m4.2+ Will we be M5 tape or M4?

[deadpool]

M4 tape

From this tape onwards the first release was already a subrelease starting at MX.1

M4.1 tape

• Introduction of advanced short-range missile, as a replacement for the current Sidewinder (AIM-9X, IRIS-T)
• Integration of advanced Link-16 functions
• Integration of SNIPER targeting pods

 

M4.2 tape

• Integration of the latest HARM Targeting System (HTS) and its R7 software
• Integration of SNIPER targeting pod and its S3 software (capable of cataloguing, storing and relaying target images using the Link 16 data-link. M4.2 gives the capability to use the HTS and Sniper ATP on the same aircraft)

 

This tape was the first common software for USAF CCIP upgraded block 40/50 airframes.

M4.3 tape

• "Clean-up" tape (intended as correction to imperfections found in earlier phases)

 

M5 tape

M5.1 tape

• Integration of capability for stand-off weapons (AGM-154) <-- (We will get this as per  )
• Introduction of more advanced A/G weapons (EGBU-12)
• Introduction of advanced Stores Management System and Joint Mission Planning System
• Introduction of an improved GPS/INS system (more accurate and jamming proof)
• Introduction of new Link-16 message standards to improve interoperability between different aircraft types
• Installation of AN/ARC-210 VHF radios to enable radio contact with FAC’s on the ground <-- (We will get this as per 

M5.2 tape

• "Clean-up" tape (intended as correction to imperfections found in earlier phases)

 

Now according to https://military.wikia.org/wiki/General_Dynamics_F-16_Fighting_Falcon_variants#cite_note-Blk_50-52_F-16.net-5 let's quote:
 

Quote

Northrop Grumman was awarded a contract in early 2004 to develop an M5+ upgrade kit to update the AN/APG-68(V)5 radars on the Block 40/42/50/52 Falcons to the AN/APG-68(V)9 standard; upgrading of Block 40/42 aircraft began in 2007 and is to become operational on the Block 50/52 aircraft by 2010. 

 

Now with all of this combined, we should:

 

1.) either don't get the AGM-154 and neither the AN/ARC-210 radios .. which the 2 pilots that ED talked to said they had in 2007.

2.) get the AN/APG-68(9) radar and more importantly and way cooler for DCS, the proper L16 interop with Hornets, etc.

 

Of course I am still cursing that there won't be SDBs, but hey .. 

[Kev2go]

an unrealistic hybrid between tape 4.3 and tape 5.1 it seems., because enough people wished for AGM154 since otherwise the Viper would have no precision guided standoff weapons, and ED caved in to the vocal mob like they did for LAU88 racks.

 

Even so software tape is not indicative what what Radar version an aircraft operates. Take  European F16A MLU's which also have the same commonality software tapes but use an upgraded APG66 radar rather than the APG68 series of radars.

 

 

AS for APG68V9  although at some point planned for USAF F16's., it appears it was only ended up being adopted by foreign operators of block 50/52.  I have not see any definitive to suggest the USAF uses it. Whereas in comparison in open sources papers/ news that we know that all APG65's were replaced with APG73 in Hornets.

 

 

 

Edited April 22, 2021 by Kev2go

[Bunny Clark]

On 4/20/2021 at 5:11 PM, deadpool said:

• Installation of AN/ARC-210 VHF radios to enable radio contact with FAC’s on the ground <-- (We will get this as per 

 

How does a post about the ARC-210 in the A-10C II module confirm we're getting it in the Viper?

[deadpool]

Wrong link on my account:

This is the correct one confirming it:

 

[Northstar98]

Hmm, so if F-16.net is anything to go by, we'll have M5.1 and our F-16CM is a 2008 F-16CM.

[briosky2]

[Frederf]

It seems more 5.x than 4.x since we have JDAM. 4.x doesn't have IAMs at all.

 

HTS with R7 and radar v9 are the major changes I don't expect to see in DCS due to their sensitivity or at least difficulty in obtaining info.

 

I know the complaining would be intense but I'd be OK with stepping fully back to pre M5 with no IAMs, etc.

[llOPPOTATOll]

14 minutes ago, Frederf said:

It seems more 5.x than 4.x since we have JDAM. 4.x doesn't have IAMs at all.

 

HTS with R7 and radar v9 are the major changes I don't expect to see in DCS due to their sensitivity or at least difficulty in obtaining info.

 

I know the complaining would be intense but I'd be OK with stepping fully back to pre M5 with no IAMs, etc.

Tape M3 had IAMs

[Frederf]

Thanks, I misread it.

[llOPPOTATOll]

My manual also has AGM-154 in M3 so i dont think F-16.net is 100% reliable source

[BIGNEWY]

Hi,

 

we have stated in our roadmap and feature topic it is M4.2+ 

 

thanks

[skywalker22]

Any news about AGM-154A? Im sure we will never see the B version, since it has been never produced for regular use.

[Northstar98]

8 minutes ago, skywalker22 said:

Any news about AGM-154A? Im sure we will never see the B version, since it has been never produced for regular use.

It's already implemented.

[skywalker22]

10 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

It's already implemented.

Oh, stupid me. I confused it with AGM-84H: https://www.f-16.net/f-16_armament_article12.html

[Dragon1-1]

The Harpoon is only used by export customers, not USAF. If you want to kill ships, take the Hornet. The best TASMO loadout for the Viper is a pair of G model Mavs.

[Northstar98]

27 minutes ago, skywalker22 said:

Oh, stupid me. I confused it with AGM-84H: https://www.f-16.net/f-16_armament_article12.html

Only operator I can find for that is the Turks with their Peace Onyx III/IV aircraft (which also have a different RWR, internal DECM, IRIS-T, HGK, LANTIRN, and a drag chute).

[Frederf]

What does the plus mean in M4.2+?

[Furiz]

5 hours ago, Frederf said:

What does the plus mean in M4.2+?

I guess some extra stuff they could get lisscence to model, but not enough to step out of M4.2, just a guess tho

[WHOGX5]

6 hours ago, Frederf said:

What does the plus mean in M4.2+?

Like Furiz touched upon, as far as I know, there is no tape that's officially designated as M4.2+. The only conclusion I can come to is that they chose to call it M4.2+ so they can incorporate some of the features of M5.1 while excluding others.

[mvsgas]

That is how the OFP are named or labeled in USAF manuals at the time (circa 2007) all of the OFP TCTO mention in the manuals have a plus at the end.

Edited March 15, 2022 by mvsgas