Jump to content

The F-5 needs an upgrade IMO

Capn kamikaze

By Capn kamikaze
in DCS Core Wish List

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 189
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Weltensegler

Weltensegler

Posted
Posted
The F-5 itself performs ok Texac' date=' but having such a limited number of missiles even if you score kills with both means a lot of landing and re-arming.[/quote']

 

The missiles are getting fixed the next updates and then its suitable for its purpose.

Also lot landing and rearming keeps you trained.

It has everything the original model had and that's what this model is supposed to simulate.

Be sure there will be mods with more missiles etc. so people who don't want the accurate simulation can play around on their servers or in SP.

4790K@4,6Ghz | EVGA Z97 Classified | 32GB @ 2400Mhz | Titan X hydro copper| SSD 850 PRO

____________________________________

Moments in DCS:

--> https://www.youtube.com/user/weltensegLA

-->

 

WELD's cockpit: --> http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=92274

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zilch

Zilch

Posted
Posted

Only two missiles just means you need practice with the gun, which is, to me, the best A2A gun system in DCS. Accurate, precise, and hard hitting enough to kill several MiG's (or ground vehicles.)

 

Refueling probe? Nah.

 

Mavericks? Maybe. This is actually a feature of the simulated aircraft and would be a fantastic addition to our experience.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Zilch79's YouTube Channel:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Capn kamikaze

Capn kamikaze

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Belsimtek just can't add fictional missiles, if the F-5E-3 hasn't used them IRL. :) Same thing for the Probe..

 

Polychop added two different versions of the Gazelle, what about adding another F-5E, one of the ones that did have four AIM-9's and the probe?

 

If you notice, my thread said "F-5" not F-5E-3, and there was a reason I wrote it that way...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
QuiGon

QuiGon

Posted
Posted
Polychop added two different versions of the Gazelle, what about adding another F-5E, one of the ones that did have four AIM-9's and the probe?

 

If you notice, my thread said "F-5" not F-5E-3, and there was a reason I wrote it that way...

 

Pls not.

Intel i7-12700K @ 8x5GHz+4x3.8GHz + 32 GB DDR5 RAM + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit

 

DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

 

Tornado3 small.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
N1tch

N1tch

Posted
Posted (edited)
Polychop added two different versions of the Gazelle, what about adding another F-5E, one of the ones that did have four AIM-9's and the probe?

 

If you notice, my thread said "F-5" not F-5E-3, and there was a reason I wrote it that way...

 

I think some people don't appreciate what goes into making a module. The Gazelle variants were planned way before launch. That's not to say Belsimtek won't add new module variants in the future but for a long time we knew what we were and were not getting.

 

A variant with a mav as someone else mentioned would be fun but that would also require a different cockpit and quite a bit of coding / scripting to have that working (not to mention additional controls).

 

A refueling probe would be fun as mid-air refueling is good practice but I don't feel it's needed. As someone stated, the A2A guns for the F-5E are so nice and fun to use, not to mention a decent amount of ammunition. If you think 2 AIM9s is bad on the F-5E you should get the Hawk... Worse AIM9,s a terrible gun and very limited ammo :pilotfly:


Edited by N1tch
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tom1502

tom1502

Posted
Posted

Yeah...how about an upgrade to F-20 specs? :thumbup:

 

Seriously though, I like the F-5 as it is. IFR would be an interesting addition, but this model didn't have it, so just have to land and refuel.

 

I've found the cannon to be excellent, the AIM-9s we know need tweaking but they still get kills. I think it is an excellent addition and a great 3rd Gen fighter for DCS.

  • Windows 10 Home - 64 Bit
  • Intel Core i7-9770K
  • 32GB DDR4 RAM
  • Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080Ti
  • Oculus Rift S

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tirak

Tirak

Posted
Posted

A new refueling probe would require a panel in the cockpit. That's a remodel and a retexture of the interior. That's coding to hook it up and make it work to. It also means remodeling the exterior, changing the flight model, and the bugsmashing required for that too. It's also a retexture, and it's a bit of a pain in the ass given the geometry but again possible. But, now you've got to code systems, and while the thing to make it work might be simple, the damage model won't be. Coding damage has been a huge stumbling block for a lot of modules. If that probe takes a hit, does it blow the whole plane up? Well no but it'll stop working. That's lines of code right there. But if it gets hit again, then what? Can it be hit at all? Does it have a damage state? Does that damage state cause a particle or flame effect? Do i need to create a damaged texture map for holes or does the whole thing fly off like a wing? What are the break points?

 

We're talking a lot of work, for no real gain. Who actually uses aerial refueling? A few folks running super sim missions and the occasional guy who does it just because it's cool, but most of the sim population does it once or twice, then never does it again because it's a pain in the ass.

 

On the other side, adding in two sidewinder slots is not out of the realm of possibility. That just uses already established hardpoint code, piece of cake. Minor coding to make it so flipping up the hardpoint switch arms the missile. Bing, bang done. There's an upgrade kit specifically for that and it doesn't require a whole lot of work. That's an upgrade worth doing, but not the refueling probe.

 

TL:DR: Refueling probe is lots of work, don't bother. Upgrade kit for 2 more sidewinders should be included.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
zcrazyx

zcrazyx

Posted
Posted (edited)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Chile_Air_Force_Northrop_F-5E_Tigre_III_Lofting-3.jpg

 

Don't know what to make of that.

 

https://cdn.defesaaereanaval.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/F-5M-FAB.jpg

 

Is an F-5EM

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_F-5#/media/File:Chile_Air_Force_Northrop_F-5E_Tigre_III_Lofting-1.jpg

 

Just says F5E III so technically the Tiger 3 by designation.

 

 

Chillian A/F bought them with the probes under Tigre III and the Canadians produced them with probes under CF-5, At the end of the day its the same air frame but with a probe bolted on and i think that because the MIG 21 has the speed advantage especially against when the F5E has external stores as well as the fact it can carry an extra 2 missiles of the short and medium range types that were not even put on until later, i then believe that if we don't get aim 120s then we should get the probe to even them up a little.

 

Also as for the AGM 65 I cannot see how a single seat aircraft with no mfcd or type of pod at all could utilise such a weapon on its own unless you just fire and forget and then let it track the nearest object (i'm sure the sight would be used but information is scarce at best) now by that logic a two seater would be able to use it however its technically a different designation and so then by this reasoning the F5E should not get mavericks either.


Edited by zcrazyx
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Capn kamikaze

Capn kamikaze

Posted
  • Author
Posted

@ Probad, tom1502 and Operator jack.... Comparing what I am asking to asking for it to be another F-15 and giving it AMRAAM's, really, or making it an F-20?

 

Taking it to those sorts of extremes to argue against my suggestion for a couple more AIM-9's kind of undermines your objection.

 

@ Nitch, I have the Hawk, and it has about the same combat persistence, but that is more reasonable considering the Hawk is primarily a trainer with a secondary combat capability, I understand how much is involved in making a module, and also how much is saved from modifying a module you've already made, all I am suggesting is that more missiles, and perhaps air-air refueling would be a very good addition in the future.

 

The F-5 could be so much better with even just the addition of a couple more sidewinders, the air to air refueling probe would be nice, but personally, I think it NEEDS more missiles, I mean vs the MiG-21 which can potentially carry 6, two seems a bit low.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...