TLTeo
-
Posts
2525 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by TLTeo
-
-
I'm a bit fuzzy on the details because iirc it depends on exact model/era/operator, but my understanding is it'll be either something barebones (think what we have in the A-4 with just an aural warning) or none at all. Afaik the only jets to receive directional RWR similar to the F-4 were the Canadian CF-104s (which were then passed down to a bunch of other operators), as well as the F-104Cs that flew in the later Vietnam deployments.
-
2
-
-
I'm pretty sure I'm one of the users that is most obsessed with an F-104, and even I want them to finish the F1 (which I greatly enjoy fwiw) first.
-
7
-
-
Yep, plus it's not like you'll have enough fuel to get enough firing opportunities to fire all 6 missiles (or 8 in the case of the meme MIg-21 loadouts).
-
3
-
-
Lovely posts. I guess my choice is to glimpse into the future to find out what HB will eventually gain acces to, or suck a fat one? Really insightful.
-
Ok I'm incredibly confused because now I can't reproduce it. I was able to do so very reliably at the time of making the original thread. Maybe some weirdness in DCS got partially broken and then fixed without me noticing? But it seems fine now.
-
1
-
-
Per the title, the ILS only works on the first map one loads in a given session. Reposted from the main forum, where steps to replicate and more information are already reported.
-
Good reminder, thanks!
-
I finally managed to find more than just the usual supersonic charts that the F-104G manuals typically come with. The data is for the -3B engine F-104A (so lighter but noticeably less powerful) with two sidewinders, but it tracks with the rest of the info in this thread - depending on weight, at sea level it'll hold ~6G without maneuvering flaps between Mach 0.8 and 0.9, so that works out to ~12 or so deg/s sustained turn rate. There's some caveats between different engines, maneuvering flaps, etc etc, but yeah, not too shabby for a 1950s supersonic aircraft supposedly incapable of turning.
Also, the stick shaker kicking in at Mach 0.6/0.7 is hilarious, it really shows how useful the addition of combat flaps was. Definitely don't try 1 circle fights.
-
2
-
1
-
-
Yep that sounds about right. The F-104G manual cites a 17 degree FoV which is similar to (but smaller than) that of the AIM-B seeker. It'll probably be semi passable for intercepting Soviet bombers at night in good weather though.
-
8 hours ago, Fitzcarraldo said:
Did it work well?
Nope xD
-
1
-
-
I don't think any F-104 user ever carried LGBs. The timer stuff was mostly for nuclear delivery, or I suppose attacking large targets (think entire airfields) with multiple aircraft. It might be semi passable with area weapons like CBUs (or napalm but that's not happening in DCS for a while if ever). Not that it's going to stop me from trying to lob four Mk-82s on just the right hangar
-
1
-
1
-
-
12 hours ago, twistking said:
How does that bombing timer work?
The bomb timer thing basically is made of two timers - a run in timer, and a release timer (although depending on the variant/operator/era the names slightly differ even though the systems do the same exact thing, go figure...). When you're planning your mission you pick an ingress point, an ingress speed, a release maneuver and a release point. You then work out how long it's going to take you to fly from the IP to the release point at your chosen speed, and how long it's going to take you to go from the release point to where the bombs need to come off the aircraft to actually hit your target. You then set those two times on the bomb timers.
When you're flying your mission, once you're over the IP you depress the weapon release button, and the run in timer starts counting down. Once it reaches 0 you're (in theory) over the release point; the gunsight turns off and you hear a sound to warn the pilot, the release timer starts counting down, and you begin your pre-planned release maneuver (say, a 4g pull to 30 degrees nose up or something). Once the release timer reaches 0 the bombs come off the aircraft automatically. The IP is something you can identify by overflying visually, or with the radar (e.g. once I see this feature at distance x, y degrees to my left/right, I'm over my IP). You can see how all of this wouldn't exactly be great for accurate conventional bombing.
QuoteWhat about Fox-1 capabilities? I assume only the later Italian air-superiority versions had it?
Roughly half the Italian S had it from the get go - "S" literally stands for "Sparrow", and that version first flew in 1965. You had to remove the gun to carry the CW illuminator to fire it though, so in practice the interceptor squadrons flew with Sparrows and the fighter bomber ones kept the gun (with some exceptions, e.g. when the interceptor folks got hand me down fighter bombers as the Tornado was coming online). The recce squadrons kept the G.
The ASA update in the late 80s/early 90s (among other things) essentially replaced the AIM-7E with the Selenia Aspide, which is based on the AIM-7E but with improved electronics/motor/seeker. It should be somewhere between the AIM-7F/M in terms of capability/performance, and it's still in use to this day as a SAM.
-
2
-
1
-
-
In the F-104G:
For air to air it's similar-ish - you have a search mode, manual acquisition, a boresight/dogfight type mode, and STT. Depending on the exact variant/era G aircraft you may or may not have access to choosing between 1 and 2 bar scans.
In air to ground it's in a completely different league from the F-5. The radar has two air go ground mapping modes (depending on beam size - one is more appropriate for high altitude mapping of large areas, one for low altitude), and two ground avoidance modes (terrain avoidance, in which the antenna is stabilized along the flight path direction, and contour mapping, in which it is pitch stabilized). Also, the antenna is not roll-stabilized so that makes things pretty interesting if you're maneuvering at low altitude. Navigation is mostly just INS/TACAN with help from the radar. The F-104 was actually the very first fighter aircraft to fly with an INS.
Weapons delivery is mostly manual; there is a bomb timer very similar to that in the F-4E, but just like in the Phantom it's most appropriate for either extremely large targets (think bombing in the general direction of an airfield) or nukes (which won't be a thing in DCS - maybe we could get a practice round though, that'd be cool).
I do not have as much info on earlier variants, but I imagine they are much closer to the F-5 (no INS for sure, likely no ground mapping modes or bomb timers, although the C had LABS iirc). The S had a radar with (some) improvement in air to air modes (and a bit more with the ASA upgrade), and eventually had GPS integrated as well with the ASAM upgrade.
-
2
-
3
-
-
20 hours ago, Schmidtfire said:
the F-100D is in progress and is in need of older winder variants.
They would have no overlap with the Tomcat though - the older Navy variants it would have used are the D, G and H, while the Hun flew with the E.
-
Also you have to be a bit careful with how you model stuff. Just because you look down and/or are at low altitude, doesn't mean you're dominated by clutter to the point of not being able to target or track something. The F-4 radar is a good example.
-
1
-
-
Yep! I wonder what else they're considering. I think if I could choose any other variant on top of the consortium G, I'd go with a Vietnam deployments-era C.
-
2
-
-
That is certainly one of the analogies ever.
Kermit, what do you think the role of VVS fighter bomber regiments flying the Mig21 was?
-
3
-
-
Best I can tell (source here http://www.ww2.dk/new/air force/regiment/shap/apib.htm), 13/31 Soviet fighter-bomber regiments flew the Mig-21 at some point in the Cold War (18th, 66th, 129th, 136th, 136th, 224th, 236th, 266th, 296th, 300th, 760th, 899th, 911th). That seems like a very large fraction for an aircraft not considered in any way for a2g missions. Granted, many of those regiments also flew e.g. the Mig 15 and 19 so the Soviets were definitely pretty cavalier with what types they tasked to those regiments
Quotewhy you consider F-105 as not direct competitor for F-104? Why not F-4 Phantom?
Because a) neither was available for export when the 104 orders were signed (or ever, in the case of the Thud) b) both were significantly more expensive both to purchase and operate and c) the 105 was wholly inadequate for air to air so it didn't meet the 104 requirements anyway. And also I don't care about "muh capabilities in DCS", if I did I'd be throwing out JDAMS from 40 thousand feet in a Viper anyway.
QuoteWhat kind of RWR posses F-104? As for passive countermeasures, is it AN/ALE -40?
Depends on the version. Some had better RWRs (e.g the Canadian and USAF ones, which then passed on to a bunch of operators), on-board jammers (some Italian ones did at least), etc. The consortium one we're getting is likely to be those two systems, yes. It's not great by any stretch of the imagination, but it's misleading to compare it to e.g. the AL-300 of the F1EE given that that was a 90s upgrade.
Plenty of other NATO flew with very barebones EW suits at the time - off the top of my head, every G91, every F84, most MAP F-100, most (all?) first gen F-5s, even the Harrier Gr1/AV8A. It definitely wasn't survivable. It also was not limited to the F-104. And it's not like the SPO-10 is some masterpiece of self protection either.
-
3
-
-
The -G never carried the Aspide (or Sparrow), only the -S which is not anywhere in the announcements.
-
1
-
-
Am I misremembering, or was the F-104G the first frontline fighter to carry an INS? The F-105 only got it in Vietnam iirc, the F-4 received also got it in the late 60s/early 70s, the A-6/A-7 weren't around in the late50s/early 60s, the Mirage 3/5 was barely coming online (and many didn't have an INS), the early F-5s had about the same avionics set as a Sabre, the Hun ended up carrying a Doppler set, the Voodoo never carried one...
-
1
-
-
I don't have the full performance manual of either so I have to do a bit of reverse engineering, however I do have the Standard Aircraft Characteristics of both:
1. The top speed of the A-4F with a single Mk-82 is listed as 561kt at 7500ft. The same document lists a top speed at sea level of 556kt. In this configuration, the combat range is listed as 780nm. Source: avialogs, document released in 1971 so compliant with forum rules.
2. The top speed of an F-104C with a centerline nuke (which the -1 shows as having a drag index of 40, so close enough to the loadout above) is listed as Mach 2 at FL 35. The combat speed is listed as 615kt at mill power at 20000 ft (which is a bit optimistic since that's exactly Mach 1, but eh, let's call it somewhere below). It probably goes down a bit with extra drag from the 3 bombs, but it's not going to lose over 50kt of top speed from 5 more drag index units. In this mission the combat range is listed as 750 nm. Source: avialogs, document from 1962.
3. From the standard aircraft characteristics of a variety of A-6 and A-4 versions, with an actual air to ground loadout their top speed is always less than 500kt at all altitudes. Also, the A-4F's range drops down to <700nm with actual stores.
You are correct on the price of an F-104G.
-
1
-
-
-
Uh, TIL. I could swear I'd read on some F-104C manual that the centerline carried tanks.
-
1
-
-
Here's another one carrying both wing and centerline tanks. It clearly shows you can't carry bombs with this loadout. That is because it's carrying rockets instead.
Seriously Kermit, please please please argue in good faith or stop wasting time.
-
3
-
Which RWR will we get?
in DCS: F-104
Posted · Edited by TLTeo
The Phantom didn't have a RWR for a while either, we have a relatively late variant. Again, there are only a couple variants of the 104 with a comparable RWR to the Phantom, and you can easily tell them apart from the antennas in the nose and near the engine nozzle: