sparkchaser2010
-
Posts
141 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by sparkchaser2010
-
-
While I missed a shot at providing these as an official offering, I can still get them out for general release. Should get them uploaded this weekend.
-
2
-
-
-
Ready for download
-
1
-
2
-
-
As soon as I posted the above pic I found a decent reference
-
4
-
-
Started work on 1 of the two tails Edwards AFB did. Been tricky with only one side showing lol.
-
4
-
-
Pretty fricken sweet man! Your templates are helping me a ton and these skins will make a wonderful addition.
-
-
With the activation of a new Aggressor squadron, some new skins were needed. Will be uploading these shortly.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Wait, was that MilesD VR pointing device, PointCTRL?
-
+1 very much needed
-
If this module included Block 25 thru 50/52 along the same time frame it would a very popular module and very similar the way HB did the F-14.
-
Add that and longer burst from the AI would look very realistic.
-
I've read about the inboard maverick not being allowed on TERs on the C/D (and i believe later block As) because their horizontal stabs are larger and the exhaust would damage them. Three mavericks were only allowed in 'war emergency'. It was possible with the A because of the smaller stabs.
I'd find it strange then that a forward firing rocket powered munition is allowed on 4 and 6 for the same reason. If HARM is allowed why not another AMRAAM? Why not Maverick (i've never seen one)... or rocket pods? If you're going to allow restrictions, then a restriction on the inboard TER for maverick should be considered too.
Not to nit-pick, but a TER is a Triple Ejector Rack for bombs and the LAU-88 is the triple rail launcher for the AGM-65, sorry I had to :music_whistling::D
-
I had an issue with the same template and it had to do with the color profile. I cannot remember the exact method I used to change but if I remember I will post it up. It was obvious when I tried to paste something into that PSD from another.
-
Look at tail markings.
Did I miss something?
Same as below, which is a heavily modified test bird.
-
Outside of the factory and depo maintenance only one career field will wire a weapons harness for a wing on an F-16 when on station. Wing changes are completed on station. The only, not avionics, not crew chiefs, not anyone but 2W1 Weapons Troops will wire the wing of an F-16 for all weapon stations. When it comes to which wires and buses are present there is no greater SME on the flightline. Why? Because the wing harness comes as one piece and must be dissembled and then reassembled when installed on the wing with wires ran to their specific stations. I'm a Weapons Troop, and have spent 13 of my 20 years working F-16s in 4 units, 3 of which happened to be SEAD units.
I'm posting not to make controversy, but to set the record straight. It is not an operational limitation to not carry HARMs on sta 4&6. There is no 1553 bus for 4&6. The 1553 bus is for 3&7 and sits near to the JRIU. No 1553 bus, means no 1760 capability for 4&6. No smart weapons, no JDAM, etc. That means only conventional stores can be reliably employed there. There's no "double braid" bundle for those who might know a thing or two. There is also no video line for sta 4&6. This means no AGM-65s either. I saw it mentioned that the AGM-65 and AGM-88 use different video lines. This is false. It's the same line. No video, no 1760 capability on 4&6 for any US F-16 unit. No variations.
What this means is not only is it not possible to use 65s or 88s from 4&6 it would take a herculean effort to reconfigure an aircraft to do so. It's not feasible in terms of cost or man hours. It's not something that could be done in days. Each jet would take weeks of maintenance to convert, not to mention the cost of a redesigned harness.
How can it be so confusing? If what I'm saying is true then how is there conflicting data? This is an easy mistake looking from the outside in. If one were to look at a wiring diagram, then they might come upon a T connector at the wing disconnect. This connector has three ports. A single on one side, and two on the other. This T connector, one on each side of the F-16 at the wing disconnect is a video line junction. The single plug goes forward toward the SMS, and there is a plug for sta 3&4 on the left side and correspondingly 6&7 on the right. They are labelled in the wire diagram. The 4&6 plugs of that T connector are capped. Without intimate knowledge of the system, it would be easy to make a mistake.
The F-16 is approved to fly with 88s on 4&6? Yes it is. However any reference to an SCL does not tell nor should it be interpreted that the missile was fired or employed from a particular station. There is no firing of munitions during SCL testing. All the SCL can tell you, it's one and only job, is to confirm that the aircraft is aerodynamically sound in flight and can be operated in the air without undue stress to the pilot or airframe with a particular loadout.
Any reference to test aircraft. Don't count. There's a book worth of reasons why, but test aircraft should never be considered when asking what if, because test birds are what ifs in and of themselves. Also, a test bird doesn't have to be at Edwards to be a test bird.
I'm not posting to make an opinion about what ED is or is not doing with 4&6. I'm trying to shed a little light on real world F-16s because the community seems to have lots of questions in this regard with a search for the truth.
I'm not coming from a position of being well read. Because of how a wiring harness must be installed, you get to know every single pin, because you'll be wiring every single pin for each station. Connect every matrix and multiplex bus. It's not an easy job, and not one that everyone is chosen to qualify for. The best guys still take a couple weeks to finish one side.
I hope this helps shed a little understanding on where the real world jet sits on the matter, and why.
From one 2W1 to another, :thumbup:
-
It's not hard to find pics:
That looks like 90-835 which is a Block 50
http://www.f-16.net/aircraft-database/F-16/airframe-profile/3207/
-
That's an extended launcher on those pictures.
That's correct, it's a variant of the LAU-131/LAU-68. The LAU-68F/A & LAU-131A/A are about 11 inches longer than the LAU-68D/A & LAU-131/A.
https://www.arnolddefense.com/product/lau-131-a/
Hopefully these new versions get added.
-
I'm thinking the Desert livery will be the first set to be finished.
-
Having been stationed at Nellis and TDY there too many times to count, I have a laundry list of items just for that base alone that should have been there from day one. So I very much wish for an update to the NTTR.
-
2
-
-
416th FLTS Skins or something else?
-
Playing with the normal maps and adding the reinforcement plates. Now if I could remove the AIFF antennas...
Just something I'm experimenting with, haven't decided if I will add them in or not.
-
It turns out the codes given by that site don't match up well with FS numbers. I've got some good photos so that sounds like a more fool proof way to get the color match I'm looking for.
Thanks for the input!
-
So I'm still a bit rusty on getting the colors correct for aircraft liveries as before I would simply use some scale model references and sample the colors from it. Recently I started work on a Standard USAF livery for my skins and started using the official template for the base color. I then discovered a website that would give me the hex code for most federal standard colors.
I decided to use this to plug these into Photoshop for what I hoped would be more accurate colors, but that doesn't seem to be the case.
This is the livery using the DCS Default colors.
This the livery using the Federal Standard converted into the Hex Code.
Seems a little washed out to me, thoughts?
Generic MLU skins
in F-16C
Posted
PM inbound