Scrape

The SMS is calculating milliseconds between release pulses. That how it understands separation. If you change the angle the number of milliseconds will not change, and thus the spacing will change. To achieve a desired result, the pilot must fly to a specific delivery point and speed or the result changes. The SMS doesn't try and predict what the pilot wants to achieve and will not 2nd guess what's happening. A level .8mach release at 10k with 400ms will have a wider spacing than a 45degree dive at .8mach at 10k with 400ms spacing.

HOF (Height of Function) is set on the ground and cannot be changed in the air. This is the case for all versions. The WCMD is for wind corrected for HOF (What people keep calling HOB) not for the bomblet fall point. This is because the internal SUU may have different submunitions installed. The most common real world setting for HOF (when the case splits) is 1500ft. Dropping a CBU low, means a low dispersal area. They aren't designed to be low level delivery weapons, and don't work best down low.

The FLCS ("Flickis") doesn't need to be told specifically what is on the stations. It will adjust the aircraft accordingly to the pilots "request." There is the CAT I and CAT III switch, but that's a different topic. If you load the F-16 with munitions and leave the inventory page blank the jet will be just fine. The FLCS doesn't check for individual stores on the aircraft. Jettison and weapons release are handled by two different systems. You can have jettison ability without the missile or any other smart weapon being connected. Jettison control in this case comes from the WWP (Wing Weapons Pylon). This is the large pylon that all a2g munitions or adapters hang from under the wing on 3,4,6,7. This pylon cannot be jettisoned, but anything it's holding onto can be. This can be disabled, as in the case with travel pods. The WWP holds onto stores via mechanical hooks and the hooks are independent from any 1760 or weapon communication cables. If an item is heavy enough to become a factor in an emergency then the station will be what is called "carted." This will give a particular station jettison and release functions. Yes the pilot will have the option to save the aircraft with emergency jettison if the store is heavy enough to make a difference.

The S-J page works the way it does in the real jet. You should unselect any stations, and then press the S-J highlighted button at the bottom. This returns you to a master page. On that page unselect jettison and now you'll be free to navigate anywhere you like and switch master modes freely.

In the United States yes. The jets under the hood are the same per block. The jets, crews, maintainers, supply system for each block is standardized so that equipment, personnel, experience, training and knowledge is completely interchangeable. Different squadrons will focus on different mission roles, but the jets themselves are the same. He was trying to explain that sometimes it is economical for an aircraft to ferry equipment on its weapon stations rather than going through the complexities of shipping that equipment by other means.

He was trying to explain that sometimes it is economical for an aircraft to ferry equipment on its weapon stations rather than going through the complexities of shipping that equipment by other means.

Top notch as always. Looking forward to it!

I don't think ED realized what the case is with sta 4&6. This isn't common knowledge for a pilot, and a pilot SME wouldn't be able to speak on the issue in depth. It's not in their area of expertise. The function of an 88, sure. How it's built, not really. I offered the example of the wire diagram because on that wire diagram, the lines are present. On paper. In reality they aren't, and for numerous good reasons. There's no spears to throw because it's the kind of misconception that someone who's reasonable and in good faith can make. Documentation alone can't provide the answers to this question. Either you have to see it with your eyes, or talk to someone who's put their hands on it. There's no documents that ED will have access to that will show what I've highlighted. That's why you can't blame them.

Just a follow up to the sidebar question. US F-16s have a maximum of 6 A2A weapons stations. Stations 1-9, 2-8, 3A-7A. That's it. No variations. Sta 4&6 do not have the required wiring to support A2A weapons, and there is no receptacle in the wing for the underwing adapter which is used on sta 2,8,3A,7A.

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.

While irl this is possible, it would not be the norm. Good out of the box thinking, but if you dropped a weapon then which number was that again? It could be confusing for the person operating the laser on the ground, including yourself as the pilot. Typically this is avoided for that reason. They way I do this in DCS with my group is have two wingmen with different codes drop at the same time while two different lasers are running. You can still accomplish this, just bring a friend!

Be careful what you wish for. There was an AIM-7 pylon, for sta 3 & 7 (not kidding), to allow the F-16 to carry two AIM-7s. Yes, just two. It looked like a slender version of the WWP, or the A2G pylon normally on 3 & 7. The last version of the 16 to be able to use these was the Blk 30. Why be careful? It was one of those things, that while present, wasn't really used and spent more time in crates than out of them, but they did exist. At this rate, I'd say it may not be entirely off the table. While I'm at it. I noted some passing comments. 3 & 7 can be converted into A2A stations. 4 & 6 cannot. And no...not a single one...of any operational U.S. owned F-16 can carry CFTs. The fuel connections are not present, there's nothing for the CFTs to hook up to. Any Blk 50 series that can carry CFTs belong to a country outside the United States.

Good concerns. The misunderstanding is easy to make looking from the outside. The SCL doesn't dictate how a jet is wired. This document is taken out of context. What it is saying is that the configuration will not produce any undesirable effects on the aircraft or performance in a normal flight or combat situation. The jet will be safe to fly with X configuration. That's the only purpose of a SCL. It is not and never has been a source document for aircraft components or wiring. Another misunderstood thing about test, is that they only happen at, or aircraft assigned to Edwards. This is not the case. For your other concern. If the MFD can't see the video, neither can SMS. The HARM cannot be used. The video involves a critical step. The HTS pod isn't connected to the HARM, it's connected to, eventually, the SMS. If the SMS can't see video, then the link between HTS and HARM is broken. A no video fault is not allowed on aircraft in the SEAD role and will generate a Red X (no fly) condition.

Stations 4&6 are not wired for video. The only stations that can transmit video are 3&7. I'm saying this as a guy who ran those video lines the AGM-88 uses. I started on BLK 30s in 2001 and worked 16s for 13 years. Never saw a video line going to or from stations 4&6. Not sure who changed your mind, but it's worth taking a second look. Edit for clarification: The station comm lines exist. Meaning jettison commands and such will go through and work. However there is no video, so the WPN page on the MFD will be blank. The 88 and LAU-118 will send the video, but there is no pin in the pylon disconnect on the wing to receive it on stations 4 & 6. Can't use a 88 without video. 65s and 88s use the same video line. Meaning that United States F-16s (can't speak for other countries) cannot support 65s or 88s on sta 4&6.

Awesome, thanks for the update and Heatblur has our continued support!

Earlier this year before ED tinkered with the missile code. Before AIM-120s range was extended the AIM-54s would track on ships and hit them with PSTT. Not sure if this was intended, but it used to work. Close range at 10nm worked very reliably. Longer range shots at 40nm reduced impact rate to about half with varied results. We've had several patches since then, but last time I checked on it the 54s ignored ships unless PAL was used to lock the ship. Without PAL no track, but with PAL track. Not sure if that's the case still. Things have been changing this year. As you noted, a missile doesn't care much what it's locked onto. It just cares that it can see it. It would be great if we had that capability back, but understand if we have shrug it off.

DCS missiles are in a state of change, but a missile doesn't care what it's shot at. It doesn't "know" what it's being shot at, it only knows if it can "see" it one way or another. There are many factors to consider, but a missile itself doesn't care if the target is a low flying aircraft, helicopter, or ship.

Had this been real life it's very possible that it could have been a compressor stall. Compressor stalls can and do happen for a myriad of conditions on fighter jets. A compressor stall doesn't mean anything broke, or had degraded performance. It doesn't mean the engine was damaged before or after. I suspect that HB did their due diligence when coding, and that means certain conditions make the engine "unhappy" are possible in DCS. Also mirroring a bit of real life, these conditions may prove difficult to reproduce. I've encountered a couple myself in the sim, and I think it's pretty cool.

Most common used altitude for canister separation is 1500ft. I'd say for best results it should be off the rack by 3000ft. If you experiment with this, you'll see a different dispersal radius of the submunitions.

I do, actually. Where is this noted? Maybe I missed it somehow, and why not all spoilers react the same way?

The Navy didn't use the Tomcat in an A2G role for a long time, and we know this. However, the engineers had designed the Tomcat with A2G in mind. The earliest red and white test Tomcats went through their trials with A2G stores for a reason. Designed for and use of did not converge until later.

It's a bug. Once the wings are forward if you encounter the partial spoilers up bug it can be worked around by engaging and disengaging full flaps. Once you go wheels up off the runway or carrier the bug goes away, and will not affect Tomcat performance. The bug is a known bug. No adverse control input or effect on the Tomcat other than it looks weird.

I'd be interested.

To add a small piece to what Shagrat said...With LGBs like the GBU-10, 12, etc. the nose option will activate the seeker head. For all LGBs you'd selected N/T. Selecting only Tail (T) will leave the fuze active, but the seeker head won't be. Like mentioned there are never nose fuzes on LGBs. Only tail fuzes and the fins are hard wired to deploy. Fins for LGBs are never attached to a fuze solenoid or fuze option. The seeker head of the LGBs, either CCG or GCU is always wired to the nose solenoid. I do not know if DCS models this, but if it does then N/T is the only correct option for LGB employment.

Copy that. Thanks for the follow-up!!