Storm Breaker for Hornet?

[Xxx]

Raytheon are releasing their Storm Breaker super glide bomb for the Hornet!

 

Designated GBU-53/B, it can be used in bad weather or dust, due to its multiple guidance systems. Milmeter radar, infra red or laser in terminal phase and GPS to guide it to target area.

 

Perhaps one for ED to have a go at in future?

 

Cheers.

[razo+r]

Really doubt that since they are really focusing on it at staying at the 2007 time.

[Furiz]

Really doubt that since they are really focusing on it at staying at the 2007 time.

 

 

This basically,

 

 

 

don't think they can even get a license for something like that. Since new aircraft, systems, and modern payloads are classified wouldn't be smart if USAF gave the specs to a game developer.

 

 

Russian side is even more in the dark, no flanker or fulcrum only the basic versions, most modern full fidelity aircraft from russian side is mig 21, which is a very old plane. (mig 31 is coming afaik)

 

 

 

Guess this helps in understanding the complexity of modeling a bomb like GBU-53/B.

[Shimmergloom667]

Also: Super Hornet, not Hornet

[maxTRX]

There are craploads of new weapons out there today. One that really brings it back to 'basics' is a 'Ginsu' bomb. It's a Hellfire variant (I believe R9X?) with no warhead. Instead it has the blades all the way around that pop out just before impact. So, it slices the terrorist vehicles... just in case the kinetic energy didn't do the job:huh: Hey, no bystanders hurt!

[QuiGon]

Raytheon are releasing their Storm Breaker super glide bomb for the Hornet!

Not for the Hornet, but for the Super Hornet, which we don't have in DCS...

[Fri13]

Really doubt that since they are really focusing on it at staying at the 2007 time.

 

Again, these should be separate things in time.

 

Terrains

Missions

Aircraft

Stores (Weapons, pods etc)

Support Assets

 

 

Meaning that when the aircraft comes out from the assembly line, it is not ended there. The aircraft can get new kind weapons without modifications to the aircraft at all after that.

 

Example the APKWS II and Ugroza, both are new weapons (rockets), from 2010 and 1999 respectfully. But you can use them from any platform that is capable to launch 2.75" FFAR or S-5/8/13 rockets. No modifications, no software changes, nothing.

 

All that is required is that the weapon specialists gets a new training for handling the rockets.

 

Here is example it for APKWS II

 

 

What gets changed in the process is how you assemble the rockets. As they will come in two separate containers, you have the warhead and you have the rocket motor and you assemble those two by screwing them together. Now there comes a new additional guidance section. You mount it between the same warhead and same rocket motor. And then you set the laser code with your screwdriver on the guidance section and go to mount the rockets to pod like previously. Difference is that the rocket now is sticking outside little bit.

 

Your aircraft firing computer doesn't get any updates to the ballistic changes. Your pods don't get any modifications. Your aircraft doesn't get any rewiring etc. Only difference is that the pilot gets an extra training how to proceed with the launch.

 

So instead aiming with CCIP, now you can designate target with the proper laser code and launch rockets toward that laser spot. That laser spot can be self-designated or third party. So same process as launching example laser guided maverick or bomb.

 

When you can upgrade your aircraft in the future without modifications, that allows you to use those weapons on anything that can carry those old pods, pylons etc, and only thing that changes is the training of the pilot.

Then why shouldn't such thing come to DCS?

 

Now in this new weapon system using tri-mode seeker (IR, Laser and MM radar, all behind same aperture and working simultaneously) asks a question, does it require modifications to aircraft?

 

If it requires a modification to software like new targeting page (instead just recognition that you have new bomb unit in store page) then it is no go.

If it requires a new wiring, then questionable.

If it requires just a new pylon.... Make it mission date dependent.

 

 

Many does forget that we do not need to know everything that is there inside the bomb or its exact properties etc. As none of that is modeled in any other weapon. Even our AIM-7 and AIM-120 are based to public information with lots of educated guesses. Should we remove those from the game? No.

 

It is enough that we know such basic informations like attack envelope (like max and min ranges, speeds and altitudes) and then basic information about its guidance system (IR, Laser, radar etc, in this case all three). And then get a accurate enough 3D model for it and animate it.

Most of those things are "acceptable level" for limitations in DCS. So it shouldn't be problem.

 

We can not stay in "We focus on this specific year" thing, because it means as well that every mission players are suppose to fly, must be on that very specific year and month. So if hornet is tried to stay on 2007 year, then no missions for 2008 or 2005 at all. So your F-16 is from 2009? Yes, sorry you can't never fly those together in same mission as they don't exist in same time!

So you are flying a Su-27S fighter from 1985 against a F-18 from 2007? Sorry, can't do that as it is completely unrealistic!

 

So what does people do? They twist the timelines to match their agenda and fun. Can we expect to see Su-27S from 1985 fly against 2007 Hornet? No. There is 22 year difference, and multiple generations from Su-27S to what is out there.

Can we expect to see a soldier fighting in 2018 using same designed cartridges in their assault rifle as their grandfathers? Yes... It doesn't matter if their grandfathers used AK-47 and grandsons AK-12.

 

 

So it should be up to mission designer in such case that do they make mission to happen later on with better weapons that are compatible, or do they go to fiction and fly modern fighters against cold war era museum pieces.

 

But we can't restrict everything to specific year.

[Sabre_Ewan]

Can we expect to see a soldier fighting in 2018 using same designed cartridges in their assault rifle as their grandfathers? Yes... It doesn't matter if their grandfathers used AK-47 and grandsons AK-12.

 

 

:music_whistling:

The AK-47 and AK-12 are totally different calibres.

[Fri13]

:music_whistling:

The AK-47 and AK-12 are totally different calibres.

 

Brainfart.... As I recall that you can get AK-12 with 7.62 x 39 as well.

[Bunny Clark]

Brainfart.... As I recall that you can get AK-12 with 7.62 x 39 as well.

That would be the AK-15.

 

While overall I agree with your sentiment, in the case of the SDB II / StormBreaker it doesn't look like it's going to be integrated with the Legacy Hornet at all. Right now the plan is for F-15E, Super Hornet, and F-35 only.

[SkateZilla]

APKWS and Storm Breaker are not certified to fire from USN legacy Hornets at all.

 

APKWS needs interface its laser guided rockets, Marine hornets deployed them in 2018, but their hornets are also updated to C+ Spec and continued to updare software and add weapons long after the USN stopped updating theirs.

 

So No.

Edited June 18, 2020 by SkateZilla

[SkateZilla]

 

We can not stay in "We focus on this specific year" thing, because it means as well that every mission players are suppose to fly, must be on that very specific year and month. So if hornet is tried to stay on 2007 year, then no missions for 2008 or 2005 at all. So your F-16 is from 2009? Yes, sorry you can't never fly those together in same mission as they don't exist in same time!

So you are flying a Su-27S fighter from 1985 against a F-18 from 2007? Sorry, can't do that as it is completely unrealistic!

 

So what does people do? They twist the timelines to match their agenda and fun. Can we expect to see Su-27S from 1985 fly against 2007 Hornet? No. There is 22 year difference, and multiple generations from Su-27S to what is out there.

Can we expect to see a soldier fighting in 2018 using same designed cartridges in their assault rifle as their grandfathers? Yes... It doesn't matter if their grandfathers used AK-47 and grandsons AK-12.

 

 

So it should be up to mission designer in such case that do they make mission to happen later on with better weapons that are compatible, or do they go to fiction and fly modern fighters against cold war era museum pieces.

 

But we can't restrict everything to specific year.

 

If a developer doesnt try to stick to a time frame/block, and tries to add things from random blocks you'll start to get endless feature creep.

 

A 2007 Hornet continues to fly after 2007 and just didnt reveieve any updates after, either due to age or deploument schedule and not being able to be rotated back for the upgrades.

 

so a 2007 hornet can fly with a 2009 viper.

 

its like trying to say a 2007 Chevy Camaro cannot drive on the street with a 2009 Corvette.

Edited June 18, 2020 by SkateZilla

[Fri13]

APKWS needs interface its laser guided rockets,

 

What interface?

There is no modifications what so ever required to use APKWS II. That is its core design by the manufacturer. No hardware, no software changes required. No even self-designation required, you just need to have a laser designation on target and launch rocket at its direction so it can find it.

 

ANY aircraft or vehicle that can carry the standard rocket pods is capable to launch APKWS II rockets. There is no interface what so ever between launcher and the rocket.

 

And legacy hornets had been approved for the operational use of the APKWS II, as was AV-8B Harrier etc what were in inventory at the time and operational use.

 

http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/defence-news/2018/april-2018-navy-naval-defense-news/6152-usmc-navair-complete-first-f-a-18-apkws-operational-flights.html

 

The only difference what you really do is that you mount the guidance module between standard warhead and rocket motor. And then you load them.

 

The ground and air crews gets training how to operate the new weapon with laser seeker. For pilots perspective, it turns to be like a laser guided maverick but with rockets if you self-designate. So find target, designate it, start lazing and launch rockets in given azzimuth and range. The rocket does all the rest, you just keep designating target until it goes boom.

 

 

This is the principle problem in DCS that new weapons that does not require modifications should be added to module weapons inventory for missions that are later than the weapon design.

We should leave the politics out that if someone doesn't want to sign a paper but it has been tested and technically possible it should be there then.

[Fri13]

If a developer doesnt try to stick to a time frame/block, and tries to add things from random blocks you'll start to get endless feature creep.

 

Yes with engines.

Yes with cockpit displays.

Yes with flight modeling.

Yes with navigation suit.

Yes with lots of things.

 

But with weapons? Not so strict.

No with weapons that requires modifications.

Yes with weapons that doesn't require modifications.

 

A 2007 Hornet continues to fly after 2007 and just didnt reveieve any updates after, either due to age or deploument schedule and not being able to be rotated back for the upgrades.

 

Yes, and in 2018 the F/A-18C Lot 20 unmodified Hornet fleet was certified for operative use of the APKWS II rockets.

 

so a 2007 hornet can fly with a 2009 viper.

 

So F/A-18C Lot 20 hornet can carry and launch APKWS II from 2018 forward missions.

 

its like trying to say a 2007 Chevy Camaro cannot drive on the street with a 2009 Corvette.

 

Yes, why APKWS II is fully operational and compatible with our Hornet, AV-8B N/A Harrier, A-10C, A-10A, F-16C Block 50 etc etc in missions from 2012-2018. Every Russian vehicle with a standard S-5, S-8 and S-13 rockets is capable to launch and use their own Ugroza rockets in missions since 1999.

 

It is ED just add the weapons to their simulator and inventory of the module in proper manner.

 

Then it is up to mission designers to decide what year their mission is about, and what weapons does the unit has available for in use.

 

Just like it is with AIM-7 vs AIM-120 or R-60 vs R-60M or Mk.82 vs GBU-12.

 

At some point in the future weapons mature, gets better and requires mission designer to make decision what can be used.

 

The same question is here, GBU-53/B Stormbreaker, is it possible to be fielded by a training of ground and air crew with existing equipment?

 

SDB II will be compatible with the BRU-61 (Bomb Rack Unit) miniature munitions carriage, the CNU-660/E (Container Miscellaneous Unit) carriage system, the Common Munitions Bit and Reprogramming Equipment and the Joint Mission Planning System. The SDB II program will develop and field a single-weapon AF storage container and a dual Navy weapon storage container.

https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/gbu-53.htm

 

When the SDB I didn't get to legacy hornet (AFAIK) by technical reasons, how could the II model get?

 

As even if we would have a standard adapters to connect to new weapon lugs, there is need to understand how does the weapon be delivered.

 

We currently have completely unrealistic means to use "smart weapons", we can program laser codes in the rockets, missiles and bombs in the cockpit using UFC, while it would be realistic even by having random laser codes set on each rearming so that you need to check them from kneeboard what is what and program your designator for it. While that UFC thing should be a game mode, or enable in special tabs with note that it is unrealistic.

 

And then people are against a new weapons that doesn't require modifications what so ever?

 

Yes, it is slippery slope quickly.

[Fri13]

That would be the AK-15.

 

Yes, these days forget that different designation...

 

While overall I agree with your sentiment, in the case of the SDB II / StormBreaker it doesn't look like it's going to be integrated with the Legacy Hornet at all. Right now the plan is for F-15E, Super Hornet, and F-35 only.

 

Of course they will not test it even on aircraft that is no more in operational use. When legacy hornets has gone bye bye, their inventory is only with those few, it would take demand from export markets operating with legacy hornets that it gets there tested.

 

But regardless all the testing, approval etc methods, that is politics and shouldn't be part of DCS at all as denying something to be available if it technically works. As DCS is not politics simulator, it is combat simulator. And in time of war, lots of political decisions are ignored. Even official procedures etc are ignored. And if your war goes bad, you would start pulling from the bone yard and stockpiles your old weapons that has been stored, just to keep fighting change. Such scenarios could very well be simulated in the DCS, while the point is currently more for a "we are superior, we just slaughter you" kind missions.

 

If the F/A-18C/D Lot 20 is not technically compatible with SDB I / II, then it can't be added. If it was tested and found functional, but was political reasons left behind, then it can be added.

AFAIK the aircraft is not compatible with it, so it shouldn't be added.

[SkateZilla]

E.D. Chose 2007 Block 20 Fleet Aircraft because that is the General Year that they had the most complete set of data.

 

APKWS was tested with USMC Hornets in 2018, not USN Hornets, which stopped receiving upgrades long before 2018, As they were already being phased out for the Block II Super Hornets.

 

You can't take a 2017 Weapon, and Slap it onto a 2007 Hornet.

 

Between 2007 and 2018, That same hornet likely saw a wiring upgrade, a Service Life Extension, a dozen OFP Upgrades, primary systems upgrades in Avionics and in the Case of the USMC Hornets Upgrades to C+ Standard.

 

If it was 100% Plug and Play w/ the Aircraft no Upgrades required, then they wouldn't have had the need to test the system w/ the aircraft at all.

 

The Marines Chose to field APKWS on their hornets, they received software updates to allow it, USN did not.

 

It uses the same Launcher, the same rocket and warhead, but's still a new weapon to the computers on the hornet.

Edited June 18, 2020 by SkateZilla

[BarTzi]

 

Meaning that when the aircraft comes out from the assembly line, it is not ended there.

 

This isn't an aircraft, it's a software simulating one. They have to pick a timeframe and stick with it. Everything else is outside of the scope of the program. Do you want them to never finish it?

[probad]

that's exactly what people want, they want endless content, now.

 

its unhealthy af