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

[SOLIDKREATE]

8 hours ago, Blaze1 said:

Very valuable, even just talking about basic theory and comparisons between ASW electronic equipment and Wild Weasel electronic equipment.

My ESM display was far more advanced than what the F-105 had. 

 

• LEFT CONSOLE - ECM (JAMMING.)
• CENTER - AN/APS-137 ISAR (Inverse Synthetic Arpeture RADAR) *My scope was a round because I used the AN/APS-115. This one shown was far more advanced.
• RIGHT CONSOLE - ESM (LISTENING)
• BEHIND HER HEAD - MAD (Magnetic Anomally Detector), Worked like a Richter Scale with actual electric scribes that used THERMOELECTRIC paper.
• LOWER CENTER - I forget, I just know I hated doing SYGNOG and OFOM's.
• ABOVE CENTER - FLIR (Forward Looking Infrared).
• RIGHT SHOULDER, LOWER - TTSI (Traget Tracking Sight Indicator) How we controlled the FLIR camera.

 

If I got anything half wrong, it's been 25yrs. Funny thing, I used to pick up cell phone back when they wewre 'Celluar'. 9000MHz. I even knew when someone was using theri microwave at home, yes really. 333MHz, definite Russin FC RADAR or any kind of equipment. Even had a book called the EPL that would allow me to classify what you were, block number, when you were made, effective weapons range, your whole life man. Every crystal in every RADAR system is uique to that system. It is a finger print.

 

Edited Thursday at 07:50 AM by SOLIDKREATE

[draconus]

9 hours ago, Silver_Dragon said:

We haven't seen an oscilloscope of that magnitude used by any third party yet

Not exactly oscilloscope but some kind of:

[upyr1]

11 hours ago, Blaze1 said:

I understand your position, but I'm of the opinion that if a developer is going to put in the hard graft to create a module, they may as well focus on one that can be modelled to a high standard from the get go, rather than putting in all the effort, then crossing their fingers praying for ED to come through sooner rather than later.

As stated earlier my expectations for a mod and module are different. I'd be fine with a modder who uses the field of dreams approach, since it is a passion project. As for an official module, I want the improved EW and the G until the improve EW comes about the bare minimum I want is an AI Wild Weasel. It's important to remember this is the wish list/ research phase. So it is more important to ask if you want a flyable Wild Weasel than it is to add the words "With the current state of EW in DCS." to that question. The words "(if there is/and) improved EW are much more productive. 

[upyr1]

15 hours ago, Silver_Dragon said:

Considering that ED is the one creating all of DCS W's weapons and associated functionality, this could be a handicap. Another issue is that even if you have access to the SDK, 

this is the reason that I say for the sake of the wishlist we should at least pretend that ED will take care of everything needed industrial core and ask focus on whether or not we want something. Fillowed by if there is enough information It might be an unrealistic expectation but let's ride the trolley 

6 hours ago, draconus said:

Not exactly oscilloscope but some kind of:

Cool 

[Silver_Dragon]

8 hours ago, SOLIDKREATE said:

If I got anything half wrong, it's been 25yrs. Funny thing, I used to pick up cell phone back when they wewre 'Celluar'. 9000MHz. I even knew when someone was using theri microwave at home, yes really. 333MHz, definite Russin FC RADAR or any kind of equipment. Even had a book called the EPL that would allow me to classify what you were, block number, when you were made, effective weapons range, your whole life man. Every crystal in every RADAR system is uique to that system. It is a finger print.

That has similar to a narrow band on a sonnar, you can identified a ship by your sound firm...

[Blaze1]

20 hours ago, Silver_Dragon said:

Considering that ED is the one creating all of DCS W's weapons and associated functionality, this could be a handicap. Another issue is that even if you have access to the SDK, you can't modify parts of the core because they're closed (most likely to prevent unscrupulous individuals from stealing parts of the simulator code or the work of other third parties, which may have "passed through" or been attempted in the early days)..

That's the point: touching things like EW, sonar, vehicle modules, naval or FPS, etc., may be beyond the reach of a third party because they can't be implemented if ED doesn't make the necessary building blocks. An example could be why Heatblur, after so many years, still doesn't have a deck crew or much of the supercarrier functionality on the USS Forrestal IA or at this time, because the M3 USS Exxes doesn't have it for WW2 either (we also don't know if the ED USS Enterprise will have it).

The panel of an F-105G very likely has specific functionality. The big question is, do we have those building blocks in the core? We haven't seen an oscilloscope of that magnitude used by any third party yet, and I'm starting to think it would be more plausible for a WW2 module, like an old A-Scope radar like an oboe navigation system.

Another point is, we know the AGM-45 has frequency seeker heads implemented, and it seems the EW and SAM radars are also implemented. How does this affect the AGM-78? What are its capabilities? Is it programmable? (Its first version, the AGM-78A-1, carried the same seeker head as an AGM-45.)

Perhaps there is some way to "force" a system-specific waveform to be created and used on the F-105G's receiver panel (or any other EW aircraft).

Here we can start asking questions.
How can we identify a specific radar?
How does this panel interact with the AGM-78's panel?
How can the weapons system interact?
How does the ECM system work?

SOLIDKREATE and Blaze1 has answered some of them....

That may be part of the issue, but from what I've seen from 3rd party devs, I can't envision them struggling with any of the cockpit functionality or displays, the issue is that those panels and displays, along with their functionality, are inextricably linked to a sophisticated EW environment.  RAZBAM's Strike Eagle radar design, is a prime example in terms of the level of detail that can be achieved under the hood by a 3rd party and demonstrates indirectly that creating an EW display shouldn't be an issue.  AGM-78 STARM capes may require coordination with ED however.

Edited Thursday at 09:04 PM by Blaze1

[Blaze1]

16 hours ago, SOLIDKREATE said:

My ESM display was far more advanced than what the F-105 had. 

 

• LEFT CONSOLE - ECM (JAMMING.)
• CENTER - AN/APS-137 ISAR (Inverse Synthetic Arpeture RADAR) *My scope was a round because I used the AN/APS-115. This one shown was far more advanced.
• RIGHT CONSOLE - ESM (LISTENING)
• BEHIND HER HEAD - MAD (Magnetic Anomally Detector), Worked like a Richter Scale with actual electric scribes that used THERMOELECTRIC paper.
• LOWER CENTER - I forget, I just know I hated doing SYGNOG and OFOM's.
• ABOVE CENTER - FLIR (Forward Looking Infrared).
• RIGHT SHOULDER, LOWER - TTSI (Traget Tracking Sight Indicator) How we controlled the FLIR camera.

 

If I got anything half wrong, it's been 25yrs. Funny thing, I used to pick up cell phone back when they wewre 'Celluar'. 9000MHz. I even knew when someone was using theri microwave at home, yes really. 333MHz, definite Russin FC RADAR or any kind of equipment. Even had a book called the EPL that would allow me to classify what you were, block number, when you were made, effective weapons range, your whole life man. Every crystal in every RADAR system is uique to that system. It is a finger print.

 

Interesting that you mentioned microwaves and cell phones, I would assume there were options to blank microwave oven and cell phone frequencies, but if you didn't, wouldn't there be far to much clutter on the scope to pick out a specific microwave or perhaps they're not used as simultaneously (across different households, offices and building) as I'm thinking.

 

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

 

12 hours ago, upyr1 said:

As stated earlier my expectations for a mod and module are different. I'd be fine with a modder who uses the field of dreams approach, since it is a passion project. As for an official module, I want the improved EW and the G until the improve EW comes about the bare minimum I want is an AI Wild Weasel. It's important to remember this is the wish list/ research phase. So it is more important to ask if you want a flyable Wild Weasel than it is to add the words "With the current state of EW in DCS." to that question. The words "(if there is/and) improved EW are much more productive. 

If we're taking about a modder making a best guess, well they'd be free to do so, but it wouldn't be a particularly accurate module, in fact nowhere close, but if people were interested in using it, more power to them.  AI Wild Weasel assets would be fine.

Edited Friday at 12:43 AM by Blaze1

[Blaze1]

11 hours ago, SOLIDKREATE said:

My ESM display was far more advanced than what the F-105 had. 

 

If I got anything half wrong, it's been 25yrs. Funny thing, I used to pick up cell phone back when they wewre 'Celluar'. 9000MHz. I even knew when someone was using theri microwave at home, yes really. 333MHz, definite Russin FC RADAR or any kind of equipment. Even had a book called the EPL that would allow me to classify what you were, block number, when you were made, effective weapons range, your whole life man. Every crystal in every RADAR system is uique to that system. It is a finger print.

By Block number and manufacturing date, I assume you must be describing EW features that may differentiate an upgraded version of a model, e.g. SA-8 Mod 0 vs SA-8 Mod 1.  You couldn't tell the difference between two SA-8 Mod 1's, unless the manufacturing tolerances were incredibly poor or they were purposely designed to have very slight, individual variations in signal characteristics.

[upyr1]

4 hours ago, Blaze1 said:

If we're taking about a modder making a best guess, well they'd be free to do so, but it wouldn't be a particularly accurate module, in fact no where close, but if people were interested in using it, more power to them.  AI Wild Weasel assets would be fine.

It looks like we might agree. My stance is simple, if there is enough information to do a Wild Weasel to the standard of Fat Amy, then I would like one in DCS. I recognize the shortcomings of DCS EW, however if the Thud starts as a mod, then I see no reason not to model the parts of a Wild Weasel a modder could actually touch  but I'd expect ED to make the necessary changes for an official module. 

[SOLIDKREATE]

5 hours ago, Blaze1 said:

By Block number and manufacturing date, I assume you must be describing EW features that may differentiate an upgraded version of a model, e.g. SA-8 Mod 0 vs SA-8 Mod 1.  You couldn't tell the difference between two SA-8 Mod 1's, unless the manufacturing tolerances were incredibly poor or they were purposely designed to have very slight, individual variations in signal characteristics.

"Trust me bro" We can. We can do the same with our 10-Points and a 'Turn Count's. BTW Everyone, Red October does not look like that in real life. It's a real sub with real screws. The hardest Subs to track are Diesel Electric  

[Blaze1]

25 minutes ago, SOLIDKREATE said:

"Trust me bro" We can. We can do the same with our 10-Points and a 'Turn Count's. BTW Everyone, Red October does not look like that in real life. It's a real sub with real screws. The hardest Subs to track are Diesel Electric  

What does that mean?

[SOLIDKREATE]

It's an old tool that looks like a Geisha Fan. It opens an closed and has 10 sharp points on it. When we print out an acoustic read, we used them to measure the distances between sound waves. This would give us 'what' you are. The turn count is literally us listening to your screw "whip-whop-whop' underwater over a 30sec period. That tells us 'who' are, and what set you claim cuz 

[Blaze1]

12 minutes ago, SOLIDKREATE said:

It's an old tool that looks like a Geisha Fan. It opens an closed and has 10 sharp points on it. When we print out an acoustic read, we used them to measure the distances between sound waves. This would give us 'what' you are. The turn count is literally us listening to your screw "whip-whop-whop' underwater over a 30sec period. That tells us 'who' are, and what set you claim cuz 

Sounds like acoustic NCTR.

[Hammer1-1]

On 5/15/2025 at 6:21 AM, SOLIDKREATE said:

After really looking at the quality Grinnelli has put into their aircraft through the images & video they post, I have total faith in them. I'm working on getting the other Thunderstick II Supplement. I have a contact at a University so I can buy a scanned copy. I have yet to scan the Nonnuclear Weapons Manual I have. That one will not be uploaded to respect ED's wishes. I will however freely loan it to a third Party Developer.

It's just hard because ther are no flying examples and good luck getting a museukm to let you crawl all over their priceless museum artifact. There was an 'F' model on loan here in WA and  begged to let them let take pics and record cockpit switch sounds. I am thinking of financing a Keyence VL-800 3D scanner and doing scans of a 1:32 scale F-105D & G model from Trupeter and Reskit after market parts they make. The platform is pretty darn big too.

I wouldnt trust Trumpeter to put out an accurate kit of a kitchen sink much less an F-105. Some of the worst designed kits out there were Trumpies.

[SOLIDKREATE]

4 hours ago, Blaze1 said:

Sounds like acoustic NCTR.

We get trained in both areas in school. Then we go to our specialized schools.

NACCS (Naval Air Crew Candidate School)  >  Anti-Submarine Warfare Specialist 'A' School (Acoustic / Non-Acoustic) > S.E.R.E. Level 'C' > RAG Squdron > Basic EW > Flight Phase 'Bounce Bitches' > Advanced EW > Flight Phase II > Checkrides 

Edited Friday at 06:43 AM by SOLIDKREATE

[SOLIDKREATE]

2 hours ago, Hammer1-1 said:

I wouldnt trust Trumpeter to put out an accurate kit of a kitchen sink much less an F-105. Some of the worst designed kits out there were Trumpies.

What about Hobby Boss with RESKIT parts?

4 hours ago, Blaze1 said:

Sounds like acoustic NCTR.

Oh and the higher the temperature, and the higher the salinity, and the higher the pressure; the faster sound travels. If I remember correctly. We called it the 'Teaspoon' formula (Temperature, Salinity, Pressure).

[SOLIDKREATE]

Found these tutorials that should help us all out

• RADAR Fundamentals I  -  https://basicsaboutaerodynamicsandavionics.wordpress.com/2016/04/12/radar-electronic-countermeasure/
• RADAR Fundamentals II  -  https://basicsaboutaerodynamicsandavionics.wordpress.com/2016/08/11/radar-fundamentals-part-ii/
• Electronic Counter Measures  -  https://basicsaboutaerodynamicsandavionics.wordpress.com/2016/03/29/electronic-countermeasure-ecm/
• RWR/ESM and Passive GEOLOC  -  https://basicsaboutaerodynamicsandavionics.wordpress.com/2016/03/02/rwresm-and-passive-geolocation/

 

[Blaze1]

11 hours ago, SOLIDKREATE said:

We get trained in both areas in school. Then we go to our specialized schools.

NACCS (Naval Air Crew Candidate School)  >  Anti-Submarine Warfare Specialist 'A' School (Acoustic / Non-Acoustic) > S.E.R.E. Level 'C' > RAG Squdron > Basic EW > Flight Phase 'Bounce Bitches' > Advanced EW > Flight Phase II > Checkrides 

What version of the P-3 were you assigned to and as part of the learning, was it a requirement for you to memorise the audio characteristics of many many signals, as was done in the past at EWO school?

[SOLIDKREATE]

38 minutes ago, Blaze1 said:

What version of the P-3 were you assigned to and as part of the learning, was it a requirement for you to memorise the audio characteristics of many many signals, as was done in the past at EWO school?

P-3C, I don't remember the block number. I do know know none of my EW stuff was original except for the APS-115. At the time I had the latest and greatest for 1999. No no sounds, just ways to ID, Classify, Track and Target for the TACCO. He is the one who gets to actually launch HARMs and the Torpedoes, DCs, Mines, Missiles ect

[Blaze1]

8 minutes ago, SOLIDKREATE said:

P-3C, I don't remember the block number. I do know know none of my EW stuff was original except for the APS-115. At the time I had the latest and greatest for 1999. No no sounds, just ways to ID, Classify, Track and Target for the TACCO. He is the one who gets to actually launch HARMs and the Torpedoes, DCs, Mines, Missiles ect

Ah okay.  I asked (about which version of the P-3) because I was looking up information on the P-3 yesterday and recalled an incident you must be very aware of, in which a Chinese fighter collided with an EP-3E Aries II over the South China Sea in 2001, with the damaged Aries landing in China, after which much of its SIGINT equipment onboard was heavily compromised.

P-3C is a really interesting aircraft, from the missions it performs to the very numerous and sophisticated, integrated sensor suite.

[SOLIDKREATE]

Oh yeah we all knew that one. Most likely why the P-8 wwas fastracked. My instructors always said if we had another major war again, it would be with them or Iran. That was in 2000 when he told us that. Fun fact, he owned a 3000GT VR-4. 

[Blaze1]

1 hour ago, SOLIDKREATE said:

Oh yeah we all knew that one. Most likely why the P-8 wwas fastracked. My instructors always said if we had another major war again, it would be with them or Iran. That was in 2000 when he told us that. Fun fact, he owned a 3000GT VR-4. 

The man had taste I can see.

Going back to what you mentioned before about IDing emitters, I get it now.  I've been re-watching a Starbaby video (former F-4G EWO) and he mentioned Specific Emitter Identification needing good intel and really only working with older systems.  I looked this up and yes, it's just like you mentioned.  The articles touch upon what I suggested as well (imperfections in each specific system within a model, giving it a unique fingerprint).

Google AIs Overview:
"Specific emitter identification (SEI) is a technique for identifying the unique characteristics of a transmitter by analyzing the imperfections in its emitted radio signals. These imperfections, often referred to as radio frequency fingerprints (RFFs), are unique to each transmitter due to manufacturing variations. SEI is valuable in various applications, including wireless network security, cognitive radio, and identifying the source of interference."

Also: Specific Emitter identification for Radar Signals

Really interesting stuff and makes me wonder about the intel side (human aspect as well) even more.

[Silver_Dragon]

4 hours ago, SOLIDKREATE said:

P-3C, I don't remember the block number. I do know know none of my EW stuff was original except for the APS-115. At the time I had the latest and greatest for 1999. No no sounds, just ways to ID, Classify, Track and Target for the TACCO. He is the one who gets to actually launch HARMs and the Torpedoes, DCs, Mines, Missiles ect

You've made me remember the old Dangerous Waters from Sonarlys... I think it's one of the few simulators we've had that simulates a P-3/SH-60 in good conditions...

Let's see if we can move this forward and improve everything that is EW/Sonar and ED is applied to improve it.

[Hammer1-1]

16 hours ago, SOLIDKREATE said:

What about Hobby Boss with RESKIT parts?

 

never put a hobby boss kit together...

[SOLIDKREATE]

4 hours ago, Blaze1 said:

The man had taste I can see.

Going back to what you mentioned before about IDing emitters, I get it now.  I've been re-watching a Starbaby video (former F-4G EWO) and he mentioned Specific Emitter Identification needing good intel and really only working with older systems.  I looked this up and yes, it's just like you mentioned.  The articles touch upon what I suggested as well (imperfections in each specific system within a model, giving it a unique fingerprint).

 

 

Yeah his was a 1992 model. Thta thing had rear wheel steering too. It's the model year I still want. The later ones I believe didnt have half the feature as the OG. Going back to the XMiters, each crystal is very unique. It's not that our equipment really knew how to do this. We had good intelligence brought to us by the CIA and boots on ground (SEALs, Rangers, ect).

 

3 hours ago, Hammer1-1 said:

never put a hobby boss kit together...

 

What do you suggest? If both models are not good, what is your solution? What brand has the best model?

Edited yesterday at 03:34 AM by SOLIDKREATE