Why Heatblur should do the F-111 next!

[Lurker]

On 5/26/2021 at 11:27 PM, Blaze1 said:

The F-111F would be the obvious choice due to its PGM capability and action during Desert Storm, but I'd really also love to see an F-111D with that beautiful digital cockpit.

 

I doubt the D would be implemented (and seriously doubt if it would be a good choice to develop anyway), as it was mostly an experimental upgrade, that was rather poorly thought out and implemented and caused more headaches than it solved problems. This is why the "D" was discontinued and was ultimately withdrawn form service. 

Edited May 28, 2021 by Lurker

[Blaze1]

The 'D' wasn't experimental, it was a digital variant that entered production.  While the digital system was a maintenance nightmare to begin with, those troubles were eventually ironed out.  The only downside of modelling a 'D' would be that it could only haul dumb a-to-g munitions (save dropping LGBs for a buddy).

[mkellytx]

On 5/28/2021 at 2:01 AM, Blaze1 said:

The 'D' wasn't experimental, it was a digital variant that entered production.  While the digital system was a maintenance nightmare to begin with, those troubles were eventually ironed out.  The only downside of modelling a 'D' would be that it could only haul dumb a-to-g munitions (save dropping LGBs for a buddy).

Prior to the end of the Cold War the D's, E's, F's and the FB-111A's were all supposed to get the Pacer Strike upgrade which installed/upgraded digital mission avionics, TFR and attack radars.  The G's got the mission computer in the conversion, some of the E's and F's got Pacer Strike but not all.   At one point the D was considered to get LANTRIN, but once the wall fell they were the first to go.

[Lurker]

On 5/28/2021 at 9:01 AM, Blaze1 said:

The 'D' wasn't experimental, it was a digital variant that entered production.  While the digital system was a maintenance nightmare to begin with, those troubles were eventually ironed out.  The only downside of modelling a 'D' would be that it could only haul dumb a-to-g munitions (save dropping LGBs for a buddy).

 

"The truth is that the D model didn't work. They parked every single one of them in Fort Worth for several years as they worked to fix the bugs"

- Richard Crandall (Source: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/4595/flying-the-iconic-swing-wing-f-111-aardvark-at-the-height-of-the-cold-war)

 

 

 

[Blaze1]

By the late 70's/early 80's, the 'D' received upgrades that significantly improved reliability.  It was a complex system that required experienced Mx crews to work on it and apparently around the time they began to get good at it, they were promoted, with the less experienced crew then taking the reins.

[Northstar98]

I still think an 80s F model with Pave Tack is the best one to do.

Edited June 2, 2021 by Northstar98

[WinterH]

30 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

I still think an 80s F model with Pave Tack is the best one to do.

I'd be inclined to agree. It can sort of represent the tank plinkers of first Gulf War too in a pinch. Did they get much in the way upgrades between 80s and then?

 

Though, I wouldn't say no to earlier F-111 either.

[Northstar98]

On 6/2/2021 at 6:30 PM, WinterH said:

I'd be inclined to agree. It can sort of represent the tank plinkers of first Gulf War too in a pinch. Did they get much in the way upgrades between 80s and then?

No idea, though personally I'm more comfortable using an aircraft that's too old in a more recent scenario than an aircraft that's too new in an older scenario.

I did have a brief look on the C:MO database and here's what it thinks:

Spoiler

From 1972:

Sensors/EW:

• AN/APQ-144 ARS (maybe limited A/A capability - like the Viggen? EDIT: Yes)
• AN/APQ-146 TFR
• KB-18A Strike Camera
• AN/AAR-34 IR MAWS
• AN/ALR-41 CMRS RWR
• AN/ALQ-94 DECM

Stores:

• 600 US gallon fuel tanks
• AN/ALQ-119 DECM pod
• B43 1mT nuclear bomb
• B57 5-20kT nuclear bomb
• B61 340kT nuclear bomb
• CBU-52/B [217 × BLU-61/B frag bomblets]
• CBU-58A/B [650 × BLU-63/B frag bomblets]
• CBU-71A/B [650 × BLU-86/B frag bomblets]
• M61 Vulcan gun pod w/ 2000 rounds(?) (in weapons bay)
• Mk82 
• Mk82 SnakeEye
• Mk84

Internal Mounts/Stores/Weapons:

• AN/ALE-28 with 90 cartridges in 2 banks.

For subsequent years:

• 1981:
  • AN/ALR-41 CMRS replaced with AN/ALR-62 TTWS Compass Sail RWR
  • AN/ALQ-94 DECM replaced with AN/ALQ-137 SPS DECM
  • AN/ALQ-119 DECM pod replaced with AN/ALQ-131 DECM pod
  • AN/AVQ-26 Pave Tack TGP (1st gen. FLIR + LTD/R, 12k feet) added
  • GBU-12D/B [Mk82] Paveway II added
  • GBU-10E/B [Mk84] Paveway II added
• 1983:
  • GBU-15(V)1/B CWW [EO, Mk84] and its accompanying AN/AXQ-14 D/L pod added
• 1986:
  • Mk82 AIR added
  • Mk84 AIR added
• 1987:
  • Matra Durandal (BLU-107/B) added
  • GBU-10J/B [BLU-109/B] Paveway II added
  • GBU-15(V)2/B CWW [IIR, Mk84] added
  • GBU-15(V)31/B CWW [EO, BLU-109/B] added
  • GBU-15(V)32/B CWW [IIR, BLU-109/B] added
  • GBU-24/B [Mk84] Paveway III added
  • GBU-24A/B [BLU-109/B] Paveway III added
• 1991:
  • GBU-28/B [BLU-113/B] Paveway III added
• 1993:
  • AN/ALE-28 replaced with AN/ALE-40 with 144 cartridges in 8 banks
• 1995-1996:
  • AN/APQ-144 replaced with AN/APQ-161
  • AN/APQ-146 replaced with AN/APQ-171
  • For aircraft belonging to the 524th Fighter-Bomber Squadron, they were upgraded with the Pacer Strike digital avionics upgrade in 1994, adding: 
    • 2 F-16C MFDs (these would've been monochromatic green displays as found in pre-CCIP F-16Cs)
    • GPS
    • ring laser gyros

I'm assuming aircraft operated by other squadrons didn't go through this upgrade, and retained the F-111F's avionics from the early 80s.

AFAIK, apart from what I've listed, aircraft are otherwise assumed to be the same as previous years.

There are a few things missing from these which AFAIK, the F-111F was fitted with:

• The AGM-130, which is a GBU-15 with a rocket motor, this entered service on the F-111 (according to this) in December 1994 (presumably A and C variants). EDIT: There is an AGM-130 present in the T.O. 1F-111F-1 stores limitations, with the AGM-130A and A-2 variants present.
• The F-111 specific M61 Vulcan gunpod, placed in the F-111s weapons bay, though seldomly fitted (with not much information available, and I've only found this picture so far).
• The AIM-9 sidewinder (presumably J, L and M variants), so far I've found only found 1 example (though it's a display aircraft, though given the sidewinder is mounted on a pylon, it seems more likely - happy to be proven wrong though). There is reference in the T.O. 1F-111F-1 circa 1995 for an outstanding TCTO (T.O. 1F111F-570) regarding to shoulder-mounted AIM-9 cability for the MAU-12, listed as a major modification, as well as AIM-9s listed in the stores limitations.

Speaking of the T.O. 1F-111F-1, here's a list of stores present in the stores limitation section that aren't listed above, note that dates will be introduction dates of the weapon itself and not necessarily when the aircraft was integrated with them (if it was integrated with them), where I've found them:

Spoiler

• AIM-9B, E, J, P, L, M (1957, 1968, 1972, 1972-mid 80s?, 1980 and 1984 respectively)
• AGM-65A, B, D, G (1973, 1976, 1984, 1991 respectively)
• AGM-130A [Mk84, TV] (1994)
• AGM-130A-2 [MK84, IR] (1984)
• AN/ALQ-184(V)4, (V)6 DECM pod (90s?)
• AN/ASQ-T11, T13, T17, T21, T27, T27(V)1, T29 (?)
• B57 5-20kT nuclear bomb
• BDU-12/B (B57 practice bomb)
• BDU-33B/B, D/B (25 Ib, Mk82 500 Ib LDGP simulator)
• BDU-38/B (B61 practice bomb)
• BL775 (No. 1 Mk. 1/No. 1A Mk. 2/No. 1A Mk. 4) [147 × anti-tank bomblets] (1973)
• BLU-109/B [Mk84 conical tail] (1985)
• CBU-24B/B [665 × BLU-26/B frag bomblets] (replaced by CBU-58/B, unknown introduction date)
• CBU-49B/B [670 × BLU-59/B frag bomblets] (replaced by CBU-58/B, unknown introduction date)
• CBU-87/B, -87A/B, -87B/B CEM [202 × BLU-97/B CEM bomblets] (1987 -)
• CBU-89/B, -89A/B GATOR [72 BLU-91/B AT mines + 22 BLU-92/B APERS mines] (80s? 90s?)
• CTU-2/A Cargo Capsule
• M117 750Ib LDGP (50s?)
• M117R (retarded version of the M117, similar to Mk82 SnakeEye, 50s?)
• M117D Destructor (bottom mine version of M117R, 70s?)
• Mk20 Mod. 2, 3, 4 Rockeye II [247 × Mk118 Mod. 0, 1 anti-tank bomblets] (1969 - 70s?)
• Mk36 Destructor (bottom mine version of Mk82 SnakeEye, 70s?)
• Mk106 (5 Ib, high-drag Mk82 simulator, presumably entered service alongside high-drag Mk82s)
• TGM-65A, B, D, G (1973, 1976, 1984, 1991 respectively)

The good thing here is that it seems that from 1981 - 1991 the only thing that's changing is weapons becoming available, so a 1991 spec F-111F could perfectly (at least to my knowledge) represent an F-111F right the way back to 1981, just with weapons restricting. This, for me, would be my preferred variant.

I imagine doing a 1993 variant would be fairly easy (swapping countermeasures, and presumably changing the control panel for it in the cockpit).

For 1995-1996 however, it sounds like it would be a lot more work, with the upgraded RADAR sets, and especially so for Pacer Strike upgraded aircraft.

 

Quote

Though, I wouldn't say no to earlier F-111 either.

Neither, though an 80s-90s F-111F would mostly suite the rest of Heatblur's lineup (both AJS 37 and F-14A/B are early/mid 90s, the early F-14A is presumably 80s and the A-6E will most likely be 80s/90s.

Edited December 7, 2021 by Northstar98
formatting

[Tonker]

*cough* Tornado IDS 80s-90s *cough*

 

I'll see myself out... 

 

[Dragon89]

On 6/2/2021 at 5:56 PM, Northstar98 said:

I still think an 80s F model with Pave Tack is the best one to do.

 

Exactly

[bies]

According to the pilot interview 1980s F-111F variant with bigger intakes and more powerful engines can go up to Ma=1.4 in clean configuration at very low level making it practically impossible to tail chase.

And having weapons bay flying in clean configuration was practical in high threat environment, especially delivering nuclear weapons. Or jettisoning the wing pylons after releasing the bombs.

Any variant from 1960s A to 1980s F required a lot of skill for both pilot and wso so it would be attractive with engaging gameplay.

[notproplayer3]

My aircraft kink is "big" aircraft such as the f14 that has heavy bomb payloads, thus, the f-111 being also one of my top good looking aircraft would be a dream come true if it were to come to DCS and much more so it it were also done by Heatblur. To be honest I don't even care about it's capability at this point, I just like that it's big and awesome looking.

Edited July 20, 2021 by notproplayer3

[Machalot]

On 5/16/2021 at 9:59 AM, BMGZ06 said:

But if the F-111 F was modeled properly with the TFR and multicrew, I would likely convert to flying it all the time since it would be a really fun mission always being on the deck going like stink.

Do own the Viggen? If not, you should give it a try. 

[Lurker]

Just came across this little walkaround of a former RAAF F-111 (that also used to serve in USAF previously) 

 

 

Edited September 21, 2021 by Lurker

[Lurker]

I guess I'm a sad panda

Was hoping that the un-announced module would be an F-111, but I guess Heatblur went for the low-hanging fruit with the Phantom. Looks like the Aardwark is not something that generates a lot of buzz, and even if a third party ever decides to do an interdiction\bomber, if I'm being completely honest with myself, they will probably go for a more popular airframe. 

Oh well, at least I got to fly the F14. Gratz to all the Phantom fans, and I am looking forward to shooting your F4s out of the skies in the future. 

[whiteladder]

One of my prized possessions is my calendar the from 1983 RAF Mildenhall Air Fete

 And the page I got the most signatures on.....

 

And by the way the dcs F111 does need to be a thing

 

 

Edited February 3, 2022 by whiteladder

[Repth]

10 hours ago, Lurker said:

I guess I'm a sad panda

Was hoping that the un-announced module would be an F-111, but I guess Heatblur went for the low-hanging fruit with the Phantom. Looks like the Aardwark is not something that generates a lot of buzz, and even if a third party ever decides to do an interdiction\bomber, if I'm being completely honest with myself, they will probably go for a more popular airframe. 

Oh well, at least I got to fly the F14. Gratz to all the Phantom fans, and I am looking forward to shooting your F4s out of the skies in the future. 

I'm with you Lurker. While I might eventually buy the F-4 somewhere down the line in the far future. I would have gladly bought an F-111 day one. 

[mkellytx]

On 2/3/2022 at 7:32 AM, Gypsy 1-1 said:

HIGHLY doubt that. Anything above 1.2 will not be possible with materials of that era. 

The Good Book, T.O. 1F-111F-1 states:

Airspeed restrictions are presented in Figure 54.
With wings swept between 16 and 49 °, the airspeed
limits shown in Figure .5-4 coincide witldhe limits
programmed into the Standard Central Air Data
Computer (SCADC). Refer to Figures 5-7 thru5-l0
for additional wing sweep/airspeed limits.

The maximum sustained speed is coincident with a
total temperature of15'.3 ° C (308 ° F). Flight at
speeds which result in a total temperatures greater
than 153 °C (308 ° F) is limited to 300 seconds per
flight. The maximum dash speed is coincident with a
total temperature of214 QC (418 °F) or2.50 Mach,
whichever is less.

NOTE
Speeds in excess .of Mach 2.2 will
begin to blister external aircraft
paint and may result in the partial
delamination of honeycomb panels
with pre-existing defects.

 

Said chart lists the limitation at SL as M1.2, M1.4 is 8,000 ft.  Given those charts are corrected to standard day, M1.4 could be attainable for non standard conditions.  Also, that's the T.O. limit, the F had much more powerful engines than the other Varks, so it could probably go faster at the risk of airframe damage.  Anyone have the stagnation temperature handy for M1.2 standard day at SL?

The -1 for the D and G have the same chart with different flight test dates, my guess is that M1.2 limit is either heat or flutter or they just tested out to the % flutter margin and called it a day since the contract requirement was M1.2 at SL.  FWIW here's the verbiage for the D

AIRSPEED AND ALTITUDE OPERATIONAL LIMIT
ENVELOPES.

The airspeed limits shown in figure 5-4
coincide with the limits programmed into the
MSMA. Airspeed limitations shown in figure
5-4 do not reflect operational limitations
imposed by cg considerations. Refer to figure
5-10 for additional wing sweep/airspeed
limits. The maximum sustained speed is
coincident with a total temperature of 153
degrees C. (308 degrees F). The maximum dash
speed is coincident with a total temperature
of 214 degrees C. (418 degrees F) or Mach 2.50,
whichever is less. Flight at speeds which
result in total temperatures greater than 153
degrees C. (308 degrees F) is limited to 5
minutes per flight. Airspeed limits for
carriage of external stores are defined for
each authorized loading configuration, refer to
"Stores Limitations," this section.

 

Edited February 5, 2022 by mkellytx

[Machalot]

32 minutes ago, mkellytx said:

Anyone have the stagnation temperature handy for M1.2 standard day at SL?

The formula is 

Tstag = (1 + 0.2 x Mach^2) x T

For 287 Kelvin that gives 369.7 K.

Edited February 5, 2022 by Machalot

[Machalot]

2 minutes ago, mkellytx said:

Thanks, that wasn't one of the ones I memorized oh so many years past...  So 471.7K is 198.7C which is in the 5 min limit, my guess is that it's a flutter limit and can go well past M1.2 on the deck...

Sorry, I posted the wrong formula at first. Please see the updated post. 

[mkellytx]

47 minutes ago, Machalot said:

Sorry, I posted the wrong formula at first. Please see the updated post. 

No worries, the new number is below the 5 min limit.  M1.4 on the deck seems attainable in the F, if not advisable all the caveats about becoming a test pilot by exceeding T.O. limits blah blah blah

[Evoman]

On 2/3/2022 at 7:38 AM, Lurker said:

I guess I'm a sad panda

Was hoping that the un-announced module would be an F-111, but I guess Heatblur went for the low-hanging fruit with the Phantom. Looks like the Aardwark is not something that generates a lot of buzz, and even if a third party ever decides to do an interdiction\bomber, if I'm being completely honest with myself, they will probably go for a more popular airframe. 

Oh well, at least I got to fly the F14. Gratz to all the Phantom fans, and I am looking forward to shooting your F4s out of the skies in the future. 

Not sure why your surprised. I had been seen for a while on these forums that the F-4 Phantom was one of the most coveted Cold War era jets. The Phantom was originally going to be done sooner but it was put in the back burner because the F-16 community had being crying for the Falcon to be done.

But now that the F-4 will be done you will be left to compete against the Tornado community who have been being crying for it for a long time.

Edited February 7, 2022 by Evoman

[Lurker]

On 2/6/2022 at 7:29 PM, Evoman said:

Not sure why your surprised. I had been seen for a while on these forums that the F-4 Phantom was one of the most coveted Cold War era jets. The Phantom was originally going to be done sooner but it was put in the back burner because the F-16 community had being crying for it the Falcon to be done.

But now that the F-4 will be done you will be left to compete against the Tornado community who have been being crying for it for a long time.

I wasn't surprised that the Phantom was in development, what just a little bit taken aback that Heatblur was doing it and not Eagle Dynamics. 

Edited February 9, 2022 by Lurker

[Tonker]

On 2/6/2022 at 6:29 PM, Evoman said:

...the Tornado community who have been being crying...

It's what we do best! 

 

 

[slam]

Yes, I will see the F-111 in dcs stand for a long time  i will pay for it