DCS: F-5E is the hardest fast jet to fly in bad IMC weather

[DmitriKozlowsky]

If you cant see 5 km ahead of you. This aircraft is the hardest to fly in DCS. Even with F10 cheat. Terra Firma and Mare Firma are the true enemies. SA-6, SA-8, can be avoided. But ground and water are everywhere.  My question is on why radar, which features ground radar clutter, not be drowned in clutter when nose is pointing at ground or steep terrain. Not saying its a TFR like in Tornado and F-111. But even community A-4E-C has a rudimentary terrain avoidance radar.

[razo+r]

If you say nose pointing to ground, do you mean the actual nose of the aircraft or the radar antenna? Because the radar antenna stays at a fixed pitch, so it can look at a different direction than the nose of the aircraft. 

 

And if you have a lot of ground clutter, pretty sure the radar is "drowning" in it. You'll have a hard time trying to identify a target there. 

The ground clutter might just not be displayed visually properly. 

[randomTOTEN]

I think it's just fine as an IFR machine. If you're relying on the FCR you're doing it wrong.

EDIT: Nellis AFB will let our F-5E land in as low as 2.3km visibility.

Edited November 6, 2021 by randomTOTEN

[DmitriKozlowsky]

9 hours ago, randomTOTEN said:

I think it's just fine as an IFR machine. If you're relying on the FCR you're doing it wrong.

EDIT: Nellis AFB will let our F-5E land in as low as 2.3km visibility.

 

With respect, any aircraft is a fine IFR type, as long you got a stop watch, and can dead reackon,and do basic arithmetic, while in landing pattern. That is far easier in slow helicopter or Cessna at 80 KIAS. But in a fast jet, with poor viz, clouds that hug ground with hills, rolling terrain, large elevation changes, your mind has to be 5 clicks ahead of nose, and 'know' terrain ahead just from studying map during flight planning. Much harder task. In Harrier II, FLIR helps a lot, realtime moving map is precious. Easier in Hornet, as AG in 10nm range, give great plan view of terrain ahead. Though it does not color codes terrain ahead and above aircraft. Perhaps putting a Garmin430 mod in F-5E is a good idea. But 430 is not a military device.

P.S. I dont quite get, how Kobe's helo pilot could loose SA in IMC and CFIT at such high speed. When he could have just slowed down the helo to 50 KIAS or slower, and slowly easy his ship out of IMC. Instead the impacted at 150 KIAS. But thats a different topic.

[TLTeo]

Because these early lightweight radars are all built around compromises and limited capabilities. The A-4's may have decent ground mapping capability (which is what you expect out of a dedicated attack jet), but it has no air to air capability whatsoever. The F-5 is a passable short range air to air radar, but just by virtue of having B-scope representation is entirely inadequate at ground mapping and bad weather flying.

If anything, the reason the F-5 sucks in weather isn't its radar (although I agree the representation is outdated at this point), but the buggy TACAN and weird bugs with the gyros ending up misaligned.

Edited November 6, 2021 by TLTeo

[randomTOTEN]

1 hour ago, DmitriKozlowsky said:

With respect, any aircraft is a fine IFR type, as long you got a stop watch, and can dead reackon,and do basic arithmetic, while in landing pattern.

Nah, this isn't true. It's somewhat beyond DCS but there are other qualities an aircraft has to have to be a "fine IFR type." Many aircraft are actually quite bad "IFR types." You described equipment and procedures that are ineffective and mostly unacceptable for IFR.

1 hour ago, DmitriKozlowsky said:

That is far easier in slow helicopter or Cessna at 80 KIAS.

No, some of the best "IFR types" are quite fast. The B747-400 is incredibly fast compared to your examples, and is a fantastic "IFR type."

1 hour ago, DmitriKozlowsky said:

But in a fast jet, with poor viz, clouds that hug ground with hills, rolling terrain, large elevation changes, your mind has to be 5 clicks ahead of nose, and 'know' terrain ahead just from studying map during flight planning.

Not really.

1 hour ago, DmitriKozlowsky said:

Much harder task.

That's why you're failing at it.

1 hour ago, DmitriKozlowsky said:

FLIR helps a lot, realtime moving map is precious.

Not relevant to IFR. Useful equipment for sure, but you're having problems because you're missing the point.

1 hour ago, DmitriKozlowsky said:

Perhaps putting a Garmin430 mod in F-5E is a good idea.

Not needed, but I know a lot of people like it.

---

1 hour ago, DmitriKozlowsky said:

P.S. I dont quite get, how Kobe's helo pilot could loose SA in IMC and CFIT at such high speed.

It's an interesting accident. People unfamiliar generally don't understand how it happened. I can often see people make the same fatal mistakes in DCS.

1 hour ago, DmitriKozlowsky said:

When he could have just slowed down the helo to 50 KIAS or slower, and slowly easy his ship out of IMC.

In his situation, I think this would have been even more of a death sentence.

Edited November 6, 2021 by randomTOTEN

[Baltic Pirate]

1 hour ago, DmitriKozlowsky said:

 

P.S. I dont quite get, how Kobe's helo pilot could loose SA in IMC and CFIT at such high speed. When he could have just slowed down the helo to 50 KIAS or slower, and slowly easy his ship out of IMC. Instead the impacted at 150 KIAS. But thats a different topic.

Thats because speed killed them. He did not lose SA, he lost control. Retreating blade stall at low level, is recoverable, but in IMC with poor skills and lack of currency, not so. Hitting the ground was result of the above. IMC flying is not that easy IRL as mistakes happen and some will kill you. I've got well over 13 thousand instrument hours and while I find it not challenging, I put an effort in every approach I do. Now especially flying into IMC without an IFR clearance and not being instrument current or allowed commercial ops under IMC is something one should not do.

Edited November 6, 2021 by Baltic Pirate

[randomTOTEN]

15 minutes ago, Baltic Pirate said:

Retreating blade stall at low level, is recoverable, but in IMC with poor skills and lack of currency, not so.

I watched the entire investigation hearing on this accident. Retreating blade stall was never mentioned. He was attempting to climb to VFR on top when he lost control, not a scenario where high speed would result in RBS.

I'm sorry but this is wrong, and the board disagrees with you.

[Baltic Pirate]

17 minutes ago, randomTOTEN said:

I watched the entire investigation hearing on this accident. Retreating blade stall was never mentioned. He was attempting to climb to VFR on top when he lost control, not a scenario where high speed would result in RBS.

I'm sorry but this is wrong, and the board disagrees with you.

I stand corrected. The discussion before prompted me to read the accident report on the case. It states as follows.

The National Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable cause of this accident was the pilot’s decision to continue flight under visual flight rules into instrument meteorological conditions, which resulted in the pilot’s spatial disorientation and loss of control.

The pilot’s poor decision to fly at an excessive airspeed for the weather conditions was inconsistent with his adverse-weather-avoidance training and reduced the time available for him to choose an alternative course of action to avoid entering instrument meteorological conditions

The pilot experienced spatial disorientation while climbing the helicopter in instrument meteorological conditions, which led to his loss of helicopter control and the resulting collision with terrain.

The pilot had about 8,577 hours flying experience, which included about 1,250 hours in Sikorsky S-76-series helicopters and about 75 hours of instrument flying time, at least 68.2 hours of which were accumulated while flying under simulated instrument meteorological conditions (IMC).16 In the 90 days, 30 days, and 24 hours before the accident, the pilot accumulated about 61 hours, 15 hours, and 1.5 hours flying time, respectively.

 

Now that being said. If with his minimal instrument experience, the pilot experienced any aerodynamic anomaly, in addition to the possible physiological effects of his rather snappy pitch up, it would have contributed to the end result. This has been an ongoing discussion with very experienced S-76 pilots since the accident happened and I will be using this accident as case study for the next CRM class.

 

Edited November 6, 2021 by Baltic Pirate

[Raviar]

F-5 IS NOT ALLL WEATHER AC, in real life the pilots (the command pilots) will get the weather report prior to flight for whole squadron, even if it is going to be a war the F-5 CAN NOT fly in low visibility weather and they dont, if Pilot do thats a big mistake which easily end up to mishap, 7 to 10 nmi visibility is required ( I cant remember the exact number)

The radar is completely useless they dont even turn it on in real life!

Edited November 10, 2021 by Raviar

[Noctrach]

"Sorry lads, the airborne invasion of our proud nation will proceed unopposed. We're all grounded due to an unfortunately dense cloud cover this afternoon."
"But sir, we have TACAN and perfectly capable radars!"
"Don't talk back to me Timmy. You know we only installed those as counterweight."

[DmitriKozlowsky]

3 hours ago, Raviar said:

F-5 IS NOT ALLL WEATHER AC, in real life the pilots (the command pilots) will get the weather report prior to flight for whole squadron, even if it is going to be a war the F-5 CAN NOT fly in low visibility weather and they dont, if Pilot do thats a big mistake which easily end up to mishap, 7 to 10 nmi visibility is required ( I cant remember the exact number)

The radar is completely useless they dont even turn it on in real life!

 

F-5E in various configs was in service , for a long time, with Taiwan (ROC), Thailand, Brazil, and Singapore maybe. Gotta check Internet. But , I lived in Taiwan, but not Thailand, it rains often, and often ,when it doesn't rain, the viz is crap. Brazil is Amazon rainforest. Ask Brazilian general on number of helicopters and fixed wings the lost to weather related poor visibility. A book of tears. A military unit that cannot fight in any weather, 24/7, is not a combat coded unit. F-5A and -5B (C?) of SkoshiTiger program in Vietnam fought and were awarded. What did they fight only on sunny clear days?  I get there are minimums, that must be present weather vise, for aircraft to fly. Moonlight has enough ambient light to fly. I figure they used TRACON radars and beacons for navigation and approaches.  USAF and CIA had these special , then secret unit, whose job was to sneak into Laos and Cambodia, and set up radio beacons on top of high hills for radio navigation and nighttime strikes. Its a nifty story. RAF and Luftwaffe had similar special ops for radio navigation and bombing at night, during Battle Of Britain. Then came radar bombing.

[Raviar]

The Singaporian F-5 equipped with far adv radar capable of firing 120B, im talking about F-5E which is available in DCS. 

U r getting to far adv tech/update ...

[Snappy]

13 hours ago, Raviar said:

F-5 IS NOT ALLL WEATHER AC, in real life the pilots (the command pilots) will get the weather report prior to flight for whole squadron, even if it is going to be a war the F-5 CAN NOT fly in low visibility weather and they dont, if Pilot do thats a big mistake which easily end up to mishap, 7 to 10 nmi visibility is required ( I cant remember the exact number)

The radar is completely useless they dont even turn it on in real life!

 

Not sure which country your statement is referring to, but I’d cut back on the blanket statements.Maybe your country had restrictions on it.

The aircraft certainly is capable of IFR flight , even the “old” F-5e models. The current bugs in DCS notwithstanding. 

The real aircraft certainly could fly IFR with Tacan , Tacan approaches and PAR approaches even in bad weather.Of course not down to zero visibility but countries like Norway flew it too and they have some interesting weather and certainly couldn’t afford too use their aircraft only in good weather..Besides Nav equipment also was most likely a customer option.Maybe your Air Force ordered the daytime fighter equipment only.

Also statements like “radar is completely useless” are plain hyperbole.Of course it can’t compete with todays radar or doesn’t offer remotely the same search&track capability but it wasn’t intended to either at its time. It provides mainly gunsight solution and rudimentary target information.

Edit: Talking about the version simulated in DCS,even  with just “only “TACAN approaches you have fairly “low” minima, take a look at a few TACAN approach charts online ,specifically their minima section.

Far below the 7-10 miles you were talking about.

The main issue is, the Tiger in DCS has some navigation & instrument related bugs and the guy who flies it needs to know how to fly basic IFR in general.

Edited November 10, 2021 by Snappy

[Mikaa]

Bingo. If these gyro bugs get fixed (as well as some of the lingering TACAN issues) this would be a perfectly capable IFR bird; and as Snappy said, this is assuming you can fly basic attitude in the first place. 

[randomTOTEN]

The gyro issue isn't even that bad in my experience. Just FAST ERECT when you're straight and level.

[Mikaa]

But if you’re in IMC, then you don’t have the reference to fast erect… also AFAIK that’s not what that button is supposed to do. It’s not a pseudo cage function, it’s supposed to manually open the pendulous vanes to allow for faster correction from erroneous precession, restoring proper attitude quickly, not cage the AI to straight and level.

[Raviar]

10 hours ago, Snappy said:

Not sure which country your statement is referring to, but I’d cut back on the blanket statements.Maybe your country had restrictions on it.

The aircraft certainly is capable of IFR flight , even the “old” F-5e models. The current bugs in DCS notwithstanding. 

The real aircraft certainly could fly IFR with Tacan , Tacan approaches and PAR approaches even in bad weather.Of course not down to zero visibility but countries like Norway flew it too and they have some interesting weather and certainly couldn’t afford too use their aircraft only in good weather..Besides Nav equipment also was most likely a customer option.Maybe your Air Force ordered the daytime fighter equipment only.

Also statements like “radar is completely useless” are plain hyperbole.Of course it can’t compete with todays radar or doesn’t offer remotely the same search&track capability but it wasn’t intended to either at its time. It provides mainly gunsight solution and rudimentary target information.

Edit: Talking about the version simulated in DCS,even  with just “only “TACAN approaches you have fairly “low” minima, take a look at a few TACAN approach charts online ,specifically their minima section.

Far below the 7-10 miles you were talking about.

The main issue is, the Tiger in DCS has some navigation & instrument related bugs and the guy who flies it needs to know how to fly basic IFR in general.

 

give you an example, in Iran Iraq war the iranian F-5 pilots never turn the radar on even in A/A engagement (I am not going to the detail about who am I, its just pure fact), they dont use F-5 in IFR condition its suicide! the F-5 which ED delivered is very similar to the IIAF-IRIAF F-5E, some avionics are different but fairly close.

The upgraded F-5 is another story! btw its DCS use what ever its suit you guys, have fun

Edited November 11, 2021 by Raviar

[Snappy]

On 11/11/2021 at 10:36 AM, Raviar said:

give you an example, in Iran Iraq war the iranian F-5 pilots never turn the radar on even in A/A engagement (I am not going to the detail about who am I, its just pure fact), they dont use F-5 in IFR condition its suicide! the F-5 which ED delivered is very similar to the IIAF-IRIAF F-5E, some avionics are different but fairly close.

The upgraded F-5 is another story! btw its DCS then use what ever its suite you guys, have fun

You conveniently ignored my arguments. I seriously doubt flying TACAN approaches or PAR approaches in IFR is suicide, if you know what you’re doing and the equipment is working correctly.Military aircraft all over the world did it regularly  and probably still do to some extent, even with the omnipresent GPS nowadays.

And stop bringing up the updated versions. It’s not like IFR was invented in 1980s or that you need a modern radar or GPS or even INS to fly .

But I can already guess that this going to be a pointless discussion ..

 

Edited November 15, 2021 by Snappy

[randomTOTEN]

6 hours ago, Mikaa said:

But if you’re in IMC, then you don’t have the reference to fast erect…

Uhh.... I specifically mentioned "straight and level," you absolutely have a reference for the fast erect.

Quote

It’s not a pseudo cage function, it’s supposed to manually open the pendulous vanes to allow for faster correction from erroneous precession, restoring proper attitude quickly, not cage the AI to straight and level.

Well considering the gyro procession isn't realistic, I'm not terribly bothered by the solution being equally fantasy...

[Mikaa]

IMC - instrument meteorological conditions, meaning you don’t have a reference outside. So you can’t know what straight and level is, thus negating the usefulness of this false caging function even if it was realistic.

And I’m not talking about climbing through a layer to VFR on top - Once I have horizon reference, I couldn’t care less what the attitude indicator is displaying - I’m talking about extended flying in the soup, which is impossible with the ridiculous levels of precession. Also, hilariously, the backup AI has the exact same precession problem, meaning the gauge mounted for redundancy is just as unreliable as the main gauge. Not how it works IRL. 

[randomTOTEN]

14 minutes ago, Mikaa said:

So you can’t know what straight and level is

lol yes you can!

[Mikaa]

So you can use altimeter and vsi to infer a rough pitch attitude, and you’re going to use the HSI for bank angle? At best it’s a rough rate of turn indication, not roll. That’s not a bet I’d take. 
 

Regardless, this discussion isn’t about the finer points of BAIF, it’s about how the F-5’s attitude indications are unrealistic, and make it unnecessarily tedious to fly for more than 2 min in IMC and shoot approaches. 
 

It doesn’t matter if the F-5 was a Day-VFR only fighter during RL ops. An attitude indicator is an attitude indicator, and flying TACAN or PAR approaches without at TFR or modern niceties like glass and gps, is not difficult at all assuming your instruments work properly. If you want to simulate partial panel ops, then go nuts, but don’t say that this instrument behaviour is realistic. 
 

Of course normal rules apply of “this is just a game, not real life” and at the end of the day, this has little to no affect on DCS missions outside of very niche situations, because you’re not ironsight bombing or dogfighting in IMC. But does this irk me somewhat? Absolutely. 

[GGTharos]

4 minutes ago, Mikaa said:

Regardless, this discussion isn’t about the finer points of BAIF, it’s about how the F-5’s attitude indications are unrealistic, and make it unnecessarily tedious to fly for more than 2 min in IMC and shoot approaches. 

Would you be able to comment on how much more accurate the indicator should be?  My specific question is, if it was to be suggested as a fix for ED (it has been suggested in fact, I'm sure) - by what factor should precession be reduced?

Unrealistic ways of 'fixing the issue in flight' aside.  BTW totally agree on where you're going with spatial disorientation here for the suggested solution, I think most people don't realize this.

[randomTOTEN]

Interesting to see the goal post move from,

1 hour ago, Mikaa said:

which is impossible with the ridiculous levels of precession.

to,

1 hour ago, Mikaa said:

make it unnecessarily tedious to fly for more than 2 min in IMC and shoot approaches. 

hhhhmmmmm

1 hour ago, Mikaa said:

this discussion isn’t about the finer points of BAIF,

Agree, the question presented: Is the F-5 a "in bad IMC weather" machine. My assertion is, Yes it is.

Anyways,

-------------------------------------------------------

Here you go guys, @DmitriKozlowsky, @Raviar

Enjoy.

DmitriKozlowsky F5 IFR.miz

Edited November 11, 2021 by randomTOTEN