DCS: F-5E!

[mattebubben]

Does anyone know what Variant of the Aim-9P is modeld ingame?

 

 

Since its not all Aspect It has to be a P-1, P-2, Or P-3.

 

But there is a Preformance differance between the P-1 and the P-3 so it does make a differance wich one is in the game =P.

[MBot]

Does anyone know what Variant of the Aim-9P is modeld ingame?

 

 

Since its not all Aspect It has to be a P-1, P-2, Or P-3.

 

But there is a Preformance differance between the P-1 and the P-3 so it does make a differance wich one is in the game =P.

 

I'm the guy that did the 3d model many years ago and asked ED unprompted to imlement it. ED very kindly did so, which to me was a huge gameplay boost for Lock On (dogfights without all-aspect missiles are way more fun, for both sides). The 3d model is an AIM-9P-3 but I am not sure to what specs it was coded. Frankly I don't think that Lock On at that point was able to model such fine differences between missile marks, and I am not even sure if DCS now does.

[Kev2go]

I'm the guy that did the 3d model many years ago and asked ED unprompted to imlement it. ED very kindly did so, which to me was a huge gameplay boost for Lock On (dogfights without all-aspect missiles are way more fun, for both sides). The 3d model is an AIM-9P-3 but I am not sure to what specs it was coded. Frankly I don't think that Lock On at that point was able to model such fine differences between missile marks, and I am not even sure if DCS now does.

 

Yea f15 has both aim9m/ aim9p.

 

I experimented with the aim9p a while back.

 

Haven't really used in much due to obviously preferring to use the aim 9m. however the aim9p, It doesn't have have full aspect lock. But indeed seems to have a higher degree of angle of attack sort of like the r60m.

 

So I guess it's most likely an aim9p3

 

 

Again why is Belsimtek only giving the f5e aim9p when AI f5 has both the aim9p and the aim9m.

 

Also how is it the AI F5E can hold x4 m82 bombs in the wings and x5 mk82s on the fuselage area totalling 9 bombs. But Belsimtek site is saying only max of 5 m82 500 pound bombs can be armed?

Edited November 11, 2015 by Kev2go

[Proof]

Also how is it the AI F5E can hold x4 m82 bombs in the wings and x5 mk82s on the fuselage area totalling 9 bombs. But Belsimtek site is saying only max of 5 m82 500 pound bombs can be armed?

 

I may be wrong, but I interpreted the list to show the maximum of each type, and to achieve the payload you described simply you would have 4x Mk-82 plus the MER-5 5x Mk-82, which are listed as separate weapons.

[cofcorpse]

Again why is Belsimtek only giving the f5e aim9p when AI f5 has both the aim9p and the aim9m.

 

AI plane is not completed yet in 1.5. It will have the same loadout as player one.

 

I may be wrong, but I interpreted the list to show the maximum of each type, and to achieve the payload you described simply you would have 4x Mk-82 plus the MER-5 5x Mk-82, which are listed as separate weapons.

 

Yes, you are correct, total of 9 bombs, 4 under wings and 5 on center pylon on MER (Multiple Ejector Rack)

[Exorcet]

Well with me not knowing too much about the F-5 I am surprised it actually can only carry two A2A missiles, and only heaters at that! Sounds like pound for pound the scales will be tipped towards the MiG 21 in the A2A scenario, As the mig can carry anywhere from 4 to 8(!) A2A missiles, which is rather surprising to me.

 

The F-5 is not a heavy mainline fighter. If it was used in US service, it would have held a place much like the original F-16. Used to bump up blue force numbers in combination with bigger fighters.

 

As far as balance goes though, I'd rather fly the F-5 for the RWR alone assuming it's similar to more modern ones. The MiG's is useless. If there is an advantage for the MiG, it's head on attacks being possible with radar missiles. In a dogfight, the F-5 should perform better with the MiG's main advantage being to run, but this makes it more vulnerable to those two missiles.

[Kev2go]

I may be wrong, but I interpreted the list to show the maximum of each type, and to achieve the payload you described simply you would have 4x Mk-82 plus the MER-5 5x Mk-82, which are listed as separate weapons.

 

ahhh right thanks. sorry didnt Realise the Mer5 is probably the fuselage mounts of the mk82s, that its seperate from the single bomb mounts on the wings.

 

ok then.

 

Also logged in dcs. new update of Beta 1.5 to 1.5.1. It seems the AI f5E has had The all aspect Aim9M removed. ( It has them in 1.2.6 and had it in Earlier build of the 1.5 beta.)

 

Now it has just Aim9P and Gar8 missile ( aka aim9b)

 

just like the representatives from belsimtek posted earlier

 

guess no full aspect IR missile for the F-5E model they are developing :cry:

Edited November 11, 2015 by Kev2go

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

ahhh right thanks. sorry didnt Realise the Mer5 is probably the fuselage mounts of the mk82s, that its seperate from the single bomb mounts on the wings.

 

ok then.

 

Also logged in dcs. new update of Beta 1.5 to 1.5.1. It seems the AI f5E has had The all aspect Aim9M removed. ( It has them in 1.2.6 and had it in Earlier build of the 1.5 beta.)

 

Now it has just Aim9P and Gar8 missile ( aka aim9b)

 

just like the representatives from belsimtek posted earlier

 

guess no full aspect IR missile for the F-5E model they are developing :cry:

 

On the bright side, the Fishbed isn't much better off. I mean, my dog is scared of firecrackers, so maybe the R-60s are more fearsome than they same.

[pepin1234]

I would like know which version of the RWR gone have the F-5E. I mean, I don't believe the RWR of the 90's have the same performance than the RWR of the 70's

 

e.g.

 

AN/APR-36/37 Vietnam era.

 

AN/ALR-46 with analogue processor.

Edited November 11, 2015 by pepin1234

[Kev2go]

On the bright side, the Fishbed isn't much better off. I mean, my dog is scared of firecrackers, so maybe the R-60s are more fearsome than they same.

 

actually the fishbed is better off for A2A. can arm 4-8 missiles including SA guided r3r, while the f5 will have only 2 IR seekers. SO if your limited by two might as balance it, by compensating it by giving a all aspect aim9m. But guess thats not happening based on the new update.

Edited November 11, 2015 by Kev2go

[howie87]

The MiG-21 has TERRIBLE cockpit ergonomics though. Switching missiles is clunky and the controls are spread out all over the place. You can 'cheat' by mapping controls to your HOTAS but I like to click on things in the virtual pit. The F-5 will be much better in the regard. Plus I won't have to convert everything from metres and km/h to feet and knots in my head!

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

actually the fishbed is better off for A2A. can arm 4-8 missiles including SA guided r3r, while the f5 will have only 2 IR seekers. SO if your limited by two might as balance it, by compensating it by giving a all aspect aim9m. But guess thats not happening based on the new update.

 

With those added weapons in the twin packs, you have a much lower G-limit than the F-5E. The F-5E also has the much better gun set up.

 

The R-3R is a short-range semi-active, as well. In a WVR engagement, that's not exactly an advantage if you have to maintain lock.

[Kev2go]

With those added weapons in the twin packs, you have a much lower G-limit than the F-5E. The F-5E also has the much better gun set up.

 

The R-3R is a short-range semi-active, as well. In a WVR engagement, that's not exactly an advantage if you have to maintain lock.

 

 

well its good the F5E has a better gun setup, after all an f5 pilot will have to resort to guns much quicker than a mig pilot

you forget but the mig21 has a higher top speed, and better acceleration and climb over the F5E. the mig21 can engage, and disengage at will if the player manages the energy. generally speaking thats a much better advantage than having only to rely on wvr. r3r sem active guided allows the mig21 pilot to engage frontally, so the r3r is useful.

 

If F5E doesnt get aim9ms then it need an additional pair of aim9p seekers fitted below on the wing hardpoints, any additional hardpoints or plyons too would give the f5e a lower g loading.

 

 

the point is for both aircraft to be balanced. That after all is why Belsimtek chose to do the F5E module. so the Mig21 could have a balanced, and comparable Western counterpart.

Edited November 11, 2015 by Kev2go

[King_Hrothgar]

Assuming the F-5E doesn't have all aspect missiles, then the MiG will hold the advantage in a head on attack at range thanks to the R-3R. But those are really easy to evade tbh. In the end, all it means is the F-5E will want to dive towards the deck to break lock when going into the merge. I don't think it will be a major issue. The real question is will the MiG-21's greater speed and acceleration be enough to avoid getting an AIM-9P up the tail while B&Zing. The other big question is that of situational awareness. The MiG-21's forward viability is poor. If the F-5E's is substantially better, then the higher SA that offers could be decisive in the right hands.

Edited November 11, 2015 by King_Hrothgar

[pepin1234]

Assuming the Mig-21 go into dogfight. The best choice is dropping out two missiles and keep only two R-60. The R-60 is a good missile for the aiming/lock pipper solution in close dogfight.

 

In this case you can forget the twins R-60 per pylons. The best dogfight for the Mig-21 is two missile only and this two should be R-60, because the lower weigh and deadly they are in short distance.

 

Make a test and you will see. So the F-5 is ready to dogfight from the take off and be careful because is a beast turning

[RevolverOcelot]

 

the point is for both aircraft to be balanced. That after all is why Belsimtek chose to do the F5E module. so the Mig21 could have a balanced, and comparable Western counterpart.

 

When did they officially mention the F-5E they're making to be implemented because the mig-21 needed a balanced counterpart?

[Kev2go]

When did they officially mention the F-5E they're making to be implemented because the mig-21 needed a balanced counterpart?

 

heres was the very initial annoucement.

 

http://www.belsimtek.com/news/1553/

 

"Continuing working on the “famous” fighters’ line, we are especially concerned about game balance in DCS World. The best rival for the beloved by users MiG-21bis is an American fighter F-5E Tiger II, developed by the Northrop in the second half of the last century."

 

 

why you think the mig21bis is balanced and fair against FC3 4th generation fighters?

 

Mig21 has no natural opponents with comparable tech, from similar ac generation of tech. thats why the F5E was chosen to be developed.

Edited November 11, 2015 by Kev2go

[Cann0nF0dd3r]

Why only 2 AIM-9s? The F-5E could carry 4, two on the wingtips and two and the outermost pylons. Later versions could even carry AMRAAMs as well.

[Custard]

Why only 2 AIM-9s? The F-5E could carry 4, two on the wingtips and two and the outermost pylons. Later versions could even carry AMRAAMs as well.

Read that on Wikipedia did you?

[Cann0nF0dd3r]

Read that on Wikipedia did you?

It's listed in several places.

 

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

[dartuil]

Why only 2 AIM-9s? The F-5E could carry 4, two on the wingtips and two and the outermost pylons. Later versions could even carry AMRAAMs as well.

 

I understand what u mean but :

-Manual is hard to find.

-Cockpit info too.

-This F-5E is made to fight the mig-21. ( too bad I know)

[Exorcet]

the point is for both aircraft to be balanced. That after all is why Belsimtek chose to do the F5E module. so the Mig21 could have a balanced, and comparable Western counterpart.

Yes balance is a goal, but it still needs to be a simulation. Granted adding the option for extra missiles isn't a bad idea, but I can see why they might not do it. The F-5's missile load out is not that much of a disadvantage anyway, the bigger issue for F-5's is that they can't do anything head on. You can remove this issue by limiting MiG missiles to early IR.

[Kev2go]

Yes balance is a goal, but it still needs to be a simulation. Granted adding the option for extra missiles isn't a bad idea, but I can see why they might not do it. The F-5's missile load out is not that much of a disadvantage anyway, the bigger issue for F-5's is that they can't do anything head on. You can remove this issue by limiting MiG missiles to early IR.

 

Balancing isn't breaking simulation. As long as such capabilities or upgrades existed and were used.

 

They can balance it by giving the f5 the an/apq 159 radar. Over the earliest1.53.

 

It was listed as part other f5e block 34 source I posted. It has plenty of info on the f5e capabilites and available upgrades. The source was from 1979

 

An/apq153 only had a range or 20 NM while an/apq 159 had 40nm twice the detection range and ability to lock on targets off boresight.

 

it's still more of a novelty feature since the 159 still doesn't have bvr missiles or all aspect heat seekers. To take advantage of its features.

 

But a longer Range radar would allow for the f5's to detect mig21 first and allow them to plan a different approach

Edited November 11, 2015 by Kev2go

[dartuil]

Did BST already say which radar they make?

[Buzzles]

The most important question is will we get a black skin with a red star on it? :)