Kev2go

So why cant they just use 1 aircraft to fill role of a2a and a2g? Like the UK has been doing? If it's just a matter of quantity, then just by more ef's. The ef is capable of multirole use. And I'm sure more weapon types could be integrated if needed. Operating 2 different aircraft where training and logistics s are not interchangable for two different roles isnt the most practical or cost effective

:D Read title above Tom cat crew: "oh look a EF, Bye il save you the trouble "press ctrl+e 3 times to eject" ? :P Ok kidding aside So what can we do when we meet this new bird of prey in the skies. The F14 already has some challenges due to not having the sort of up to date avionics of more newer gen 4 digital teen fighters. Sure with a very disciplined pilot can still beat hornet or Viper in BFM in 1 vs 1 guns only. But in most scenarios missiles engagement will be the first order of things. But considering the EF excellent performance characteristics and even more advanced sensors and EW suites relative to Viper and Hornet how will the tomcat fare, and can tactics be adjusted properly to have any real chance? It seems on paper the EF will be hands down the most lethal platform for A2A compared to anything else in DCS. Will same tactic in MP against hornets or vipers hold? IE keep distance when possible and spam AIm54's to maintain stand off range? ( since vipers and Hornets will typically you with 9x's when the get into visual without having to go maneuver directly onto your six) or will AIm54's start becoming redundant? will ECM suite and towed decoy finally put an end to aim54 domination, finally mitigating the tomcats standoff ranges?

Yes General purpose For the UK version but not German one apparently . As for self designation of LGB's with a TGP can the same be verified for Luftwaffe within the same time frame ?( which is the version being focused on for now). IT also depends on which time period the source publications or revisions are able to be found. as an Analogy Remember than F/A18C lot 20 in 1998 had different capabilities then the circa 2005 model we have in dcs, or if to compare hypothetical compare Lot 20 hornet to more recent timeframe , ( IE as an example only using older Litening 2 AT instead of newer Litening 2 G4 issued since 2008 )

I wonder how good the simulation will be of the EF Air to ground mapping qualities. I read that it has High resolution ( Not medium resolution) SAR

so tranche 1 just had a version earlier than AIm120C-5?

so what medium range radar missile did EF's use prior to the Aim120c-5 capability that got introduced with tranche 2?

The JF17 wasn't the most advanced jet. The only feature thats more advanced about the JF17 relative to F16/F18 is just larger cockpit displays and IR Missle warning system. otherwise the JF17 was behind in radar range ( max range at 80 NM relative to 160 Nm) and does not have JHMCS + AIm9X equivalents. IT also has smokey engine ( IRRC copy of mig29 engine) , and not as good T/W ratio as you'd expect for such a lightweight fighter. the EF ( especially if its tranche 2) will in fact be all around the most advanced and arguably best A2A platform in DCS.

Ok scratch out my assumptions with FAq out this is what we can expect. seems will be in fact luftwaffe EF with plans to expand and include versions of other nationaliteis eventually. although the FAQ states they wish to achieve the most current EF that they possibly can they don't outright state with tranche and block, but at least optimistically that means we certainly aren't getting the earliest , and this implies at it will at least be within tranche 2. https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4260824&postcount=1 I just really hope that doing more modern tranches doesnt mean leaving certain systems blank or with half ****ed functionality. (IE A10C * cough cough *missing lots of SADL functionality, and being a franken hybrid of suite 3 and suite 5) I personally would rather get fully working earlier model, than a latest and greatest model but have dev's either told off by GOV't contract cutoff certain features due to consumer product , or be forced too much guesstimating where systems are classified. Given their confidence in being able to go with more recent iteration however i wish to remain optimistic.

yes bigger differences with newer block. People seem to be drawing comparison of recent features. But purely from screenshots alone we can't tell all that, and although not yet announced i'm not holding my breath for such a late enough tranche for many of those more advanced A2A weapons or an IRST pod. So likely the only real difference will be the skin, and therefore interchangeable with what EF user you want to play purely on changing the skin.

so how is the german EF different from the English ones besides having different paint scheme and/or markings? because seeing the WIP EF screenshots with Luftwaffe markings thats the only noticeable difference to me between the RAF one.

Yea, it seems the proper A/G capabilities started with Tranche 2. Although Tranche 1 block 5 is said to have introduced some initial A/G functions, unfortunately i think the block 5 is only really able to carry LGB's for buddy lasing. Im not even sure the EF can use unguided GP bombs at that point in time?

considering that veao left, it is pleasant to know someone else was able to get a license to make a EF simulation. EF was not something i was thinking about as being anywhere near the top of my personal wishlist but certainly will be something i very much purchase. This should be a a dream to fly. great maneuverability, and a T/W that should be even better than the Viper

Im wondering is it a new 3rd party OR any of the currently existing ones making the EF?

Forthe "salute" option can we expect ED to create a visible pilot animation like HB did for the tomcat?

both are 50% off so with the current sale its a good time to get both . Although the harrier is a unique due to VTOL capabilities it does have some limitations being a dedicated CAS jet. The hornet is a multi role fighter. It is not only capable for A2A roles, in air to ground it is still more flexible in its employment for A/G missions besides CAS compared to the Harrier due to wider variety of guided munitions. So due to purely due to being a faster jet with greater role versatility i say between the two i would still choose the Hornet. Edit: since some have suggested the F16, I would also say that the Hornet is more feature complete. the Hornet is still better bang for your buck than the Viper as of now. and still arguably so even when both are feature complete since F16 aint getting JASSM, the Hornet will still be king in terms of standoff muntions.

I remember way back when razbam said the AGM65G was just a placeholder until ED made the AGM65F for the Hornet. Since the Agm65F has been on the hornet for some time now, when can we expect razbam to replace AGM65G and port over the AGM65F for integration on the Harrier?

The basic F5E-3 , and as the type operated by USAF, USAF or USN Aggressor units never used Aim120's or AGm65. If anything the F5E aught to be remodeled into two separate F5E( F5E-3 USAF, and or F5E3 Swiss/ and/ or F5N USN) allowing F5 module to have INS and digital radio set on top of what it currently has but that's about it.

I would like to think the Plus would come first, or be more likely because of cockpit and many other avionics functionality being shared with AV8B N/A and due to similarities between APG65 radar and APG73 on ED's Hornet. a New FM and new 3d model is needed but thats still time saved in development relative to a totally different harrier derivative requiring everything done from scratch. AS Razbam said way back when N/A was announced that they would have already went towards developed the plus if only ED had A/G code ready. And i agree having a more fleshing out jack of all trades ground attack is very nice. However even so the Radar on the harrier won't truly make it a fighter. Harrier plus is a very poor mans fleet defender. Itl come at the case of extra weight ( worse T/W and climb and worse turning.) and harrier N/A is already a relatively slowish subsonic jet. I dont think Razbam would be able to find new enough documentation to get AIm120 operating procedures for plus as they were only integrated into USMC operated harriers 2011 at earliest. So if PLUS happens it will likely be a pre 2011 model and thus have no BVR capability. Although Radar has advantages as you can have the radar to slew AIm9's or to provide gunsight computed gunnery solutions. Even if did get AMRAAM, it wouldnt be able to match the standoff distance of a Hornet let alone a viper because as we know launching them at higher speeds allows missile to be lobbed further. In my experience flying N/A it its quite overrated as a dogfighter. Its a much chunkier boi than the older sea harriers and GR1/3's which most harrier fans seem to refer when talking of dogfighting. If a Harrier is not armed with Aim9's , I find its actually easier to dogfight and win with a F86F or Mig15 against a av8b N/A than it is for N/A to win Against those, let alone a Hornet. granted N/A it lacks radar aid to provide guns solution, so there is that.

This :D ( good timing when it was posted btw heh)

ITs similar, but there are some slight differences aside form being the older APG65 radar. the APG65 radar antenna in the harrier had to be scaled down due to size constraints. the radar antenna only 23 Inches as opposed to 28 in the Hornet. According to the tactical manual the Harriers APG65 radar can do up to EXP 3 zoom along with medium resolution SAR . That I find very interesting, when apparently it was thought only the APG73 radar after Phase 2 upgrades got such capacity. Any noted differences can be adjusted from relative source code from Hornets radar based on source documentation pertaining to the harrier

Its a more recent adoption. From sources i found Aim120 was not implemented operationally until as recent as 2011 for the usmc. Don't know if razbam can get documentation that recent. The most recent tactical manual i ever came across was from 2002. Any AIm120' employment procedures are not documented or listed as an authorized weapons store at this point in time.

F35 is a next generation multirole platform . F22 already exists as a 5th gen stealth air superiority fighter. F15X is an overhaul in avionics, relative to the current eagles, but til never be stealth gen 5 aircraft with low observable RCS. Perhaps the USAF might just buy F15EX's as to compliment the USAF fleet and repalce some older Strike Eagles, but itl never be an F35 contender either in sales or actual role. Maybe Boeing will have better luck marketing a spit and polished 40 year old aircraft via FMS to nations that are restricted from the F35 for political reasons. this was the same argument that was probably made every time new technology came about, Why replace X with Y when Y is 30 or 40 years old and combat proven? Because technology changes and if you fall behind, you will suffer against an adversary that has progressed further. If this was the logic actually put into application then there would never be progress. Stealth isn't just nice to have, but it is a necessity for any future conventional conflict to have an advantage ( at least for now when stealth aircraft aren't so common yet) IF Stealth wasn't important, other nations that are regarded as adversaries to the USA wouldn't be building their own gen 5 stealth fighters.

Maybe hornet pilots fly the hornet because they like it, not because they want the most capable jet. . Not all viper drivers have the hornet, and not all horent drivers have the viper. Some have both and other aircraft because they literally like collecting and flying al forms of aircraft. And with the Jeff the red force do have a study sim module within the same ballpark of the hornet and viper. It's not like anyone "needs" any aircraft. They just want to fly it. The f35 certainly is a fascinating aircraft. However considering this isnt a online arcade avaiation mmo,, exact forced balance is not a prerequisite for a study sim. EVEN aircraft that are within a comparable ballpark in avionics and mission roles, are not the same. Many aircraft are dissimilar. As similar as viper and horent are on the mission types, they are pretty dissimilar in they way they are flown against one another.

Ed still needs modules to make profit. And they said a new project will be announced within March. Doubt its gonna be the phantom given certain keywords they used, but there is something already brewing.

Though both require crew/teamwork mindset the pilot does have more control in the F4E than in the tomcat. In the F4E pilot does at least have close canopy switch, and armament selector panel, and i think the pilot can still guide in AGM65's or bullpups ( hand control stick in the pilots pit) if need be. In the tomcat pilot can';t so much as wipe his rear end with toilet paper without assistance from the RIO :D Of course best multiseaters, are the ones where the pilot is control and can do just about everything as if they were a single seater ( F/A18F and F15E) , and the backseater is just there as a ridealong, maybe to manage only the boring repetitive stuff no pilot wants to do, like radios, or manually input coordinates. You know just enough to keep em occupied, and feeling as if they are needed ;)