[ATTN ALL DEVS] F-105D, F & G "THUD" THUNDERCHIEF ENGINEERING & PERFORMANCE DATA DUMP (upd. 2025MAY26)

[MAXsenna]

1 hour ago, SOLIDKREATE said:

Heatblur should just license their RIO to Third Party DEV's or sell it to DCS for a "nominal fee" . This way it beomes the Standard and they get a cut of any module the other team sells.

Not worth it in my personal opinion, unless you can speak to it. Should also be "AI driven", so you don't have to speak perfect commands.

Pretty sure ED is cooking something, and we might see the first iteration in the long awaited for ATC. 

Edited February 7 by MAXsenna

[Fitzcarraldo]

7 hours ago, Tengah said:

Have you flown any of the available two seat aircraft with a human component in the back seat?  If not, then your statement is moot, and you really should give it a go.  If you have and your experience was poor, then you need to work with your backseater more.

I don't have easy access to human components for the backseat. And i doubt many people would be interested considering the type of missions i tend to fly (which would result in long stretches of downtime for the backseat)...

Anyway... this is veering off-topic...

THUD! THUD! THUD!

[upyr1]

23 hours ago, Fitzcarraldo said:

For me only the D would be interesting. HB Jester is decent, but doesn't really cut it for me. Maybe in the future we can get fully dynamic LLM powered WSO/RIO. That might change my opinion about 105F/G...

Don't for get the deisgnationg EWO though GIB might be best. Anyway We RIght now Jester is the best AI GIB we have. I'd love to see ED develop a better GIB AI but I'd rather have the F or G before then. Anyway I figure the D is a must have. The Wild Weasel at the minimum should be an AI asset combined with a better EW modeling. I'd love the F or G because my dad was an EWO and I don't expect an EB-66 module 

Edited February 8 by upyr1

[upyr1]

16 hours ago, SOLIDKREATE said:

I agree with statement. I think if you asked, there are some folks on here who are dedicated back seaters. I'm willing to bet you'll change your mind.

Heatblur should just license their RIO to Third Party DEV's or sell it to DCS for a "nominal fee" . This way it beomes the Standard and they get a cut of any module the other team sells.

I asked HB about that here is the thread and basically they said yes. So if you could get the thud module going just contact them if you are doing the F or G  

 

[upyr1]

THud

[Blaze1]

On 1/29/2025 at 3:46 AM, upyr1 said:

I'd like to see what we can get about either one, before completely eliminating one or the other. Know how DCS normally does the most advanced if we could get the documents for both we would get the G. 

 

On 1/29/2025 at 7:47 AM, SOLIDKREATE said:

 

My wepons manual (T.O. F-105B34-1-1) and it supplements cover the D, F and G from 1971 - 1980. So, yeah well withing the realm. You can even ask @Blaze1. He has one too, and a real one to boot.

A 'D' and 'F' could definitely be modelled, but you'd struggle with the 'G'.  The Wild Weasel mission equipment in the 'G' was described in classified supplements and while those supplements are most definitely declassified now, they are difficult to locate.  Also, given the analogue, EWO critically involved nature of the F-105G and the lack of EW modelling in DCS, I'm not sure how well a player controlled (as the EWO/Bear) F-105G would work.

[SOLIDKREATE]

5 hours ago, Blaze1 said:

 

A 'D' and 'F' could definitely be modelled, but you'd struggle with the 'G'.  The Wild Weasel mission equipment in the 'G' was described in classified supplements and while those supplements are most definitely declassified now, they are difficult to locate.  Also, given the analogue, EWO critically involved nature of the F-105G and the lack of EW modelling in DCS, I'm not sure how well a player controlled (as the EWO/Bear) F-105G would work.

 

I have S1 - S5 Brother. I'll take pics for you. Or send them to you to scan and send back. DM me.

[Blaze1]

9 hours ago, SOLIDKREATE said:

 

I have S1 - S5 Brother. I'll take pics for you. Or send them to you to scan and send back. DM me.

SOLIDKREATE, thanks for the offer, but to provide a little clarification, the supplement I was referring to is a completely separate manual/set of manuals.  The supplements to your -34 are something like:

• TO 1F-105B-34-1-1SS-1 to TO 1F-105B-34-1-1SS-5 for Safety Supplements
• TO 1F-105B-34-1-1S-1 to TO 1F-105B-34-1-1S-5 for Operational Supplements

If you look at the title page (cover) of your manual, the left hand column provides a list of Safety Supplements and Operational Supplements that were associated with the previous manual which this basic manual (updated) replaces.  Those older supplements listed, were incorporated into the basic -34 you have.

My -34 manual also has a large number of those supplements included and those supplements serve as amendments to the basic manual, before the basic manual is updated.  You can almost think of them like errata sections in a book.

The supplements required to model the F-105F and F-105G more completely, namely their Wild Weasel functions, are:

• TO 1F-105D-1A (older title I believe) or TO 1F-105D-1-2 (newer title I believe) Supplementary (SECRET) Flight Manual, F-105D/F Aircraft
• TO 1F-105G-1A (older title I believe) or TO 1F-105G-1 (newer title I believe) Supplementary (SECRET) Flight Manual, F-105G Aircraft

I hope that helps

 

Edited February 18 by Blaze1

[upyr1]

15 hours ago, Blaze1 said:

 

A 'D' and 'F' could definitely be modelled, but you'd struggle with the 'G'.  The Wild Weasel mission equipment in the 'G' was described in classified supplements and while those supplements are most definitely declassified now, they are difficult to locate.  Also, given the analogue, EWO critically involved nature of the F-105G and the lack of EW modelling in DCS, I'm not sure how well a player controlled (as the EWO/Bear) F-105G would work.

I think we would need improvements to the EW modeling to even get an Ai Wild Weasel. Two variants of the F saw combat the original Wild Weasels and the Combaat nails. The EF-105F would have some of the same issues as the G but what is available for the Combat nails? 

I figure the ideal situation for a module or mod would be the D, Combat nails F and G 

2 hours ago, Blaze1 said:

SOLIDKREATE, thanks for the offer, but to provide a little clarification, the supplement I was referring to is a completely separate manual/set of manuals.  The supplements to your -34 are something like:

• TO 1F-105B-34-1-1SS-1 to TO 1F-105B-34-1-1SS-5 for Safety Supplements
• TO 1F-105B-34-1-1S-1 to TO 1F-105B-34-1-1S-5 for Operational Supplements

If you look at the title page (cover) of your manual, the left hand column provides a list of Safety Supplements and Operational Supplements that were associated with the previous manual which this basic manual (updated) replaces.  Those older supplements listed, were incorporated into the basic -34 you have.

My -34 manual also has a large number of those supplements included and those supplements serve as amendments to the basic manual, before the basic manual is updated.  You can almost think of them like errata sections in a book.

The supplements required to model the F-105F and F-105G more completely, namely their Wild Weasel functions, are:

• TO 1F-105D-1A (older title I believe) or TO 1F-105D-1-2 (newer title I believe) Supplementary (SECRET) Flight Manual, F-105D/F Aircraft
• TO 1F-105G-1A (older title I believe) or TO 1F-105G-1 (newer title I believe) Supplementary (SECRET) Flight Manual, F-105G Aircraft

I hope that helps

 

I think a foia request is in order worst thing that will happen is they say no 

[Blaze1]

1 hour ago, upyr1 said:

I think we would need improvements to the EW modeling to even get an Ai Wild Weasel. Two variants of the F saw combat the original Wild Weasels and the Combaat nails. The EF-105F would have some of the same issues as the G but what is available for the Combat nails? 

I figure the ideal situation for a module or mod would be the D, Combat nails F and G 

I think a foia request is in order worst thing that will happen is they say no 

Yep.  An FOIA is probably your best bet.

Is the EF-105F referred to as Combat Nails?

[Blaze1]

On 9/19/2023 at 3:14 AM, mkellytx said:

The F model weasel is completely doable.  The only system on the G model that might be tough is the QRC-160 jammer, not that they used it, but jamming is typically pretty closely held stuff.  The rest of the system is pretty much out there and could be done.

The QRC-160 wouldn't be an issue as it has been declassified.

[upyr1]

4 hours ago, Blaze1 said:

Yep.  An FOIA is probably your best bet.

Is the EF-105F referred to as Combat Nails?

No, the EF-105F was a designation that was proposed for the F-105F Wild Weasel. I don't belive It was never used. I used it as I was hoping it would focus on the fact I was talking about the Wild Weasel 

[Blaze1]

4 minutes ago, upyr1 said:

No, the EF-105F was a designation that was proposed for the F-105F Wild Weasel. I don't belive It was never used. I used it as I was hoping it would focus on the fact I was talking about the Wild Weasel 

I see.

[SOLIDKREATE]

15 hours ago, Blaze1 said:

SOLIDKREATE, thanks for the offer, but to provide a little clarification, the supplement I was referring to is a completely separate manual/set of manuals.  The supplements to your -34 are something like:

• TO 1F-105B-34-1-1SS-1 to TO 1F-105B-34-1-1SS-5 for Safety Supplements
• TO 1F-105B-34-1-1S-1 to TO 1F-105B-34-1-1S-5 for Operational Supplements

If you look at the title page (cover) of your manual, the left hand column provides a list of Safety Supplements and Operational Supplements that were associated with the previous manual which this basic manual (updated) replaces.  Those older supplements listed, were incorporated into the basic -34 you have.

My -34 manual also has a large number of those supplements included and those supplements serve as amendments to the basic manual, before the basic manual is updated.  You can almost think of them like errata sections in a book.

The supplements required to model the F-105F and F-105G more completely, namely their Wild Weasel functions, are:

• TO 1F-105D-1A (older title I believe) or TO 1F-105D-1-2 (newer title I believe) Supplementary (SECRET) Flight Manual, F-105D/F Aircraft
• TO 1F-105G-1A (older title I believe) or TO 1F-105G-1 (newer title I believe) Supplementary (SECRET) Flight Manual, F-105G Aircraft

I hope that helps

 

 

Ah okay, I see now. I think I'll hit the museum up again.

[upyr1]

 

[SOLIDKREATE]

So, it swings bothe ways?  

[upyr1]

8 hours ago, SOLIDKREATE said:

So, it swings bothe ways?  

I almost wrote the Thud was a hermaphrodite.  

[Andrew8604]

21 hours ago, SOLIDKREATE said:

So, it swings bothe ways?  

It's swangin'!  If its probe was longer and could bend, it could 'boom' itself and fly forever, delivering an endless supply of -105's out its bomb bay.  

This why we can't have the F-105 in DCS.  People who could fly it would brag about being the only ones who could go downtown.  And then a Hun pilot would get mad and say, "Why don't you go boom yourself!" 

How many other aircraft could go 'both ways'?  I can't think of any.  The F-4 Phantom II was either/or amongst variants, but not both, right?  Same with the A-7 Corsair II?  What about the Tornado?  All else I can think of were one way or none.

[SOLIDKREATE]

Was this in the production version? Or was this just a "one of" concept?

[Marsvinet]

1 hour ago, SOLIDKREATE said:

Was this in the production version? Or was this just a "one of" concept?

All Thuds were set up to use both systems and as far as I know, it is the only aircraft that was built that way. 

[upyr1]

5 hours ago, SOLIDKREATE said:

Was this in the production version? Or was this just a "one of" concept?

Production. 

[Fitzcarraldo]

THUD!

[upyr1]

thud

[Tengah]

Thought I might post this here:  Flying the F-105 Thunderchief in Vietnam with Maj Gen Russ Violett

[upyr1]

16 minutes ago, Tengah said:

Thought I might post this here:  Flying the F-105 Thunderchief in Vietnam with Maj Gen Russ Violett

awesome