noted that Bell offered Uh1H II upgrade program that included some features from twin huey (212) plus a 1800 SHP engine to many of these foreign users that had all these retired surplus hueys dumped on them. UH1C/M operators manual published 1980 is still floating around. IF they had really wanted to do a short body they could have done it.....

The most interesting photo ive found is of a Wisconsin National Guard Uh1V taken in 2008. It appear to have APR39A v1 RWR installed judging by how the scope indicator looks, compared to the original APR39 V1. APR39 v1 was limited to just having strobe indicators of SAM threats similar to much older RWR's that existed in SEA for fixed wing jets, wheras APR39A v1 was capable of displaying threats with alpha numerics, and included synthetic voice to call out threats ( IF reference point is needed see RWR in use in the OH58D module or UH60L community mod) https://www.airliners.net/photo/USA-Army/Bell-UH-1V-Iroquois-205/1386330 The latest manual i found was of the final 2005 revision of the 1988 UH1H/V operators manual, which is also when the last UH1H is retired from active duty use. (although there are national guard units where Uh1H and Uh1V manage to stick around longer) and said 2005 manual only still includes the old APR39 V1 references but not APR39A v1. So i am left wondering if this was an unofficial field mod if its not documented in the manual or if National guard have seperate manuals after Hueys left active duty service.

didn't have doppler navigation systems. The DCS H has a lot of equipment normally utilized on the V models as well, like the radar altimeter, which was not often seen on H models in US Army service. On the ASE suite side, the only common piece was the APR-39; not even the sugar scoop and infrared suppression plates were seen that often. Bear in mind that the UH-60 was taking over the bulk of transport/logistic duties in this time frame and UH-1s were being relegated to second line units, so the limitations (as we see them) weren't considered a massive deal. From what I know, the DCS UH-1H is closest to the configuration utilized in El Salvador, as I've seen references that those aircraft were equipped with radar altimeters, IR suppression, and ALQ-144s. I can only guess the flare packs were included in an effort to abstract the protection given by the disco ball. Yes hueys were on thier way out. I know uh60 was the intended replacement but i wonder why bother replacing metal rotors with composite rotor blades after the end of the cold war? I remember seeing videos of the dcs uh1h in initial release that it didn't have radar altimeter or countermeasures system , that these got added further in development. So with that in mind i think the lack of asn128 doppler nav or asn175 cugr, or the apr39 rwr can be attributed to belsimtek deciding development of extra features wasn't worth the time based on the $$ sales they had, rather then it due to not being common. Which is unfortunate, because otherwise the dcs uh1h is a 1990s era helicopter excluding the m21 armament system from the short body hueys.

I may have to self correct myself. IF we count the 3d model of the door gunners its a late 1990s huey, due to the type of body armor they wear. The door gunners in Uh1H module appear to be wearing PRU60A body armor. Airsave was a survival vest adopted in the late 90s? (AIRSAVE manual publication is dated 1999) but aforementioned manual has body armor referenced with in that can be worn underneath the survival vest ( or without it like in DCS ) The Door gunners PRu60A is only a soft armor type although the manual also had a frontal ceramic plate addon for PRU60A called PRU 61, which isn't present in the crew on DCS version. IF they had the add on ceramic plate. FLight helmets. Pilots and door gunners have SPH4B helmets which did not get adopted until the early 90s, as a replacement for the earlier SPH4 ( which was retrofitted for NVG mounting in the 80s) Although from my understanding SPH4B's weren't around that long, since a few years later after SPh4B, the HGU56P was adopted into service, and appears to be widespread by the time GWOT kicked off in the early 2000s. HGU56 is what you see in the 3d model of aircrew in the 21st century helicopter modules such as the Ah64D and OH58D. Although actual mounted NVG's are not modelled on the SPh4B ( presumably due to old age of Uh1H module) if it ever did get a updated 3 makeover the pilots should be wearing AN/AVS 6 aka ANVIS 6 night vision goggles mounted on their helmets. Those would of already been going into service since at least the late 80s ( probably earlier adoption for 160th Night stalkers) , and would of almost certainly phased out all PVS 5 systems for aviators by the 90s, even for the flying remaining legacy platforms like the UH1H.

Basically a early 90s Huey. Ignoring frankenstein features like m21 armament system being mounted on a long body huey instead of the short body hueys ( uh1b,c and m) or m130 chaff/flare dispensers which are only mentioned in eh1 manuals ( electronic warfare variant huey) , but even then it's mounted on fuselage rather then tail. To this day it's a mystery what developers source was on m130s mounted on the tail. Composite rotorblades not tested until late 80s. The earliest references of them on the uh1h/v operators manual is in a 1990 revision of the 1988 publication.so maybe composite rotorblades are only being available for replacement of metal rotors circa gulf war 1. Night vision compatible cockpit is circa 1980s same with apn209 radar altimeter ( although not all hueys had it). Wire strike protection system is standard issue circa 1980s, as is the forward nose of the huey with the 2 caps where its not used but present as a provision to install sensors for the an/apr39 V1 RWR. the RWR scope display would be installed where the radar altimeter currently is placed, although there were other configurations as per electrionics confugration manual where both radar altimeter and RWR scope display could be present in a different cockpit arrangement ( and would be preffered anyways because the cited configuration allows 2 Radar Altimeters for co pilot and pilot) A mid to late 90s uh1h on the other hand would be expected to have an/asn175 cugr gps device. Thats my biggest gripe with uh1h. It lacks any real navigation systems, and has an inadequate defensive suites for a late cold war battlefield. I would have argued even for the 1980s it's very backwards to still be relying on vor ndb and adf as your only navigation systems, when every other major Helicopter aviation asset in US army ( including modernized cobras) was at least using a ASN 128 Doppler navigation suite as its primary nav source with radio beacon aided navigation like VOR only being a backup aid if said doppler navigation system failed . Some UH1H's allegedly had this system retrofitted as well pre ASn175 CUGR GPS. In similar timeframe that army hueys got the cugr gps system USMC UH1N's got combined doppler GPS navigation, an/apr39 v2 rwr and by the 2000s when gwot came around the uh1n's got ale47 cm suite and missile warning systems to make it more survivable in a modern battlefield. Tbh UH1N navigation and defensive systems are better then what even us army uh60a and uh60L's had in the comparative timeframe.

if thats the only difference could ED get around Russian security laws by using documentation acquired outside of the country that is specifically meant for a export version? Isn't that how they were able to do a mi29 9.12? Or was that old enough they could use Soviet era documentation?

yeah bump ns430 need to have support for such maps.

seen a 2009 published MI35M manual circulating online. and a 2008 technical supporting manual, but irrc those were export manuals since they were in english

Aside from the obvious , bigger payload of weapons and gas, the biggest difference was simply having the touchscreen UFCD which could if necessary be used as a 4th display and used for other things which was nice because the Hornet isn't as intuitive as the F16C or F15E ( swapping through different programmed per preference pages via hotas) Otherwise id say its very similar functionality to the legacy, and there aren't any massive technical leaps with block 1. stuff like the UFCD could have been modernized into legacy Hornets if the Navy really wanted. the Towed Decoy would of also been an appreciated feature. Legacy was supposed to have that via external hardpoiint mount at some pint verus the Super hornets internally carried system but that was canned from F18 roadmap. Another neat difference i recall is being able to use SA Format ( they call decided to call pages formats in Super Hornet) to lock a target without needing to use the dedicated Radar Format on one of the other displays. But i'm not sure if that was a new SH feature that legacies didn't have IRL or if that's just because MSI is undermodelled in the DCS legacy hornet.

i don't recall ever coming across legacy hornet tacmans either But then again even tacpack Superhornet weapon systems procedurally from what i recalled was virtually identical to legacy features. Either they used legacy hornet tacmans as a stand in and hoped no one would notice or the F/A18E-F tacman they had for a block 1 super hornet really was similar to how Legacy hornet functions. Or they used Boeings avionics handbooks. Although i personally have not come across Greybooks ( legacy) or goldbooks ( super) myself either.