Jump to content

Another F-117 thread (sorry!)


Airj247

Recommended Posts

The whole “it wouldn’t be fun because you fly from point A to point B, drop an LGB and return home” is an opinion totally at odds to what many of us enjoy about flight simulation. The entire civ sim community is born out of a love of flying straight and level. Do we have to enjoy air Quake to enjoy DCS? Really? Because that’s not what gets me strapped in every flight. Microprose F-117 was my favourite flight game from my childhood because it was about avoiding conflict not engaging in it, because you knew you were in trouble if you didn’t hide. Like a good thriller, it was all suspense. We also have multirole, air combat and ground pounding really well represented, whereas the F-117 would be a new experience. I really hope it gets a full fidelity module some day.

 

Absolutely THIS 100%

Main Module: AH-64D

Personal Wishlist: HH-60G, F-117A, B-52H

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting date to "zombie" the tread.... 20 years to a date since F-117 was shot down....

-------

All the people keep asking for capabilities to be modelled.... I want the limitations to be modelled.... limitations make for realistic simulation.

Arguing with an engineer is like wrestling with a pig in the mud, after a bit you realize the pig likes it.

 

Long time ago in galaxy far far away:

https://www.deviantart.com/alfafox/gallery

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, RCS modeling in DCS is quite primitive. To do any justice to the F117 you'd have to seriously upgrade the the entire engine, and every other aircraft/missile RCS. I'd still want it though.

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think there is still too much data that is not known. Like many have said, the limited info on the F-117s RCS means we have no idea how to simulate the stealth at all. It would be a massive set of guess work.

 

While it was "declassified", there are many elements that are still classified or not fully reported on. Theres a huge difference from what we get with aircraft like A-10C where ED was actually contracted to make the aircraft by the ANG, and an aircraft filled with a whole bunch of guess work. As great as the F-117 would be, I think theres still too much unknown data for it to be made to a decent quality and released within DCS. I would rather efforts be put on aircraft with a larger quality of realism than put in an aircraft that we put a bunch of "maybe it worked like this" features in.

 

and? F/A18C module unlike A10C isnt a resultant from a military Dekstop trainer. So the argument A10C was and XYZ aircraft proposed isnt, and therefore too much guesswork" isnt a really valid argument, because that would mean no Hornet, No Viper, and no Strike Eagle. All aircraft have some degrees of guess work especially aircraft that are still in active duty service.

 

Build:

 

Windows 10 64 bit Pro

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z790 Motherboard, Intel Core i7 12700k ,Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 64gb ram (3600 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia RTX 3080 12gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; Samsung 970 EVo, , Samsung evo 860 pro 1 TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD,  WD 1TB HDD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and? F/A18C module unlike A10C isnt a resultant from a military Dekstop trainer. So the argument A10C was and XYZ aircraft proposed isnt, and therefore too much guesswork" isnt a really valid argument, because that would mean no Hornet, No Viper, and no Strike Eagle. All aircraft have some degrees of guess work especially aircraft that are still in active duty service.

 

 

Very true. And even if you have all the stuff in front of you... it's STILL guesswork :P That's why they build pre-production prototypes to this very day lol As for the F-117, the aircraft relies entirely on computer control to fly, as it is barely capable of doing so itself, so if you can figure out "ballparkish" behavior, that would be close enough anyway, as without the computer you're pretty much on a very short trip... And for RCS, we don't really need super detailed specifics, and DCS doesn't have (nor particularly need to at this point) that specific. Every aircraft already has a variable RCS value, you just assign it a very small one based on an educated guess and move on. That said, it's unlikely we'll see something like a 117 anytime soon ;) I also agree with others that the aircraft having a simplistic mission profile isn't a relevant reason to decline it. We're not here solely for explosions or "balance". We're here to fly highly detailed aircraft most of us will never touch in real life


Edited by zhukov032186

Де вороги, знайдуться козаки їх перемогти.

5800x3d * 3090 * 64gb * Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The aircraft had different paint coating applied depending on expected wavelength of radar threats. The flightplan was also set to not only minimze exposure to known threat areas, but even schedule turns at correct moments so as to keep the aircraft at the optimum orientation towards the radars. Good luck simulating that.

 

It would be interesting aircraft to learn in the sim, but to fly a mission realistically in DCS - forget it.

Hardware: VPForce Rhino, FSSB R3 Ultra, Virpil T-50CM, Hotas Warthog, Winwing F15EX, Slaw Rudder, GVL224 Trio Throttle, Thrustmaster MFDs, Saitek Trim wheel, Trackir 5, Quest Pro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since the RL F-117 was made using "off the shelf" stuff from the Hornet and Falcon, I guess we need to get back to this topic once they are both done ;)

-------

All the people keep asking for capabilities to be modelled.... I want the limitations to be modelled.... limitations make for realistic simulation.

Arguing with an engineer is like wrestling with a pig in the mud, after a bit you realize the pig likes it.

 

Long time ago in galaxy far far away:

https://www.deviantart.com/alfafox/gallery

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The aircraft had different paint coating applied depending on expected wavelength of radar threats.

That is not true. If it was, it would mean the aircraft would only fly every 2 week in combat. Since repainting takes that long with refuels/defuels, aircraft preps and weigh and balance. It took a lot of man hour per flight hour to maintain the aircraft and handful of MARTIANS per aircraft to maintain the RAM/RAS, but not that many man hours.

 

 

The flightplan was also set to not only minimze exposure to known threat areas, but even schedule turns at correct moments so as to keep the aircraft at the optimum orientation towards the radars.
Highly implausible. The aircraft took a lot of planning, but that would be impossible to plan.

 

Since the RL F-117 was made using "off the shelf" stuff from the Hornet and Falcon, I guess we need to get back to this topic once they are both done ;)

It took parts from a dozen aircraft: A-10, F-111, F/A-18, F-16, F-104, etc.

To whom it may concern,

I am an idiot, unfortunately for the world, I have a internet connection and a fondness for beer....apologies for that.

Thank you for you patience.

 

 

Many people don't want the truth, they want constant reassurance that whatever misconception/fallacies they believe in are true..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

That is not true. If it was, it would mean the aircraft would only fly every 2 week in combat.

 

The aircraft were not repainted for the mission, but different aircraft had different RAM surfaces with varying capabilities. Might not have been intentional per se, but was a result of ongoing development and changes to particular aircraft, and it resulted in aircraft having different coating. At least in one of the monograms I read it stated that for the Desert Storm deployment they chose the aircraft that had coating which worked best against the enemy radars operating in the area.

Only towards the end of life there was an effort to standardize and apply single optimized RAM surface on all aircraft (Single Configuration Fleet program).

 

Highly implausible. The aircraft took a lot of planning, but that would be impossible to plan.

 

What's impossible? Major part of stealth technology is not about absorbing radar energy, but rather scattering it at an angles at which it won't return to the sender. That is the whole reason for the unusual F-117 shape. But it means at some angles the aircraft is more visible to the radar than from the other sides. So the routes and turns were planned to minimize exposure, so as not to turn the underside (or whatever angle gives most exposure) straight into known radar direction.

Hardware: VPForce Rhino, FSSB R3 Ultra, Virpil T-50CM, Hotas Warthog, Winwing F15EX, Slaw Rudder, GVL224 Trio Throttle, Thrustmaster MFDs, Saitek Trim wheel, Trackir 5, Quest Pro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's taken me years to finally stop post on every tread and arguing with you with take us nowhere. My opinion is base on the few years working on the aircraft, take or leave it is up to you. Moving on.

To whom it may concern,

I am an idiot, unfortunately for the world, I have a internet connection and a fondness for beer....apologies for that.

Thank you for you patience.

 

 

Many people don't want the truth, they want constant reassurance that whatever misconception/fallacies they believe in are true..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you sure you haven't mistaken me with someone else?

 

Back to topic, so how many years you spend working on F-117? Because:

 

The FY2003 budget continues to fund the Single Configuration Fleet (SCF) effort to develop a single, optimized low observable configuration for the F-117 fleet. Previously, the F117A fleet had two major radar absorbing material (RAM) coating configurations, costly and labor intensive panel access technology, and five leading edge configurations. The configuration developed for SCF features new leading edge technologies, spray-on coatings, new sheet RAMs, and new panel access technologies. Standardizing the configuration will preserve radar cross-section performance, reduce maintenance requirements, and eliminate the separate procedures each aircraft required previously.

https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/f-117.htm

Hardware: VPForce Rhino, FSSB R3 Ultra, Virpil T-50CM, Hotas Warthog, Winwing F15EX, Slaw Rudder, GVL224 Trio Throttle, Thrustmaster MFDs, Saitek Trim wheel, Trackir 5, Quest Pro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole “it wouldn’t be fun because you fly from point A to point B, drop an LGB and return home” is an opinion totally at odds to what many of us enjoy about flight simulation. The entire civ sim community is born out of a love of flying straight and level. Do we have to enjoy air Quake to enjoy DCS? Really? Because that’s not what gets me strapped in every flight. Microprose F-117 was my favourite flight game from my childhood because it was about avoiding conflict not engaging in it, because you knew you were in trouble if you didn’t hide. Like a good thriller, it was all suspense. We also have multirole, air combat and ground pounding really well represented, whereas the F-117 would be a new experience. I really hope it gets a full fidelity module some day.

Totally agree. It has a snowball’s chance in hell of becoming a full module but I’d love it if it did.

i7 7700K @5.0, 1080Ti, 32GB DDR4, HMD Odyssey, TM WH, Crosswind Rudder...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to see the F-117 in DCS one day but the unique technology that a stealthy attack aircraft would have would be of the most secure data to acquire to be able to do it right to DCS level. Even after the F-117 retirement a number of aircraft have been kept flight worthy and have been flown in Nevada. There has even been rumors that they have been used in special missions in Syria in 2016. For more info about it I highly recommend reading this recent article. https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/26728/lets-talk-about-the-rumor-that-f-117s-have-flown-missions-in-the-middle-east-recently


Edited by Evoman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to see the F-117 in DCS one day but the unique technology that a stealthy attack aircraft would have would be of the most secure data to acquire to be able to do it right to DCS level. Even after the F-117 retirement a number of aircraft have been kept flight worthy and have been flown in Nevada. There has even been rumors that they have been used in special missions in Syria in 2016. For more info about it I highly recommend reading this recent article. https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/26728/lets-talk-about-the-rumor-that-f-117s-have-flown-missions-in-the-middle-east-recently

 

its its unsubstantiated rumors then? Another example of

 

 

hQFhyAv.png

 

 

to quote the article itself

 

"As such, to my knowledge, nobody saw it worth betting their reputation as a journalist on reporting the claims as fact with their name directly attached to the byline. In fact, nobody found there to be enough evidence to even report them as rumors."

 

 

 

 

So with that being said, lets also think What would be the point of resurrecting and then sending a combat retired aircraft, (a handfull due to being seen arespuclated for only really being used for some evulation testing of ability of other radars or aircraft to intercept Low observable aircraft) for actual combat missions when there are other more modern Stealth aircraft more capable that are in officially in service and are able to be used in full capacity?

 

 

The B2 bomber can self designate and drop guided munitions as can the F35's which even as a multirole Strike fighter can still match F117's payload in its stealth config


Edited by Kev2go

 

Build:

 

Windows 10 64 bit Pro

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z790 Motherboard, Intel Core i7 12700k ,Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 64gb ram (3600 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia RTX 3080 12gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; Samsung 970 EVo, , Samsung evo 860 pro 1 TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD,  WD 1TB HDD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

its its unsubstantiated rumors then? Another example of

 

 

hQFhyAv.png

 

 

to quote the article itself

 

"As such, to my knowledge, nobody saw it worth betting their reputation as a journalist on reporting the claims as fact with their name directly attached to the byline. In fact, nobody found there to be enough evidence to even report them as rumors."

 

 

 

 

So with that being said, lets also think What would be the point of resurrecting and then sending a combat retired aircraft, (a handfull due to being seen arespuclated for only really being used for some evulation testing of ability of other radars or aircraft to intercept Low observable aircraft) for actual combat missions when there are other more modern Stealth aircraft more capable that are in officially in service and are able to be used in full capacity?

 

 

The B2 bomber can self designate and drop guided munitions as can the F35's which even as a multirole Strike fighter can still match F117's payload in its stealth config

 

 

While I understand your point being that they are just rumors. What I found the most interesting about the article was the reasoning of why the F-117 still has a special value and capability that the other modern stealth aircraft don't have. Below are just two of the top reasons that were mentioned in the article.

 

1st- Modern stealth strike aircraft mostly rely on GPS designation Which can be impaired by GPS jammers and they don't provide as precise and dynamic targeting capability as LGBs, and above all else, they can't hit moving targets.

 

 

"When the USAF retired the F-117 it lost a number of capabilities. A stealthy tactical platform that could drop 2,000lb class bombs for instance. As far as we know, only the B-2 could do that mission after 2008, and at the time there were only 21 of them and they are limited operationally, especially in regards to how they are deployed."

But - The B-2 "Can't employ LGBs, has no self designation capability, strategic asset, highly sensitive, basing/alert issues, etc etc etc"

 

2nd- The F-117 older tech makes it a less sensitive asset. "The F-117 has other advantages as well. Its radar signature and the technologies behind its design are far better known by the enemy than those of 5th generation fighters or cutting-edge stealth drones. Losing one in combat wouldn't result in a massive dump of extremely high-value intellectual property right into the enemy's hands. In fact, an F-117 has already been lost in combat and its carcass exploited for intelligence purposes. "

 

 

And if you still don't believe it take it up with the Author, Tyler Rogoway. Tyler@thedrive.com He is one of the best knowledgeable authors I have found.


Edited by Evoman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I understand your point being that they are just rumors. What I found the most interesting about the article was the reasoning of why the F-117 still has a special value and capability that the other modern stealth aircraft don't have. Below are just two of the top reasons that were mentioned in the article.

 

1st- Modern stealth strike aircraft mostly rely on GPS designation Which can be impaired by GPS jammers and they don't provide as precise and dynamic targeting capability as LGBs, and above all else, they can't hit moving targets.

 

 

"When the USAF retired the F-117 it lost a number of capabilities. A stealthy tactical platform that could drop 2,000lb class bombs for instance. As far as we know, only the B-2 could do that mission after 2008, and at the time there were only 21 of them and they are limited operationally, especially in regards to how they are deployed."

But - The B-2 "Can't employ LGBs, has no self designation capability, strategic asset, highly sensitive, basing/alert issues, etc etc etc"

 

2nd- The F-117 older tech makes it a less sensitive asset. "The F-117 has other advantages as well. Its radar signature and the technologies behind its design are far better known by the enemy than those of 5th generation fighters or cutting-edge stealth drones. Losing one in combat wouldn't result in a massive dump of extremely high-value intellectual property right into the enemy's hands. In fact, an F-117 has already been lost in combat and its carcass exploited for intelligence purposes. "

 

 

And if you still don't believe it take it up with the Author, Tyler Rogoway. Tyler@thedrive.com He is one of the best knowledgeable authors I have found.

 

 

Yes i read the article and i can already counter argue those reason.

 

 

1) SO what if they rely on GPS based munitions? Its not the sole ordinance options Its not like LGB are i short supply or loadouts cant be changed based on mission needs? The capabilty are there. The b2 spirit can drop and self designate Laser guided bombs as well as can the F35 . SO yes they can hit moving targets.

 

 

2)

 

Yes past tense, They have this sort of capability with the B2 and the F35. and so what if B2 only got those capabilities in 2008? the F117 was retired the same year, not earlier, so there was no capability gap. Today an F117 offers nothing over those 2 platforms, it is using obsolete avionics, and doesn't have as low RCS due to ustilizing decades old "stealth" designed technology. F117 offers nothing better over those two. Especially the F35 which unlike the B2 is already around in larger numbers, an aircraft which can actually self escort or fight its way out of a hairy situation given its a Multirole fighter.

 

3)

 

 

it was already publicized that F22 have in the past flown over Syrian airspace, to launch SDB at ISIS targets. IF the US government was so fearful of loosing 5th gen assets they wouldn't sent them period. Especially the F22 which only they operate. Remember These aircraft were developed for a reason, The logic of never using them due to paranoid fears of them falling into the wrong hands, would make thier whole existence equating nothing more than a paper tiger.

 

The F35 has been sold to countless nations worldwide already, and the Isrealis have officially used F35's to strike Iranian troops over Syrian territory, which makes Israel the first nation to have Used the F35 in combat operation.

 

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/security-aviation/with-iran-in-syria-israel-launched-world-s-first-air-strike-using-f-35-stealth-fighters-1.6110706

 

The cost of resurrecting a couple of F117s for single mission over Syria sounds like something out of a very cheap B action movie, and therefore very implausible.

 

Some people here such as myself believe in facts, not in speculation and unsubstantiated rumors. Tyler Rodgway doesn't have any special insider knowledge or secret sources to state this is the truth. He literally admitted its his own speculation, hence sensationalist article.

 

 

and plenty in the comments disputed the article, say its very unlikely F117s are used for flying a single or even a few strike missions over SYria, and offer different more believable theories ( but theories nonetheless) that it is instead used as CIA based intelligence gathering asset.


Edited by Kev2go

 

Build:

 

Windows 10 64 bit Pro

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z790 Motherboard, Intel Core i7 12700k ,Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 64gb ram (3600 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia RTX 3080 12gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; Samsung 970 EVo, , Samsung evo 860 pro 1 TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD,  WD 1TB HDD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some people here such as myself believe in facts, not in speculation and unsubstantiated rumors. Tyler Rodgway doesn't have any special insider knowledge or secret sources to state this is the truth. He literally admitted its his own speculation, hence sensationalist article.

:megalol: Ok bro, chill. Tyler makes it clear from the outset that, while not impossible, it's extremely unlikely the rumors are true, and spends most of the article explaining why. This is literally part of the opening:

Overall, I have seen zero actual evidence or direct sourcing that this deployment took place or that the F-117 force was ever spun-up in any meaningful way to support a limited deployment to the Middle East.

Nothing sensational about it. This the first time TWZ even mentions the rumors in an article and it's to debunk them. And the article is contextually relevant because of the recent high profile uptick in F-117 activity and re-emergence of the rumors in military aviation websites and blogs. The most sensational thing in the whole article is the subheader, which, if you're an even marginally competent news reader, you'll know is subject to Betteridge's Law.

i7 7700K @5.0, 1080Ti, 32GB DDR4, HMD Odyssey, TM WH, Crosswind Rudder...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:megalol: Ok bro, chill. Tyler makes it clear from the outset that, while not impossible, it's extremely unlikely the rumors are true, and spends most of the article explaining why. This is literally part of the opening:

 

Nothing sensational about it. This the first time TWZ even mentions the rumors in an article and it's to debunk them. And the article is contextually relevant because of the recent high profile uptick in F-117 activity and re-emergence of the rumors in military aviation websites and blogs. The most sensational thing in the whole article is the subheader, which, if you're an even marginally competent news reader, you'll know is subject to Betteridge's Law.

 

I know... But the other user who posted the article keeps defending the rumors.....

 

Build:

 

Windows 10 64 bit Pro

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z790 Motherboard, Intel Core i7 12700k ,Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 64gb ram (3600 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia RTX 3080 12gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; Samsung 970 EVo, , Samsung evo 860 pro 1 TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD,  WD 1TB HDD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes i read the article and i can already counter argue those reason.

 

 

1) SO what if they rely on GPS based munitions? Its not the sole ordinance options Its not like LGB are i short supply or loadouts cant be changed based on mission needs? The capabilty are there. The b2 spirit can drop and self designate Laser guided bombs as well as can the F35 . SO yes they can hit moving targets.

 

 

2)

 

Yes past tense, They have this sort of capability with the B2 and the F35. and so what if B2 only got those capabilities in 2008? the F117 was retired the same year, not earlier, so there was no capability gap. Today an F117 offers nothing over those 2 platforms, it is using obsolete avionics, and doesn't have as low RCS due to ustilizing decades old "stealth" designed technology. F117 offers nothing better over those two. Especially the F35 which unlike the B2 is already around in larger numbers, an aircraft which can actually self escort or fight its way out of a hairy situation given its a Multirole fighter.

 

3)

 

 

it was already publicized that F22 have in the past flown over Syrian airspace, to launch SDB at ISIS targets. IF the US government was so fearful of loosing 5th gen assets they wouldn't sent them period. Especially the F22 which only they operate. Remember These aircraft were developed for a reason, The logic of never using them due to paranoid fears of them falling into the wrong hands, would make thier whole existence equating nothing more than a paper tiger.

 

The F35 has been sold to countless nations worldwide already, and the Isrealis have officially used F35's to strike Iranian troops over Syrian territory, which makes Israel the first nation to have Used the F35 in combat operation.

 

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/security-aviation/with-iran-in-syria-israel-launched-world-s-first-air-strike-using-f-35-stealth-fighters-1.6110706

 

The cost of resurrecting a couple of F117s for single mission over Syria sounds like something out of a very cheap B action movie, and therefore very implausible.

 

Some people here such as myself believe in facts, not in speculation and unsubstantiated rumors. Tyler Rodgway doesn't have any special insider knowledge or secret sources to state this is the truth. He literally admitted its his own speculation, hence sensationalist article.

 

 

and plenty in the comments disputed the article, say its very unlikely F117s are used for flying a single or even a few strike missions over SYria, and offer different more believable theories ( but theories nonetheless) that it is instead used as CIA based intelligence gathering asset.

 

 

You are partially correct. The F-35 can deploy LGB munitions now but not in the past.

 

But I repeat that I am in no way trying to say that I believe the rummers are true. I am just trying to get the point across that the F-117 still had certain unique capabilities that such a deployment could had been plausible. And because of such capabilities that made the F-117 so sensitive it could impact the possibility of a full fidelity module being developed for DCS.

 

 

This is from another article. https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/26728/lets-talk-about-the-rumor-that-f-117s-have-flown-missions-in-the-middle-east-recently

 

"Quite frankly, it's also quite possible that if the F-117s were put back into service, the USAF wasn't who did it. A particular American agency may have instead. One that would have very limited, but essential use for such a unique assassination tool.

While all of this sounds relevant and plausible, actually paying to get just a handful of these jets fully combat capable with at least some updated sensors (it's DLIR in particular) and other systems and deploying them halfway around the globe for very special and limited missions seems like a reach, but not one too far to fathom.

Fast forward to 2019 and the Pentagon has once again regained its ability to laser-designate and attack targets with a stealthy penetrating airframe—the F-35. Not just that, but it also regained its ability to employ 2,000lb class weapons in a similar manner from that same 5th generation stealth tactical jet. As such, the need for F-117s would have come and gone, but this doesn't impact the timing of the Middle East deployment rumors, it actually fortifies them.

Still, in the end, there is no evidence that the F-117 was sent back into combat in any form or magnitude. Zero. At the same time, there seems to have been a fairly good reason to do so, at least in small numbers. And these aircraft were mandated by Congress to be preserved at great cost for operational contingencies. Why do that if their unique capabilities couldn't be leveraged when needed. But without any evidence, all this is speculation, and it seems hopeful speculation at that.

Clearly, there is an amazing amount of infatuation with the F-117 even a decade after it was officially retired. The fact that it is still flying in some form has only turbocharged that interest. So, we have to remain very skeptical of any grand claims or when rumors that didn't have enough evidence to justify printing them years ago are stated as fact when the F-117 hype is at its pinnacle today."


Edited by Evoman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are partially right. The F-35 can deploy LGB now but not in the past.

 

But I repeat that I am in no way trying to say that I believe the rummers are true. I am just trying to get the point across that the F-117 still had certain unique capabilities that such a deployment could had been plausible. And because of such capabilities that made the F-117 so sensitive it could impact to possibility of a full fidelity module being developed for DCS.

 

 

This is from another article. https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/26728/lets-talk-about-the-rumor-that-f-117s-have-flown-missions-in-the-middle-east-recently

 

"

Quite frankly, it's also quite possible that if the F-117s were put back into service, the USAF wasn't who did it. A particular American agency may have instead. One that would have very limited, but essential use for such a unique assassination tool.

While all of this sounds relevant and plausible, actually paying to get just a handful of these jets fully combat capable with at least some updated sensors (it's DLIR in particular) and other systems and deploying them halfway around the globe for very special and limited missions seems like a reach, but not one too far to fathom.

Fast forward to 2019 and the Pentagon has once again regained its ability to laser-designate and attack targets with a stealthy penetrating airframe—the F-35. Not just that, but it also regained its ability to employ 2,000lb class weapons in a similar manner from that same 5th generation stealth tactical jet. As such, the need for F-117s would have come and gone, but this doesn't impact the timing of the Middle East deployment rumors, it actually fortifies them.

Still, in the end, there is no evidence that the F-117 was sent back into combat in any form or magnitude. Zero. At the same time, there seems to have been a fairly good reason to do so, at least in small numbers. And these aircraft were mandated by Congress to be preserved at great cost for operational contingencies. Why do that if their unique capabilities couldn't be leveraged when needed. But without any evidence, all this is speculation, and it seems hopeful speculation at that.

Clearly, there is an amazing amount of infatuation with the F-117 even a decade after it was officially retired. The fact that it is still flying in some form has only turbocharged that interest. So, we have to remain very skeptical of any grand claims or when rumors that didn't have enough evidence to justify printing them years ago are stated as fact when the F-117 hype is at its pinnacle today."

 

 

 

what past? you make it sound like the F35 has been in operational services for decades or something. Its only been in service for a few years.

 

Again the USAF didn't regain this in ability just now in stealth aircraft as the B2 could already self employ LGB's starting in 2008.

 

The F35A only reached IOC in 2016 with the USAF..... and AFAIK block 3i ( which went live same year as USAF adoption) already allowed it the capability to use EOTS to Track , and self designate targets for laser guided Gbu family.

 

 

Block 3F software went live by the end of 2018. giving it full operational war-fighting capability. I dont see why you bring up SDB as a lack of capability not being able to be futlly utlized until BLock 4 software when the F117 never used such a muntion type. F117's were only ever capably of laser guided bombs, and later in life JDAMS. F35 can already utilize those muntions and then some all with a vastly superior sensor network fused suites.


Edited by Kev2go

 

Build:

 

Windows 10 64 bit Pro

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z790 Motherboard, Intel Core i7 12700k ,Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 64gb ram (3600 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia RTX 3080 12gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; Samsung 970 EVo, , Samsung evo 860 pro 1 TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD,  WD 1TB HDD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what past? you make it sound like the F35 has been in operational services for decades or something. Its only been in service for a few years.

 

Again the USAF didn't regain this in ability just now in stealth aircraft as the B2 could already self employ LGB's starting in 2008.

 

The F35A only reached IOC in 2016 with the USAF..... and AFAIK block 3i ( which went live same year as USAF adoption) already allowed it the capability to use EOTS to Track , and self designate targets for laser guided Gbu family.

 

 

Block 3F software went live by the end of 2018. giving it full operational war-fighting capability. I dont see why you bring up SDB as a lack of capability not being able to be futlly utlized until BLock 4 software when the F117 never used such a muntion type. F117's were only ever capably of laser guided bombs, and later in life JDAMS. F35 can already utilize those muntions and then some all with a vastly superior sensor network fused suites.

 

 

Ok lets get this straight once and for all. Yes, I know the F-117 was only capable of deploying laser guided bombs early on. The whole point of the article was to point out and compare that it was because of this sole and only capability that the F-117 uniquely possessed at the time to deploy LGB ( laser guided bombs) that could be self designated that were ideal for hitting moving targets. And because GPS guided bombs were not capable at the time to hit moving targets, could not be self designated and GPS signals could be jammed this only left aircraft capable of deploying LGB bombs the only tool available for such precision strikes.

 

 

 

“GPS guided munitions, such as the Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) are fire-and-forget weapons—once released, the launch aircraft can move to a safer position as the weapon flies to its target on autopilot. The launching aircraft can also release the weapon farther from its target as it doesn't have to designate the target itself. But GPS weapons have their limitations too. They don't provide as precise and dynamic targeting capability as LGBs, and above all else, they can't hit moving targets.

 

 

Some of that is changing now as the latest generation of GPS enabled weapons is being built with multi-mode seekers that can autonomously track their targets if they move away from the original target area during the weapon's terminal attack phase. Networked weapons can also leverage offboard sensor data to remain honed in on their target even if it is moving to a new location. But these concepts are cutting-edge weapons technology today, and they really weren't available even a year or two ago. They also have their own limitations and are less suitable for making direct precision strikes on highly mobilized targets, and especially those in complex and dynamic urban environments or that exist under strict rules of engagement.”


Edited by Evoman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just came across this topic and I kinda want to chime in about the original idea of even having a F-117 in DCS. While I don't know if it is really possible in terms of both secrecy and outright licensing/agreements with the USAF, I don't think that it is correct to dismiss it because of its specific role. It seems that a lot of the arguments against it are coming from the multiplayer/public server/sandbox scenario side of things while forgetting that DCS is also a interesting single player platform that can be used to explore a much, much wider variety of mission types and the scenarios where such mission types are actually appropriate.

 

Getting past the technical issues of stealth (something that DCS need only develop on a somewhat limited level for it to be functionally adequate for the Nighthawk), the role of the F-117 is not entirely different from the role of the AJS-37. Both require fairly detailed flight planning, both require rigid adherence to attack plans/procedures, and both are pretty focused on striking fixed targets (though the Viggen also has a anti-ship function). Heck, you could even argue that while the Viggen carries more bombs, it is similar to the F-117 in that it drops them all at once so you really only have a single attack and then you head home.

 

When the Viggen first came out for DCS, it was pretty clear that it was not a great fit for the standard issue sandbox multiplayer server scenarios. Suddenly players needed pre-planned targets. They needed structured sorties with details that simply were not required for pilots flying A-10C's (in a unrealistic strike capacity) and F-5's. It was not until Heatblur added some additional data cartridge/F10 map functions that it actually became useful in those scenarios. The whole thing showed the limits of the sandbox public server scenario when talking about dedicated "one pass, haul ass" strike platforms that need planned targets.

 

Fortunately, DCS is not all about those big sandbox public server scenarios. We have a editor that allows interested players to make scenarios that can realistically explore the role of ANY aircraft in DCS without the need to worry about how it will fit in the overall multiplayer ecosystem. Flying the Viggen in a big sandbox scenario online might be okay nowadays but when you really dig into its role and build scenarios to model that role and put the aircraft in its proper context, you really get to see how tense and how difficult even a "simple" strike against a static target can be.

 

The F-117 is no different. It might not fit into large sandbox scenarios online but that is not a prerequisite for its existence as a module and should NEVER be a rigid prerequisite for any potential module. For players who value DCS as a platform to explore mission roles, doctrine, and precise mission procedure/execution, aircraft like the F-117 offer a interesting opportunity in the same way the Viggen currently does.

 

Granted. I don't really think that DCS will get a F-117 but mostly because I don't think ED could get the required agreements in order to do such a thing without potential trouble. I know that it is not exactly highly classified anymore (at least not parts of it) but there is more to it than that when it comes to making a module. Still, I think this argument goes beyond the F-117 itself and gets into the divide between those that want DCS to focus on the big multiplayer server thing and those that see DCS as a platform for everything from focused single player/co-op to big multiplayer.

 

DCS is not just about what is fun but also what is interesting. For many (including myself), the idea of planning and flying a good strike mission with a aircraft that can only carry two bombs and makes a single attack pass is very, very interesting in the same way that the Viggen (when used realistically) is also very interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just came across this topic and I kinda want to chime in about the original idea of even having a F-117 in DCS. While I don't know if it is really possible in terms of both secrecy and outright licensing/agreements with the USAF, I don't think that it is correct to dismiss it because of its specific role. It seems that a lot of the arguments against it are coming from the multiplayer/public server/sandbox scenario side of things while forgetting that DCS is also a interesting single player platform that can be used to explore a much, much wider variety of mission types and the scenarios where such mission types are actually appropriate.

 

Getting past the technical issues of stealth (something that DCS need only develop on a somewhat limited level for it to be functionally adequate for the Nighthawk), the role of the F-117 is not entirely different from the role of the AJS-37. Both require fairly detailed flight planning, both require rigid adherence to attack plans/procedures, and both are pretty focused on striking fixed targets (though the Viggen also has a anti-ship function). Heck, you could even argue that while the Viggen carries more bombs, it is similar to the F-117 in that it drops them all at once so you really only have a single attack and then you head home.

 

When the Viggen first came out for DCS, it was pretty clear that it was not a great fit for the standard issue sandbox multiplayer server scenarios. Suddenly players needed pre-planned targets. They needed structured sorties with details that simply were not required for pilots flying A-10C's (in a unrealistic strike capacity) and F-5's. It was not until Heatblur added some additional data cartridge/F10 map functions that it actually became useful in those scenarios. The whole thing showed the limits of the sandbox public server scenario when talking about dedicated "one pass, haul ass" strike platforms that need planned targets.

 

Fortunately, DCS is not all about those big sandbox public server scenarios. We have a editor that allows interested players to make scenarios that can realistically explore the role of ANY aircraft in DCS without the need to worry about how it will fit in the overall multiplayer ecosystem. Flying the Viggen in a big sandbox scenario online might be okay nowadays but when you really dig into its role and build scenarios to model that role and put the aircraft in its proper context, you really get to see how tense and how difficult even a "simple" strike against a static target can be.

 

The F-117 is no different. It might not fit into large sandbox scenarios online but that is not a prerequisite for its existence as a module and should NEVER be a rigid prerequisite for any potential module. For players who value DCS as a platform to explore mission roles, doctrine, and precise mission procedure/execution, aircraft like the F-117 offer a interesting opportunity in the same way the Viggen currently does.

 

Granted. I don't really think that DCS will get a F-117 but mostly because I don't think ED could get the required agreements in order to do such a thing without potential trouble. I know that it is not exactly highly classified anymore (at least not parts of it) but there is more to it than that when it comes to making a module. Still, I think this argument goes beyond the F-117 itself and gets into the divide between those that want DCS to focus on the big multiplayer server thing and those that see DCS as a platform for everything from focused single player/co-op to big multiplayer.

 

DCS is not just about what is fun but also what is interesting. For many (including myself), the idea of planning and flying a good strike mission with a aircraft that can only carry two bombs and makes a single attack pass is very, very interesting in the same way that the Viggen (when used realistically) is also very interesting.

Amen!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am an air-to-air guy. I have little use for dropping bombs. I am also a retro guy. The F-4 Phantom is about the newest level of tech I like to use. If it has MFDs and GPS navigation, it is probably far too high tech compared to what I like to fly: steam gauges with no computers or fly-by-wire. The F-117 is exactly what I don't like. But if the documentation was there to model it accurately enough, this is a no-brainer for me. It is an amazing aircraft with an interesting history. I wouldn't fly it too much after the first month of owning it, but I would love to try flying it and add it to my collection.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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