Weapons regarding F5E Tiger II

[OldE24]

I think the F5 will have a very hard time facing the 21. No it's gonna be a massacre

 

unless the bandaid a IFF..which it doesn have aparently, it will be a team killing cluster .... in multi player, it's RWR will let it deal with the mig but in a 104th/blue flag setting i can see the friendly kill a thon comming to a server near you.

[Custard]

unless the bandaid a IFF..which it doesn have aparently, it will be a team killing cluster .... in multi player, it's RWR will let it deal with the mig but in a 104th/blue flag setting i can see the friendly kill a thon comming to a server near you.

Maybe it's time to stop the ridiculous practice of putting all planes on both teams then. Hopefully we can finally see the rise of some 70s East v West servers. Pitting the MiG-21, L39ZA, Mi-8 & Gazelle against F-5E, Huey & Gazelle.

 

After all, Mirage v 21 was popular back when that was a fair fight back. When the alpha state of the Mirage prevented it being as much of a threat as it is now.

Edited May 26, 2016 by Custard

[WinterH]

F-5, even if it gets the top AAM it can in form of AIM-9P5, still only have visual range air to air armaments.

 

As Custard said above, if F-5 pilot knows who are on the opposing team, which he should... with it's visual range only weapons it shouldn't be too much of an issue, in fact, a non-issue.

 

From what I know, newer popular servers suchas blue flag have dissimilar plane sets for Blue and Red sides, so would not be an issue.

 

For more usual servers such as 104 etc. it can be argued still a good thing as it may encourage a bit more communication and teamwork, as F-5 may team up with another aircraft, as MiG-21 did often early on it's release.

 

Edit : besides, at worst, it may not be 104th friendly, as many released and reasonable popular old aircraft aren't either. I am sure we will get some F-5 vs MiG-21 servers.

Edited May 26, 2016 by WinterH

[Vedexent]

Hear hear. If the F-5 isn't "Airquake" friendly, it doesn't make it useless.

 

Just use it / design missions a bit more intelligently.

 

As for the F-5/MiG-21 match - I suspect that the disparate skills of the pilot are going to weigh heavier than any disparate capabilities of the planes (planes don't kill people ...).

 

I say this as a "ground pounder" who sucks at A2A - so it probably doesn't matter which airframe you'd give me in that match up. :P

[WinterH]

Speaking of ground pounding, one of my favorite things to do in MiG-21 is to practice toss bombing from a standoff distance against convoys, which I very rarely succeed at :D.

 

When released, it will be one of the first things I will try with F-5, as you can potentially carry 9 bombs with this little bird :D.

 

Now, technically, MiG can carry and toss 10 of those but, 8 of them would be relatively puny FAB-100s, and other two FAB-250s in that case. Now only thing remains to discover is, whether the F-5 will be able to lift itself off the runway with so many bombs, given it's tiny wings and tiny engines :D.

[Custard]

 

Any chance of wing mounted MERs? I'm aware the picture is of an F-5A, but that had even less engine power than the F-5E and somehow managed.

 

Edit: Just noticed the lack of guns, anyone able to identify this bird?

[WinterH]

Edit: Just noticed the lack of guns, anyone able to identify this bird?

 

A quick search of tail number, leads to this :

 

http://www.aviation-photos.net/picture/show/22467/NORTHROP-YF-5A-FREEDOM-FIGHTER-PROTOTYPE-94987

 

and this :

 

http://www.airlinefan.com/airline-photos/United-States-Air-Force/Northrop/F-5-Freendom-Fighter-Tiger-II/94987/3284516/

 

It seems to be a prototype.

[Schmidtfire]

I think the F5 will have a very hard time facing the 21. No it's gonna be a massacre

 

I like the Mig-21bis a LOT, but it's not up to par with the upgraded Tiger II. Mig-21bis is made for shooting down big tactical nuclear bombers at high altitudes. The F-5E is not a very big aircraft and turns like a m*therf#cker. Trying to hit it with R-3R's against the F-5E's superior RWR is not gonna be easy. But we will se how it goes...

One thing is clear, there will be a lot of Mig-21 vs F-5 servers :thumbup:

[OziRekt]

Zuni rockets? Not a fan of the 70mm rockets for AT work. Wikipedia says it can carry them, not sure if it's correct though

[Vedexent]

Speaking of ground pounding, one of my favorite things to do in MiG-21 is to practice toss bombing from a standoff distance against convoys, which I very rarely succeed at :D.

 

I think with the MiG-21 - and the Sabre - you're supposed to use nukes for this ;)

 

So far as I know you can't do this with the F-5 - but I'm intrigued by the (limited?) CAS capabilities of the F-5.

 

Have to admit the shot of the snake-eye deployment in the trailer made me sit up and take notice.

[WinterH]

Yeah, it is relatively easy with Nuke due to not so small blast radius :). I have meant with regular bombs though, and I don't see a reason for F-5 to be unusable in that manner ;).

[Kev2go]

I think with the MiG-21 - and the Sabre - you're supposed to use nukes for this ;)

 

So far as I know you can't do this with the F-5 - but I'm intrigued by the (limited?) CAS capabilities of the F-5.

 

Have to admit the shot of the snake-eye deployment in the trailer made me sit up and take notice.

 

limted? in comparison the F5 is a bomb truck to the Mig21.

[hvymtal]

I think standoff against convoys would be challenging without guided weapons of some kind. CCRP lofting on steerpoints IE airfields, FARPs, and the like, I see no problem though. Besides, standoff is overrated, just fly some bombs down their throat like you would in a fulcrum :)

 

Or better yet, Rockets :D

Edited May 27, 2016 by hvymtal

[MBot]

I think standoff against convoys would be challenging without guided weapons of some kind. CCRP lofting on steerpoints IE airfields, FARPs, and the like, I see no problem though. Besides, standoff is overrated, just fly some bombs down their throat like you would in a fulcrum :)

 

Or better yet, Rockets :D

 

There is no CCRP or CCIP in the Tiger. You bomb according to values (dive angle, speed, release altitude, pipper depression) in tables. This will require a lot of training to learn, but promises to be very fun and statisfying.

 

Oh,and there aren't any steerpoints either :)

[WinterH]

Unlike in the MiG, with F-5E we will be able to set ripple quantity and ripple interval while bombing. Sort of like we can with A-10 and Su-25. This alone would make it more interesting for level or toss bombing runs, since with mig you can't adjust such things.

 

As for CCRP, I did not read the whole manual but I am %99 sure that there is no such thing in F-5 :). Same goes for steer points.

[Kev2go]

Unlike in the MiG, with F-5E we will be able to set ripple quantity and ripple interval while bombing. Sort of like we can with A-10 and Su-25. This alone would make it more interesting for level or toss bombing runs, since with mig you can't adjust such things.

 

As for CCRP, I did not read the whole manual but I am %99 sure that there is no such thing in F-5 :). Same goes for steer points.

 

Manual depression is still better over not getting any option to depress it to your given liking.

 

the aiming reticule does have a range bar inside the gun sight reticule, so the closer you get the shorter it will get. so that will certainly help in the unguided bomb dropping.

 

 

it still seems better than that 1 default bombing solution that mig21 has and red light that pop when you are close enough to bomb, which imo could be dropped a bit higher off.

 

 

with a range bar i feel as you cnn better prepare for a bomb drop and get away with higher releases, which is important for anything heavier than 500 pound bombs, as to not risk damaging your aicraft with shrapnel.

Edited May 28, 2016 by Kev2go

[Schmidtfire]

Mattebubben, what do you think about the news that LN MiG-21bis will have full-aspect R60M in the next patch? So far, we have only seen rear-aspect Aim-9P on the F-5E. MiG-21bis will have the edge when it comes to speed and missiles. F-5E will have better SA and better cannons/gunsight. Very interesting fight.

[IvanK]

WRT F5E Manual depression bombing its also worthy of note that in the Bombing mode the reticle is roll stabilized up to 22 deg angle of bank ... that makes Manual bombing a whole lot easier

[mattebubben]

Mattebubben, what do you think about the news that LN MiG-21bis will have full-aspect R60M in the next patch? So far, we have only seen rear-aspect Aim-9P on the F-5E. MiG-21bis will have the edge when it comes to speed and missiles. F-5E will have better SA and better cannons/gunsight. Very interesting fight.

 

Well first.

 

The R-60M (even fully modeled)

 

is not 100% all aspect.

 

Its Limited all aspect.

 

So its all aspects during some conditions (Range / Target type Engine power etc)

 

and also this is yet another reason why they HAVE to the F-5E the Aim-9P4 or Aim-9P5.

 

Maby the P4 as its of the same time period as the R-60M (early 80s)

 

while the Aim-9P5 is mid-late 80s.

 

Just make it an option on-top of the Aim-9P

(just like they have been talking of adding the Aim-9B)

[Schmidtfire]

Well, a lot of sources put R-60M as limited all-aspect. However, using it with FC3 aircraft, I think it's all-aspect in the sim. It has been fired head-on in combat, but so has the Atoll ;)

 

Aim-9P4 would be cool, but I don't know if they can figure out a way to mix rear-aspect with all-aspect missiles aswell as getting the right symbology (on the gunsight) for each type.

But it would be really cool and very dangerous WVR in mp.

Edited June 9, 2016 by Schmidtfire

[mattebubben]

Well, a lot of sources put R-60M as limited all-aspect. However, using it with FC3 aircraft, I think it's all-aspect in the sim. I think it has been fired head-on in combat, but so has the Atoll ;)

 

Aim-9P4 would be cool, but I don't know if they can figure out a way to mix rear-aspect with all-aspect missiles aswell as getting the right symbology (on the gunsight) for each type.

But it would be really cool and very dangerous WVR in mp.

 

The R-60M in reality can be fired head on depending on the conditions.

 

For example against a aircraft with powerful engines that is on full afterburner it will get a lock.

 

But against a aircraft with less powerful engines where its radiating less heat then it wont be able to get a solid lock.

 

Weather etc can also play a part.

 

 

And also what do you mean with

"right symbology (on the gunsight) for each type."

[Chrinik]

There is no symbology for Aim-9s on the gunsight, you either get a locktone or you don´t with some ranging information if you have the target locked in radar...that´s about it.

Edited June 9, 2016 by Chrinik

[Schmidtfire]

First off, I have always got head-on locks with the R-60M in the FC3 modules. I don't know if that is correct or not, but thats the way R-60M behaves within DCS :music_whistling:

 

I read something that the F-5E sight in "MSL, missile mode" displays some kind of ranging information for the Aim9 when the target is locked by radar, the same way as for using the cannons. With Rmax and Rmin. But I might be wrong about that...

[mattebubben]

First off, I have always got head-on locks with the R-60M in the FC3 modules. I don't know if that is correct or not, but thats the way R-60M behaves within DCS :music_whistling:

 

I read something that the F-5E sight in "MSL, missile mode" displays some kind of ranging information for the Aim9 when the target is locked by radar, the same way as for using the cannons. With Rmax and Rmin. But I might be wrong about that...

 

Yes.

 

But why would the symbology/range information have to be changed for a Aim-9P4 or P5?

 

Since first of all the Aim-9P4 uses the same Rocket engine as the Aim-9P3 (as far as i have been able to find)

So they would not really need to change the performance parameters of the calculations.

 

Or do you mean how it would handle head on calculations compared to chase calculations? (as the velocities would make the effective ranges very different)

 

It depends on how advanced the computing is (if it takes velocity into the range calculation or not)

 

but if thats not the case it would most likely just be a case of Pilot Training (the pilots knowing the effective range in a head on etc)

 

In either case.

 

If the Computer is capable of calculating the Rmin/Rmax by taking into account closure rates it wont be a problem either way.

 

And if its not capable of doing so then it wont matter since even a F-5E only using the All aspect variants would still be limited by that

 

(and would most likely have the rear aspect as the default Rmin / Rmax since its better to be closer then you have to then it is to not be close enough)

Edited June 9, 2016 by mattebubben

[IvanK]

The F5E/F/N Fire Zone computation is limited to Rmax,Rmin and excess G.(probably only relevant to AIM9B 2G launch limitation) Together with actual range these are displayed by the reticle in miss mode. Even these Rmax and Rmin calculations would be very basic as no G versus Target Aspect information is used. Range rate is however part of the Fire Zone calculation according to the Data flow diagrams in the Navy and USAF manuals.

 

What Fire Zone to use for each Missile type is a manual switch selection. This is selected pre flight and the selection switch is behind the seat. The USN F5N and USAF FE/F weapons delivery manual lists only the Aim9B,E and J as selectable options.