DCS: F-5E!

[TomCatMucDe]

Cause now that people are getting better in the mirage and the plane itself will have its missing feared the MIG won't have fun anymore. Hope the F5 won't take long till its there

[mattebubben]

If the F-5E gets a Aim-9P4 or Aim-9P5 (Wich is really should get)

 

then the mig would not have a real advantage in a headon fight.

 

Against a Mig-21 in Afterburner the F-5E could probably even get the first shot of in a headon.

 

Against a non afterburning mig it might or might not get a good tone before the R-3R is in range but it would either be before or just after.

 

So a F-5E with the All aspect Aim-9Ps would very likley be able to fire a missile off and most still have the time to go evasive before the R-3R reached him.

 

Would be interesting for the F-5E pilot since he would very much have to decide if it was worth it or not before fiering any missile since he cant really afford wasting missiles when you only have 2.

[spiddx]

On the other hand when both fire at about the same time the AIM-9 is fire and forget while the R3R isn't. So the F-5 can go defensive immediatly while the MiG can't if it wants to score a hit.

[Kev2go]

just 4 missiles, 2xR3R and 2xR13M1. The F5 will have a hard time evading the R3R. When it does defend, it would go into a merge with in a bad situation.

 

For sure it comes to the pilote skill, but in equal skills, the F5 is at a big disadvantage without radar missiles.

 

6 missiles in total actually. you can mount x4 r60/r60m( x2 per pylon under each wing) plus an addtional 2 missiles.

Edited January 14, 2016 by Kev2go

[spiddx]

You can even load 8xR60s. :) I wouldn't recommend it though as the MiG turns like a bus with that much drag.

[Ultra]

Some people say the Mig shouldn't even have the dual pylon capability, as it's not realistic. I personally don't know if it's realistic or not.

[RoflSeal]

MiG-21 could certainly be fitted with twin rails. Polish MiG-21s were fitted with them, but as far as I know, only the inner pylons could mount them

Edited January 14, 2016 by RoflSeal

[Tirak]

MiG-21 could certainly be fitted with twin rails. Polish MiG-21s were fitted with them, but as far as I know, only the inner pylons could mount them

 

Google disagrees.

 

[Ultra]

Idk, there's a whole argument somewhere on here about it. I didn't read the whole thing.

[WinterH]

Arguments were about loading two sets of twin rails (8 missiles total) being unrealistic, not twin rails themselves.

[TomCatMucDe]

Yes, I have read that in real 8 R60 werent possible. Going with this loadout is more of a handicap than an advantage, and it would be so against the F5. You are much less manoeuvrable and you would have a hard time to get on his six.

 

I think when you have 4 of these you would never get to shoot the last 2-4 before you die.

[Nerd1000]

6 missiles in total actually. you can mount x4 r60/r60m( x2 per pylon under each wing) plus an addtional 2 missiles.

 

Those doubled up pylons weigh you down and induce more drag than they're worth, especially if you're concerned with flying long distances. I never load more than 4 missiles, typically 2x R-3R and 2x R-60M.

 

Edit: on that topic, how does the F-5 compare to the MiG when it comes to range? It seems to have much larger droptanks.

[Aginor]

The F-5 has the greater range and/or loiter time.

[mattebubben]

The F-5 has the greater range and/or loiter time.

 

Are you sure about that =P

 

All ive seen points towards the opposite =P.

Edited January 14, 2016 by mattebubben

[Aginor]

I have a book here that states around 2000 miles of range for the F-5E and 1100 miles for the MiG-21bis.

 

Although I admit I am not sure if the F-5's range may not actually be the ferry range, it sounds impossible with internal fuel, but I don't know how many drop tanks have to be used for that range.

 

EDIT: Interesting, Wikipedia puts the F-5 at around 750 miles of range and the MiG-21 at 1200. So either my book used a range with external tanks or one of the numbers is horribly wrong....

 

EDIT2:

This site puts the F-5E operational range at around 1500 miles:

http://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/f-5.htm

Edited January 14, 2016 by Aginor

[mattebubben]

that 1500 miles is probably with 3 external tanks ("Maximum" fuel)

 

and the Mig-21 numbers are stated to be on internal fuel only.

 

The F-5E is a very small airframe (even smaller then the mig-21) and carries 2 engines instead of one.

 

So while those engines might be very fuel efficient its still two weaker engines instead of one stronger engine.

 

And also the 2 engines limit the space avaliable for internal fuel.

 

So the F-5Es range is limited so planning / throttle management will likley be very important to preserve fuel.

 

And i foresee the 3 external tanks to be standard atleast for any air-air missions.

[Aginor]

And i foresee the 3 external tanks to be standard atleast for any air-air missions.

Me too, but that's the same thing for the MiG-21, at least if the use of afterburner is intended, that thing gulps down fuel like nothing. :D

[mattebubben]

i kinda like the way in the mig-21 where you can turn the Afterbuner on / off with the switch.

 

I usually only turn on the afterburner switch when in close combat (or trying to catch up when ambushing somone)

 

but other then that i always fly without the Afterburner

(Milpower or 90% rpm)

 

i wonder of the F-5E will work.

 

If there is an "on/off" switch for the afterburner or if its all in the throttle (like in the FC3 fighters where if u put full throttle the afterburner turns on).

[Aginor]

I think I recall it being just the throttle, probably with a detent so you don't push it into afterburner that easily.

So I'd assume it will work like in the FC3 planes or the M-2000.

[cofcorpse]

I think I recall it being just the throttle, probably with a detent so you don't push it into afterburner that easily.

 

Correct!

[Ultra]

Arguments were about loading two sets of twin rails (8 missiles total) being unrealistic, not twin rails themselves.

 

Ah yes, thanks for the correction.

[openfalcon68]

F-5E-3 in DCS World 1.5.2

 

This is a lot more better and different than the older F-5E which is still present in DCS World.

 

 

A preview of the F-5E Module ?

 

Manish

[Aginor]

Well, we can say there is a new external model in the game.

That's all for now, but yeah, I guess we can call that a preview. :)

[King_Hrothgar]

The new 3d model has been in for a couple months at least. The F-5E and F-5E-3 appear to be identical as well in appearance, skin options and armaments. But yeah, it's good looking, I can't wait to fly it.

[Hook47]

MiG-21 could certainly be fitted with twin rails. Polish MiG-21s were fitted with them, but as far as I know, only the inner pylons could mount them

 

On the way back from my last deployment, we stopped in Croatia and I spoke at length with a MiG 21 crew chief in Croatia, he told me that twin pylons could be mounted on any store. Since this was right when the MiG 21 was in the near future I was very interested in its capabilities so I bombarded him with questions. I've seen people state otherwise on the forum but I feel like he would know. People who talk about this or that being unrealistic need to realize the extent which each of these aircraft could be and were modified.

 

Also 8 R-60s weight little more than four and two R-3Rs IIRC (thinking a 100 lbs or so, I'll have to load the sim to check later) so that is a mute point. I use the load out occasionally to good success (if I know I'll be in knife fights with wingmen) but I usually go with six missiles. Either way, the MiG will have more teeth than the F-5 and it could be trouble for the Tiger unless it can carry more sidewinders than I suspect. I still certainly look forward to fighting in both aircraft against both aircraft

Edited January 14, 2016 by Hook47