MKev

It is well known that F-16C is a 9G fighter. There are books and pilot interivews that claim records of up to 11 or 12g in the F-16. Experts know what the F-16 is capable of and all of them have seen the maneuverability of the EF. 9G claim for Eurofighter is a joke and I can say like many other observers, that the Eurofighter is capable of well beyond 9-10G but we are not supposed to know it. ;) Exact numbers are certainly classified.

Hi there. Besides all that, it is stated in multiple interviews of Pilots and on the offical site, that the iris-t is capable of self tracking, identification ir screenin and can not be blinded by flares and sun. It distinguishes between sun, flare and jet thrusters. I am no expert and the most information is restricted and therefor only TrueGrit knows whats right or wrong, but the info that you can get in the public via books, videos and interviews state that it is the most modern and capable IR close to mid range missile aside of Aim-9X. The Iris-T has some kind of database and photo sensor. It is therefore able to identify what is decoy and what is the real deal. It can attack every aircraft in a sphere around the aircraft beyond 25km. True Range is restricted. The only failsafe defence against IRIS-T is by Directed Infrared Counter Measures. In other words: Blinding the seeker of the missile with a laser. :book: If ED stays true to the real deal, like the CEO of ED claimed in recent Interview, and TrueGrit follows ED's and their own standards, the Eurofighter will be almost impossible to beat in DCS skies as long as it carries IRIS-T. :smilewink: Maybe one of the reasons TrueGrit Leads would love to see some upcoming releases of more modern russian Jets. We all hope to open the door for modern russian jets when EF is released.

The second Picture shows the Typhoon-Helmet or Striker II by BAE Systems to be exact. Does this indicate that we might get confirmation on the Striker II helmet? If so I am very happy and can say, that it is better for REDFOR to stay on ground. :D

Happy that you guys liked it. Love to help and get information out. I also added an additional interview in english to the main posting. Enjoy.

Remark: I did not find the Interview in this Forum so I translated it to provide it to you in form of this Thread. A PDF version is also included in the Attachments. The Typhoon in Detail – Interview with Gero Finke from TrueGrit Interview by simFlight.de 28. April 2020 – Translated by Mark “MKev” P. On 27 March, it came like a thunderbolt when it was announced on Facebook and in the DCS forum: "The Eurofighter Typhoon will be added to the DCS as an aircraft module." But who is behind the development of this agile and highly complex multi-purpose combat aircraft? We spoke to Gero Finke, who is working with his team at TrueGrit on the development of the Eurofighter simulation. Probably the most modern module in the DCS world: The Eurofighter Typhoon The Person Gero Finke was in the service of the Luftwaffe for well 30 years. After his basic training and the ENJJPT program in Sheppard / USA, he began training as a pilot on the F-4 Phantom II. He flew it from 1993-2003 and was a flight instructor and weapons instructor there. As one of the first German pilots, he was able to join EADS in Manching in 2003, where he began his conversion to the Eurofighter. With the knowledge gained there, the foundations were laid for the conversion of future crews. In 2004 Gero was one of the first flight instructors sent to Laage. As a standardizer, he created training documents and thus created a basis for future generations of pilots. After several stations as Squadron Captain and Group Commander, Gero began in 2015 to spend his last years of service as Deputy Commodore in the Tactical Air Force Wing 71 "Richthofen" in Wittmund. How does a fighter pilot get to flight simulation? I have used various flight simulators since the beginning of my military career. Since Falcon 4 I have stayed right on it, I even built a small home cockpit for it. With Falcon 4 I also started to work more intensively with the military simulators and finally stayed with DCS. How did you get the idea to become a developer for DCS? After my professional career I had the time to deal more with the topic DCS. The thought that you can fly your former work equipment on your home computer was of course extremely appealing to me. Due to these circumstances and through various contacts in the Falcon 4 : BMS community, the idea that the Eurofighter should also have its place in the virtual DCS sky became firmly established. In the course of the research work a team of 15 people was formed, including the main developer of Falcon4 : BMS "Dunc". Oliver "The_Fragger" Michel from MILTECH-5 and Thomas "TomCatz" Schultz could be won for the area of 3D design. Even the look of this WIP panel . . . . . . is outstanding. What is the development process? What difficulties are encountered in the development process to simulate such a complex aircraft? The main problem in the development of the Eurofighter and especially of all new aircraft is the secrecy of many documents. Many people in the team have the knowledge, but there is always a certain tightrope walk in how far you can use this for the development. Many documents are not public or classified, so we rely on public sources. These circumstances naturally ensure that we come as close as possible to the original. In terms of armament, we cannot yet make a clear statement either, as we start with basic features and gradually add more features. But this will again require the release of documents etc. It is not possible otherwise due to the above mentioned restrictions. In the further course of the development the implementation of the other European versions is also possible. However, we are the first developers to have an exclusive license agreement with the company Eurofighter Jagdflugzeug GmbH and are therefore allowed to use all official logos, names etc. Therefore we are of course obliged to fulfill the trust and expectations placed in us. The hype surrounding the announcement of the Eurofighter has blown up almost all forums, discords and social media. Hence the important question: Do you already know a release date and a price? We have been in active research for a good year and have recently started programming the systems and the visual implementation. Eagle Dynamics has classified us as an "Epic Module" because of the depth of the system we are aiming for. Therefore, the price is set accordingly. But I cannot yet give an accurate price. Each EJ200 Turbofan powerplant propels the Eurofighter with 90kN of thrust and ensures outstanding flight performance Thank you for your time and good luck for your future projects. Additional Interview from Gero in English: GeroFinke_Interview.pdf

Thank you. I tried to explain that guessing out of the blue is no way for ED. Lets call it a studied guess based on information of subject matter experts or documentation. You will never get true capability numbers (e.g. Radar or missile range) from a Jet still in service. Thats coming over time with trust, research and agreements. Thats why Modules can improve over time or get upgrades. We are lucky that ED is doing so. There are devlopers out there that would not bother. I hope you understand what I try to say. Sure it is a Trailer. But in that Trailer is a introduction part where they explain the development process before explaining features like multicrew. Thats the interesting part I linked the Timestamp of. True, there is more behind ist. But I can not present several years of Forum posts and information on development from Heatblur. About the Interview you provided. No I did not know it. I will check that out too. Thank you for that. regards.

Development process of study level aircraft [uPDATED] Hello Guys. I studied and informed myself a lot about the process of getting an aircraft into a sim, and what kind of information is needed to reach high fidelity or better: "Study Level" in developing a Sim. A while back in my efforts to understand more about the process behind such an endeavor of creating an study level sim for a platform, I had a chance to speak with an employee of a 3rd Party developer for X-Plane 11 and FSX and their efforts for an awesome study level A320, including the negotiations that they needed with Airbus in order to get things rolling. It made me even more curious and I started digging for knowledge. The transparent talks in forums regarding development on BMS was a help too. But I still don’t grasp all aspects of such a development effort and all my respects go to our developers that try to achieve their goals while they fight every obstacle on their way to fulfill our wishes and dreams. Let me try to explain in detail, what kind of work might happen behind the curtain. ED or TrueGrit may correct me or add information if I say something wrong. DCS has remarkably high standards and those standards must be achieved from its in house as well as 3rd party developers. They can only achieve this high level if they have enough information for the project. This information is obtained by negotiation with officials like the US Airforce or the company that has built the aircraft. Because of that high standard we don’t have any good 4th generation Russian or Soviet Jet in DCS, because the Russian Federation is very restricted, and the info of restriction is above that classified too. :D So to speak. It’s even hard to get enough public information. Remark: Eagle Dynamics does not release or change weapons or modules for balancing purposes. The CEO made that clear in an interview. That’s why the performance of an AMRAAM is made as authentic as possible and will not be changed, just because some kids complain about it. So, let's call the DCS level of fidelity by its name: "Study Level". What is Study Level? Study Level is the level of fidelity everyone should expect when he talks about a Simulator Platform that simulates one or several airplanes based on their real-life counterparts. That means, that a real Pilot who uses this simulation should be able to recognize every aspect of the airplane, the handling of the board computer, radar, instruments and displays e.g. MFDs. These Displays should work like in real life, if the Pilot that uses this simulation wants to reach a specific menu, he should be able to reach the menu the same way as he recalls from memory. In other words, how he has learned it in his classified or restricted handbooks or manuals of his aircraft that he serves on. Developers tend to invite or include these Pilots, Crewman or Engineers into their development process. This people are known as subject matter experts. The quality of development can differ based on hands on tests, records, and subject matter experts. Like Heatblur explained in their presentation of the F-14 Tomcat. "hand crafted, down to the last nut, rivet and bolt". To have such access, you need the trust of the officials, and you need to sign papers like an NDA for example. The Information needed by developers is mostly not that complex. That means they do not need to know how the wiring is made behind a Radar or MFD display. But they need to know what is displayed. How many Targets can be attacked and how is the maximum radar range. In cases of sensitive data, like radar range or how many tangos can be engaged at the same time, we have several possibilities: - 1: The Aircraft in development is out of service and sharing sensitive information is not that problematic. (probably how Heatblur had gained info on their F-14 and Viggen) - 2: The Aircraft is still in Service, but the company or agency can share the information under NDA. For a specific block or timeframe for example. (probably how ED had gained information for the F/A-18 and F-16C) // Same goes for A-10C that will receive an upgrade now, because ED seemingly has gained the information clearance to develop newer systems into the A-10C. I remember that ED had requested help from subject matter experts in the community, to get information on a panel in the F-16. We have good informed people in our community and they tend to help if you ask kindly. Besides that: If I recall correctly, the CEO of Eagle Dynamics or another developer explained in one of their recent interviews, that they work together with us military and that the military is using DCS. There has been two Interviews recently, one with the CEO and one with another developer. I don’t remember in which of these interviews they gave this information. - 3: The Aircraft is new/young and has state of the art technology. In that case you either get inaccurate information or you are not allowed to display a specific technology no matter the detail under any license or NDA agreement given. // That was the case with the last development attempt we had on the Eurofighter. The case with that “Typhoon Helmet” (Striker II) from BAE Systems and its capabilities if I recall right. https://www.baesystems.com/en/product/typhoon-helmet Conclusion: Guessing is not recommended for developing a study level simulation module for DCS. Information from “subject matter experts”, provided data by officials and/or companies behind the aircraft and licenses/agreements with those are needed. And of course, a good amount of crazy and talented developers behind the project. :thumbup: If I understand this quote right, TrueGrit has only access to public information. I love the Eurofighter; I follow its development since childhood, and I look forward to its DCS counterpart since it was first announced for DCS years back by another 3rd Party developer. But I am careful now with my hopes for this module. I recently watched an official Video from the Luftwaffe about a Eurofighter training together with Tornados in Nevada. In that Video they explained that the Eurofighter has gained ground attack capability clearance at the end of 2017. Because of that, they made sorties in Nevada and trained GBU delivery. I have hopes but I don’t believe that the TrueGrit developer Team gets access to documentation or the clearance to deliver us a Eurofighter module with the systems and tech from 2017/18. Please TrueGrit proof me wrong! I don’t need an impotent Eurofighter that is only capable of Air to Air combat. The Eurofighter is developed to become a true multi-role-fighter-aircraft with best dogfight and air superiority abilities. A true modern 5th generation beast. Just to get things right and explain the significance of this Jet compared to others in the world: The Eurofighter is the European answer to the F-22 Raptor and competitor to the Suchoi Su-57, Su-35, Su-34, MiG-35 and MiG-29. MiG-29 was introduced as counterpart to the F-16. I claim the Eurofighter eats them all for breakfast and fights with the F-22 and the Su-57 until the next dawn. UPDATE I just found out who is behind the TrueGrit team. A very talented team of people gathered behind former Pilot, Flight- and Weapons instructor of the Eurofighter Typhoon "Gero Finke" and develops the Eurofighter. There is a German Interview with Gero Finke about TrueGrit and the development of the most modern Aircraft in DCS with some outstanding screenshot that some of you might have seen already. I dont know if this Interview was published already here in the Forum. Nevertheless I am working on a Translation already and will provide it soon. After getting all the information about TrueGrit and Gero Finke from the interview, my hopes for a well developed Eurofighter DCS Module are very High now. Can't wait to see the result. You can find the Translated Interview here: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=4467248#post4467248 Below is a Link to the direct timestamp of Heatblur explaining its development efforts on the F-14. For everyone who did not know it already, it’s a very good and impressing information. I included some nice video information about the Eurofighter for you guys. Capabilities in detail. The German EF has some differences compared to RAF. Finally, an Information video about the Striker II Helmet by BAE systems also known as Typhoon Helmet mentioned above. There is a lot of information videos about this helmet in the web. This Helmet is part of the Eurofighter Typhoon weapons platform and due to modern datalink capabilities and AR tech you can see enemies behind clouds etc. Information from AWACS and other allied forces connected to the system can send in information through PIP (Picture in picture). With Meshes and AR projection you can see the ground terrain while looking at the floor of the aircraft. Also allied tanks are displayed and several allied assets. This is the most modern Pilot Helmet in the world. Kind regards, MKev

Ah now I understand. I hope RAZBAM is sure on this. There was somebody mentioning that this new wings with "dog-tooth" have been released with the MiG-23MLA already. Can't be sure what is right or wrong. I hope RAZBAM has the correct papers :D

Nice 360° Video: And a weapons video - MW1 cluster weapon dispenser:

what do you mean with strakes?

And this is missing in the current model? Is there any explanation why? Edit: Is the Armament we get in DCS for MiG23 known already? I heard it was Air superiority fighter in the first place, but had some nice additional wepons for ground attack. Is there any information what kind of weapons we get? All that Wikipedia confirmed for the MiG23MLA so far is: 4x Wympel R-23/R-24T (AA-7 „Apex“) - Mid Range - active infrared-guided missile (Fox 2 /3) (not enough details on that. My guess: The missile has its own active infrared seeker - in that case its a Fox 3.) 4x Wympel R-23R/R-24R (AA-7 „Apex“) - Mid Range - semi-active radar-guided missile (Fox 1) additional options for Air-to-Air Combat: 4x R-3S, 4x R-3R and 2x2 R-60MK 4x R-73E (only on MiG-23MLD or MiG-23-98 upgrade / If we get this 'MiG-23-98' upgrade on a later date post MiG-23MLA release is up to RAZBAM) Ait-to-Ground: 18x FAB100 (100kg freefall bomb), 6x FAB250 (250 freefall bomb), 6x FAB500 (500kg freefall bomb) and 1x TN-1000 (tactical freefall-Nuklearbomb) MiG-23MLA ("Flogger-G") The later production variant of the "ML" was redesignated the "MLA". Externally, the "MLA" was identical to "ML". Internally, the 'MLA' had an improved radar with better ECM resistance, which made co-operative group search operations possible as the radars would now not jam each other. It also had a new ASP-17ML HUD/gunsight, and the capability to fire improved Vympel R-24R/T missiles. Between 1978 and 1982, around 1,100 "ML/MLA"s were built for both the Soviet Air Force and export customers. As with the MiG-23MF, there were two different MiG-23ML sub-variants for export: the first version was sold to Warsaw Pact countries and was very similar to Soviet aircraft. The second variant had downgraded radar and it was sold to Third World allies. -Wikipedia Max takeoff weight: 17,800 kg (39,242 lb) Fuel capacity: 4,260 l (1,130 US gal; 940 imp gal) internal with provision for up to 3x 800 l (210 US gal; 180 imp gal) drop-tanks Powerplant: 1 × Khatchaturov R-35-300 afterburning turbojet, 83.6 kN (18,800 lbf) thrust with variable-geometry nozzles dry, 127.49 kN (28,660 lbf) with afterburner According to the MiG-23ML manual, the MiG-23ML has a maximum sustained turn rate of 14.1 deg/sec and a maximum instantaneous turn rate of 16.7 deg/sec. The MiG-23ML accelerates from 600 km/h (373 mph) to 900 km/h (559 mph) in 12 seconds at the altitude of 1000 meters. The MiG-23 accelerates at the altitude of 1 km from 630 km/h (391 mph) to 1300 km/h (808 mph) in 30 seconds and at the altitude of 10–12 km will accelerate from Mach 1 to Mach 2 in 160 seconds. -Wikipedia Some more stats: Maximum speed: 2,499 km/h (1,553 mph, 1,349 kn) / M2.35 at altitude 1,350 km/h (840 mph; 730 kn) / M1.1 at sea level Range: 1,900 km (1,200 mi, 1,000 nmi) clean Combat range: 1,500 km (930 mi, 810 nmi) with standard armament, no drop-tanks 2,550 km (1,580 mi; 1,380 nmi) with standard armament and 3x 800 l (210 US gal; 180 imp gal) drop-tanks Ferry range: 2,820 km (1,750 mi, 1,520 nmi) with 3x 800 l (210 US gal; 180 imp gal) drop-tanks Service ceiling: 18,300 m (60,000 ft) g limits: +8.5 Rate of climb: 230 m/s (45,000 ft/min) at sea level Take-off distance: 500 m (1,600 ft) Landing distance: 750 m (2,460 ft) regards

Nice Information. Can u please add this video to the video thread and do you have some more weapon information videos on the tornados capabilities?

Very nice shots:

How could I forget that. True true. I just heard in a documentary that the Tornado is capable of flying Automated in low altitude flight while evading terrain. Is this a Autopilot subroutine or is this something special? Would love to know more about it. regards.

Yes I was thinking about creating this topic in another sub-forum. But my second thought was, that we may get Heatblur hungry for this Aircraft. Comparable with discussion topics regarding Tornado in this Heatblur Sub-Forum. :smilewink: If Heatblur does not like this Topic to be in this Sub-Forum, they may move it and it will make its way into oblivion. Like many other topics before it. Thank you for those Videos. I was searching Youtube and only had 10 hits with mostly german speaking material. :book: Very good short video with comments from Pilots and Weapon Officers:

What are the Pro's & Con's that speak for Heatblur having the best skills for doing the Tornado?: - They already gained experience with a low level attack aircraft: Viggen - They already gained experience with wing sweep - They already gained experience with terrain following radar - They proofed with F-14 how good they are in research & development of flight models - The Tornado fits the knowledge and Time period of Viggen and F-14 - Most weapons and systems of the Tornado are similar or at least comparable with Viggen and F-14 - They have experience with reverse thrust implementation - They have experience with avionics and systems of that time period shown in development of Viggen and F-14 - they have .... many more... they are gods in aircraft simulation - period. Does anybody else have something to add to this list? Anything that speaks against it or even some more pro's I did not manage to mention?

Ah okay sry. looked like it. I am already exchanging thoughts over there. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=244749&page=18

I know it, its a discussion and not a video topic. thx. Here are some additional goodies: The Fighter Pilot Podcast #048 with Panavia Tornado as Topic: Documentary "Tornado R&D and History" Short 16min. Video including interview with Nils Meister, one well known Tornado Test-Pilot for decades. Desert Stom low level Flight footage. Poor quality but a few nice shots nevertheless.

Hello Folks. I think we all can agree that the Panavia Tornado is a perfect Fit for Heatblur Simulations. Documentaries and Information from fellow forum users helped me to raise my interest in this Fighter Bomber and I did not even expect to find out, that it is up to this day one of the most compelling fighter bombers in service. But all good Aircraft reach their end of service similar to the F-14 and so the Tornado is already retired in the UK and about to get retired in Germany. With my love and interest in Military Aircraft of the Cold War and Gulf War time period, I see a promising possibility of a Tornado finding its way to DCS due to the fact, that former classified documentation of this aircraft should now be more easily accessible for developers like Heatblur. In order to feed us with information and make the developers of Heatblur Simulations hungry for the Tornado, I decided to create this Video Thread about this compelling Fighter Bomber. Please assist me in collecting the finest documentaries and videos possible for this aircraft. If there is a video thread already in place, I am sorry. I did not find it. kind regards, MKev I will start with a good Tornado Overview video from Matsimus. I think he made a great job but I am still longing for more tapes.

Thanks for the Information. Yes I recently heard in a German Documentary about the Tornado that the Pilots had to trust there systems (Ground Mapping Radar and Terrain Following Radar) to fly save in low level flights at night. There was also one of the main test pilots interviewed who was part of the Tornado program for decades. I also recently learned, that the Tornado IDS has the Aim-9 Lima as the only weapon that is used as defence against air threads. But the no. 1 Priority is to dive low and try to escape, since this Tornado is a heavy bomber-jet that is not doing well in Air to Air combat and therefor, air combat is the last resort. The only full Air Combat capable variant is the ADV if I remember right, but this platform would not be that interesting I suppose. As a German kid that grew up with his US Family parts and contact to the US Military (One of my Uncles was Tank Commander in 2nd Golf war 1990-1991 "Operation Desert Storm") I never had the Tornado on the Radar. So it is some kind of discovering the Tornado and its state of the art technology it had when it came into active duty. I am still digging all information about this platform and checking some documentaries. When I find a good one I will share. Let us hope that Heatblur is going for the Tornado. It is a realy interesting and capable Aircraft with an compelling story behind it. My wish would be that Heatblur does a all around Tornado Module Pack where you are able to switch between a GR.1 or GR.4 and a German variant like the ASSTA 2 for example inkluding sub variants like IDS / ECR / ADV where the interior and cockpit will change depending on the module you use. Similar with switching from F-14B to F-14A when its done. It sounds a lot and I may be wrong, but as far as I was able to read and see in two documentaries so far, it seems that this Tornado and its Variants has huge similarities except a few systems and weapons loadout based on its role. And that would be something amazing to finally have in DCS. I would pay even $100 for such a module without thinking twice. I remember from the old Falcon4 days that you where able two switch platform variants of the F-16 and you had the coresponding differences. I miss something like that in DCS. I dont expect that a developer has to release all its modules with all possible variants. But if there is a Airplane that offers to do so because there are more similarities than differences, I would be very pleased to see such an effort. What do you guys think? Like I said, I may be wrong but Tornado and its variants sound promising. regards

Sure, I was laughing already because of the fact that we wrote about the same matter in two different threads :D

Anybody here who can explain the differences of the tornado IDS variants? That would help a lot. I would love to know in detail what Night-Combat-Capability in GR.1 had looked like and why they had to develope "night-combat-capability" in the GR.4 after all. What are the exact Features of the GR.1? An Overall feature list? Like someone else mentioned, I would love to fly a F-14D not F-14A Tornado :D

Thats why I mentioned that I need expert input on this matter. Is there some kind of features list? In german Wiki they say GR.4 had development of the night combat capability. Where are the differences in this case with GR.1/A and GR.4/A ? Questions over questions. :joystick:

I searched for some documentation on the IDS Variants. These MFDs/Screens seen in some Pictures came with ASSTA 2 already. Regarding German variants and classification I see chances for ASSTA 2 in DCS. In regards of the british variants I go with GR.4. Based on Infos from the Web the GR.1 variant had no FLIR, LASER, GPSWR and no night time operation capabilities. So it is GR.4 for me. And GR.4 is a 1998 Modernisation. So it should be possible to get it into DCS. Since the Tornado is retired in the UK the chance to get former classified documentation and information should be higher. I am not sure how accurate those informations on the web are. Maybe some experts and some active or former tornado pilots can shed some light on those variants and its differences. My bets for Heatblur doing Tornado IDS Gr.4 or similar are pretty high, after experiencing their great work with the F-14B Tomcat. I would say 80:20 chance. It would fit Heatblur very well. It should be possible for Heatblur to get well and swift through development on such an Tornado IDS Project, since all the experience they made with the Tomcat.

I searched for some documentation on the IDS Variants. These MFDs/Screens seen in those Pictures came with ASSTA 2 already. Regarding classification I see chances for ASSTA 2 in DCS. In regards of the british variants I go with GR.4. Based on Infos from the Web the GR.1 variant had no FLIR, LASER, GPSWR and no night time operation capabilities. So it is GR.4 for me. And GR.4 is a 1998 Modernisation. So it should be possible to get it into DCS. Since the Tornado is retired in the UK the chance to get former classified documentation and information should be higher. I am not sure how accurate those informations on the web are. Maybe some experts and some active or former tornado pilots can shed some light on those variants and its differences.