Jump to content

DCS F5E model errors ( mix mash of avionics from various versions)


Kev2go

Recommended Posts

The cockpit avionics are incorrect for either USAF or USN based F5E aggressor model.

 

 

 

According to both USAF series F5E/F manuals, and US navy's Natops F5E/F/N manual, the US service F5E's never had AN/ALE40 counter measures system, nor AN/ALR87 Radar warning receiver.

 

Those avionics ( and their exact placement) would be on a Swiss F5E.

 

 

The AN/ALE40 and AN/ALR87 RWR are only referenced within the Natops manual for the USN F5N model , but thats because they are literally former swiss modified F5E's, that they bought in the 2000's to augment the F5 aggressor fleet. ( IE what can be called a buyback of sorts)

 

However just because DCS F5E has AN/ALE40 CM and ANN/ALR87 RWR is still not accurate as a Swiss F5E or US navy F5N as most notably it lacks Digital Radios on the front center panel. and INS based navigation suite. ( Right panel) There are also some other minor missing things like some changes made to the Fight stick.

 

 

Since BST has been dissolved and incorporated into Eagle Dynamics, I would hope that this DCS F5E module is eventually remodeled by ED. Ideally I think it would be to split into two versions when( and if) remodeling , USAF aggressor model , and a Swiss F5E to represent authentic F5E tiger model(s)

 

 

I can't post direct manual excerpts in public forum due to rule 1.16, but here is some public information that can be provided that note the difference in Swiss F5E's and USN F5, in avionics is non existent. It can be in turn compared to a usaf agressor f5e.

 

http://toniosky7.blogspot.com/2012/09/northrop-f-5e-walkaround-swiss-air-force.html

 

 

https://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_display.asp?cid=1100&tid=1050&ct=1

 

 


Edited by Kev2go
  • Thanks 1

 

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

Kev2go, good researches, this and about F-5!

Removing missile is a bad choice, and the other choice is very long. Also, this makes mavericks on F-5 nearly impossible, I assume.

I think that the choice of certain features was a kind of a compromise between opportunity and desire.

 

 

Il reply in this thread instead of the F86F bug report :smilewink:

 

 

F5E modded with Mavericks wouldn't be realistic either fora USAF agroessor irregardles if they also had the F5E3 block.. That too would ideally require 2 different F5E versions. These are features only on some users like the Saudi or Taiwanese F5E versions. This too requires some remodeling as would the proposed Swiss F5E or USN F5N due to having a new screen that flips between Maverick TV jmode, and Radar display.

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=171297

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3572864&postcount=2

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2857921&postcount=2

 

 

I know This was asked about playerbase years ago but was admitted the development team couldn't find the the documentation for how they work, and others associated with ED said it ultimately wouldn't be added because it was not a feature part of Aggressor version anyways. ( implying it was supposed to be US operated one), but as established it is not quite a SUAF aggressor model and halfway to being a Swiss F5E or USN aggressor F5N . However documentation is not lacking for remodeling USAF based F5E3, and to a SWiss F5E or USN F5N.


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

The way we've been buying them back, it's a frankenstein fleet already. :huh:

 

for 2020...

 

"The service also wants to purchase 22 F-5 Tiger IIs, recently retired from the Swiss Air Force, to act as aggressor aircraft for the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps fighter pilots to train against."

 

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/a26813047/pentagons-2020-budget-plane/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way we've been buying them back, it's a frankenstein fleet already. :huh:

 

for 2020...

 

"The service also wants to purchase 22 F-5 Tiger IIs, recently retired from the Swiss Air Force, to act as aggressor aircraft for the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps fighter pilots to train against."

 

https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/a26813047/pentagons-2020-budget-plane/

 

 

I wouldnt even call that Frankenstein fleet. That would be like saying not all fa18c,s not up to lot20 prodution standard with deviance are Frankenstein. In genral The manuals note differences between production models and what post production upgrades are applied to which batches. That was not really what's wrong here, but incorrect features for a specific version and service..... because such features are only within new ones acquired., not partially spread around to other planes.

 

 

BOTH respective usaf and usn f5 manuals note which aircraft has what features. F5e ( either in usaf or usn) dont have an/ale40 cm or an/ale87 rwr. That is a fact.

 

The current " buy back "f5,s are 35 former swiss f5e's acquired in 2000s and put into service in 2006, and the US navy gave them a new designation, the f5n to distinguish them from basic f5e,s in agressor use. Thier differences are notable for that specific version in documentation. As already noted in OP. The Usaf has already retired their f5 in the 90s.

 

The usaf nor USN never bought back any maverick capable f5e,s.

 

That article you linked isfrom 2019 and it again mentions buying more swiss f5s. If they would be buying different f5,s it is obviously you cant expect to use that as an argument simulate an agressor that's not yet even been aquired given lack of documentation. If it's the from the swiss. It's just additional ones from Switzerland than thier going to be like the ones aquired from earlier.

 

That's why you represent a specific time frame. It too is pretty obvious hornets and vipers have more capabilties today in 2019 than they did a decade ago. But ed arent simulating the most modern versions either. And specific lots and production blocks to keep the features standard among the version being simulated.

 

Just like other aircraft there are charts noting differences and a ecp list, noting new changes or addons implemented.

 

ED will make the choice as to what remodel if this is acknowledged, but I think splitting into multiple versions as ed did with the p51d, would be the most ideal.


Edited by Kev2go
  • Thanks 1

 

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

The Franken-fleet is F-5E's / F-5N's as the F-5E's Purchased and Re-designated F-5Ns, some have new F-5F Wings, Some don't.

 

And the USMC has a Franken-Fleet of Hornets at A+, C, D, C+ all with different Systems.

Windows 10 Pro, Ryzen 2700X @ 4.6Ghz, 32GB DDR4-3200 GSkill (F4-3200C16D-16GTZR x2),

ASRock X470 Taichi Ultimate, XFX RX6800XT Merc 310 (RX-68XTALFD9)

3x ASUS VS248HP + Oculus HMD, Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS + MFDs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Franken-fleet is F-5E's / F-5N's as the F-5E's Purchased and Re-designated F-5Ns, some have new F-5F Wings, Some don't.

 

And the USMC has a Franken-Fleet of Hornets at A+, C, D, C+ all with different Systems.

 

It's one thing to have mixed fleets of various versions, that's a given. And it's another to represent a an aircraft from the specific nation and branch where those differences dont apply to the given type of aircraft. In other words there is no documented existence of f5e in usaf or usn service utilizing this particular configuration as in the dcs f5e. . Therefore it's not an authentic as an agressor model.

 

Hence why to have an accurate remodeling of documented f5 versions you would need to split into at least. two versions

 

 

Dcs f18c lot 20 hornet doesnt have a mish mash of acd or export features. These are standardized features. The dcs f16c block 50 is also very specific to the version and timeframe.

 

Both the usaf series f5e/f and usn natops f5efn Manuals documentation note the differences between production batches and have a list of post production upgrades and which apply to repsective production models.I've read them

 

 

In the usaf and usn, none of those f5e3s ( or any f5e block) include an/ale40 ,an/ale 87 rwr. Or any rwr or cm suite for that matter.Those are specific to the us navy f5n which have those features because they are former swiss modified f5e,s.

 

However f5ns as noted have other avionics like digital radios and ins navigation. So dcs f5e is not representative of any agressor model they operate, and aught to be remodeled to 2 versions , basic f5e3, ala usaf, and the swiss f5e/ usn f5n.

 

 

It is disingenuous for you to try to point otherwise skate. I know you know better


Edited by Kev2go
  • Thanks 1

 

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

It's one thing to have mixed fleets of various versions. And it's another to represent a an aircraft from the specific nation and branch where those differences dont apply to the given type of aircraft.

 

 

Dcs f18c lot 20 hornet doesnt have a mish mash of acd or export features. These are standardized features.

 

Both the usaf series f5e/f and usn natops f5efn Manuals documentation note the differences between production batches and have a list of post production upgrades and which apply to repsective production models.I've read them

 

 

In the usaf and usn, none of those f5e3s ( or any f5e,s) include an/ale40 ,an/ale 87 rwr. Or any rwr or cm suite. Those are specific to the us navy f5n which have those features because they are former swiss modified f5e,s.

 

However f5ns as noted have other avionics like digital radios and ins navigation. So dcs f5e is not representative of any agressor model they operate, and aught to be remodeled to 2 versions , basic f5e3, ala usaf, and the swiss f5e/ usn f5n.

 

 

It is disingenuous for you to try to point otherwise skate. I know you know better

 

Ummm, you pretty much just confirmed what I was saying about the F-5E's/F-5Ns :huh:

 

There arent any plans that I know of to port the F-5E to F-5N for Aggressor AI or Human Controlled Aircraft in Redflag Campaigns or Missions.

 

If that's what your imposing.

Windows 10 Pro, Ryzen 2700X @ 4.6Ghz, 32GB DDR4-3200 GSkill (F4-3200C16D-16GTZR x2),

ASRock X470 Taichi Ultimate, XFX RX6800XT Merc 310 (RX-68XTALFD9)

3x ASUS VS248HP + Oculus HMD, Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS + MFDs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ummm, you pretty much just confirmed what I was saying about the F-5E's/F-5Ns :huh:

 

There arent any plans that I know of to port the F-5E to F-5N for Aggressor AI or Human Controlled Aircraft in Redflag Campaigns or Missions.

 

If that's what your imposing.

 

 

No plans.... well you dont say?. i get it , just now were alll "learning" what's wrong via this bug report.

 

Confirmed what you said? Perhaps I misunderstood your intentions but I thought you attempted to imply that current f5 is one of the existing authentic configurations, purely because many versions exist , without directly saying so. It's not. There is no documented evidence of a usaf or usn f5e being operated in the way its modeled in dcs. If that's the case, that was quite an irresponsible standard to take, to make up a configuration that's suits the team. IN turn its very inconsistent to apply higher standards to other modules. Granted bst was not dissolved and directly incorporated until very recently, so perhaps that's why.

 

 

I am just suggesting that To fix this error, a realistic remodel to a usaf aggressor is needed, which means removing an/ale40 and an/alr 87.

 

The only way can truly authentically keep the an/ale40 and an/alr 87 on a US operated F5E is if it's an f5N, which includes upgrading some features, which I mentioned earlier. IF thats not an option for whatever reason, then we will be left with a less capable F5. IF thats what ED would choose to do because its less effort fine.

 

If bst chose to actually model a manual documented f5e3 for an us operated aggressor model the first time around instead of bending realism, there wouldn't be a need for such a thread.

 

 

So how do you satisfy both needs? Split into multiple versions. That way no one complains they are left with only a downgraded version. and a version that retains the features that the module was originally with. At the same time this means that that ed upholds the fidelity standards that they have on other modules.


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

No plans.... well you dont say. Your "learning" just now what's wrong via this bug report.

 

Confimred what you said? Perhaps I misunderstood your intentions but I thought you attempted to imply that current f5 is one of the existing authentic configurations, purely because many versions exist , without directly saying so. It's not. There is no documented evidence of a usaf or usn f5e being operated in the way its modelled in dcs. If that's the case, that was quite an irresponsible standard to take, to make up a configuration that's suits you, and very inconsistent to in turn apply higher standards to other modules. Granted bst was not dissolved and directly incorporateded until very recently, so perhaps that's why.

 

 

I am just suggesting that To fix this error, a realistic remodel to a usaf agressor means removing an/ale40 and an/alr 87.

 

The only way can truly authentically keep thean/ale40 and an/alr 87 on a us operated f5e is if it's an f5n. Which includes upgrading some features, which I mentioned.

 

If bst chose toactually model a documented f5e3 for an us operated agressor model the first time around instead of bending realism, there wouldn't be a need for such a thread.

 

 

So how do you satisfy both needs? Split into 2 versions. That way no one complains they are left with only a downgraded version. and ultimately that ed upholds the fidelity standards that they have on other modules.

 

I wouldnt mind a Split to:

F-5A

F-5E-3

F-5N

Windows 10 Pro, Ryzen 2700X @ 4.6Ghz, 32GB DDR4-3200 GSkill (F4-3200C16D-16GTZR x2),

ASRock X470 Taichi Ultimate, XFX RX6800XT Merc 310 (RX-68XTALFD9)

3x ASUS VS248HP + Oculus HMD, Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS + MFDs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In order to make proper F-5N it is needed to remove guns, I guess. Is it worth it?

 

That's why ealier in this thread ( and in the other f5e to f5n thread) I said splitting between a usaf f5e and swiss f5e..... not specifically f5n, it's just that its established that F5ns are otherwise swiss f5e,s therefore us navy f5 manual is still valid alternative source to model them given the same airframe and avionics. And therefore swiss f5e is close enough to also be used as a f5n with skins.


Edited by Kev2go
  • Thanks 1

 

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

I wouldnt mind a Split to:

F-5A

F-5E-3

F-5N

 

Neither would I mind the above but I suggest splits only within f5e ( particularly f5e3) type family purely to avoid as many FM changes as possible or avoid them altogether. F5A is much more significant remodel to both differing aerodynamics, engine performance and much earlier avionics.

 

Alot of more degree in commonality between current existing f5e3 and what I proposed to go from there between usaf f5e, and a swiss f5e and or f5n.


Edited by Kev2go
  • Thanks 1

 

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

If I'm not mistaken, the F-5E has the "pointy nose" and smaller LERX, that could mean FM changes .

 

 

I think that the INS and digital radios of the Swiss F-5 could be a good compromise .

 

This is my favorite DCS plane, so the more versions the better .

 

 

And I would like (and pay for) an F-5N with cannons . :music_whistling:

By the way, anyone knows what radar the F-5N has?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I'm not mistaken, the F-5E has the "pointy nose" and smaller LERX, that could mean FM changes .

 

 

I think that the INS and digital radios of the Swiss F-5 could be a good compromise .

 

This is my favorite DCS plane, so the more versions the better .

 

 

And I would like (and pay for) an F-5N with cannons . :music_whistling:

By the way, anyone knows what radar the F-5N has?

 

Yes Swiss F5E and F5N have the "pointy shark nose" and larger LEX and the AUTO flaps function. But so does the current F5E3. After all these were changes that came with that specific E production model which IRRC was a relatively late batch starting in 1979.

 

 

These is also a aerodynamic characteristics that was present on of USAF aggressor based F5E's ( at least those that are the E3 model), so really there would be no FM changes needed from the current F5E3, just removal of AN/ALE40 Countermeasure and AN/ALR 87 RWR ( which is an export derivative of the AN/ALR 46V anyways) , because they weren't installed in USAF aggressor fleet.

 

 

Edit:

 

According to natops manual the F5N has the AN/APQ159 V3 or V5 radar. V5 radar is not more capable than the APQ 159V3 just described a product improvement to increase reliability and reduce weight to that of the earlier AN/APQ 153 Radar. In the manual both V3 and V5 are lumped into the same category and description and diagram of thier operations are the same.


Edited by Kev2go
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

 

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

  • 1 year later...
  • 4 weeks later...
On 1/11/2021 at 3:00 PM, Riojano said:

Looks like Taiwan F-5E

 

 

 

 

 

0946505.jpg

 

 

taiwanese F5E's have thier countermeasures panel in front of the left hand panel as opposed to being at the back. 

 

 

pwvpKfb.jpg

 

 

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

On 1/11/2021 at 1:31 PM, Bravelink03 said:

Could someone tell me why the F-5N wouldn't get guns?

 

When the US navy got those Surplus Swiss F5E's , i suspect the guns were removed because they werent really used.  AS a purely aggressor aircraft, Its not like a pilot would actually fire thier ammunition from the guns against other aircraft, so it may as well be deadweight if all you do is simulate a2a kills.

 

Its not like those holes or empty spaced blocked off. IN the same way how a Thunderbird F16 has its guns removed,  they can easily be reinstalled and put back into combat configuration if it was necessary.


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

ED should make the F-5E a dual variant aggressor/combat aircraft module similar to the C-101 and L-39. i.e. two slightly different aircraft for the price of one. But it is probably not cost effective for them to do it for free and it may not sell well enough as an upgrade to justify the cost. I don't understand why Belsimtek or ED would deviate from reality when they could have just as easily chose and made a single 100% accurate version that had the gameplay features they wanted?


Edited by streakeagle
  • Thanks 1

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd rather it be a F-5E( 4AAMs, used by a lot of nations) and a F-5N (modernized F-5Es from the swiss air force with CM dispensers , RWR and digital radios with INS). This makes the most sense as for Sedlo's campaign, the F-5E would be used and for Maple flag's campaigns, the F-5N would be used. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 8/15/2019 at 10:47 PM, Kev2go said:

 

Yes Swiss F5E and F5N have the "pointy shark nose" and larger LEX and the AUTO flaps function. But so does the current F5E3. After all these were changes that came with that specific E production model which IRRC was a relatively late batch starting in 1979.

 

 

These is also a aerodynamic characteristics that was present on of USAF aggressor based F5E's ( at least those that are the E3 model), so really there would be no FM changes needed from the current F5E3, just removal of AN/ALE40 Countermeasure and AN/ALR 87 RWR ( which is an export derivative of the AN/ALR 46V anyways) , because they weren't installed in USAF aggressor fleet.

 

 

Edit:

 

According to natops manual the F5N has the AN/APQ159 V3 or V5 radar. V5 radar is not more capable than the APQ 159V3 just described a product improvement to increase reliability and reduce weight to that of the earlier AN/APQ 153 Radar. In the manual both V3 and V5 are lumped into the same category and description and diagram of thier operations are the same.

 

The F-5N does not have a radar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mayo25 said:

The F-5N does not have a radar.

 

?

 

Yes the F5N does have 'a' radar.

 

an/apq159v3 to be exact according to the 2006 natops manual


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

None of them are virgins. They have all been around the block and had stuff done to them before they get sold again. 

 

My point is, even if ED's isn't a perfect representation of one that is flying, or has flown, it fits the mold in that it isn't a perfect match to any manual.

 

It's inherent imperfectness makes it perfect. 

 

😉

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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