Radar/Sensors Discussion

[_BringTheReign_]

2 hours ago, Aussie_Mantis said:

Hey guys, necro'ing this thread again because I had a question about what the pinky switch does- in the non-nuclear weapons delivery manual it states a bunch of azimuth values- what exactly does this mean? Does it mean that when the guns position is selected, the slewable scan centers around 15 degrees to the left instead of directly in front of the plane, and so and so forth?

Pinky switch on the throttle is a 3 position switch that allows you to quickly select guns, heat, or radar. However, when caging (throttle button as well) you can use that same 3 pos switch to select a "corridor" for the auto-acq scan - left, right, or center. Then when you press the auto-acq button on the stick, it starts scanning in that preselected corridor in STAB-OUT, until a target is locked. 

It is understandably confusing because the way it is worded in the manual, it makes it seem like you can only acquire gun targets 15 degrees off the nose hahaha, but in this case when they say "guns" they just mean that position on the 3 position switch, not literally selecting guns as the active weapon on the trigger. Hope that makes sense!

[Aussie_Mantis]

3 hours ago, _BringTheReign_ said:

Pinky switch on the throttle is a 3 position switch that allows you to quickly select guns, heat, or radar. However, when caging (throttle button as well) you can use that same 3 pos switch to select a "corridor" for the auto-acq scan - left, right, or center. Then when you press the auto-acq button on the stick, it starts scanning in that preselected corridor in STAB-OUT, until a target is locked. 

It is understandably confusing because the way it is worded in the manual, it makes it seem like you can only acquire gun targets 15 degrees off the nose hahaha, but in this case when they say "guns" they just mean that position on the 3 position switch, not literally selecting guns as the active weapon on the trigger. Hope that makes sense!

Thanks, but that wasn't what I was confused by- does the manual mean that if I switch it to guns, CAA starts scanning in a scan pattern centered 15 degrees to my right, or does it expand the FOV by 15 degrees?

EDIT: Never mind, found my answer already. It just scans in a pattern 15 degrees to the right.

Edited June 9, 2023 by Aussie_Mantis

[_BringTheReign_]

34 minutes ago, Aussie_Mantis said:

Thanks, but that wasn't what I was confused by- does the manual mean that if I switch it to guns, CAA starts scanning in a scan pattern centered 15 degrees to my right, or does it expand the FOV by 15 degrees?

Roger that - to clarify, it will scan in discrete "corridors" with specifically 1 degree of overlap

[Aussie_Mantis]

7 hours ago, _BringTheReign_ said:

Roger that - to clarify, it will scan in discrete "corridors" with specifically 1 degree of overlap

yeah. As I said, I found the answer, page 1-35 F-4E Non-Nuclear Weapons Delivery.

[_BringTheReign_]

13 hours ago, Aussie_Mantis said:

yeah. As I said, I found the answer, page 1-35 F-4E Non-Nuclear Weapons Delivery.

Hey Mantis, sorry about that... I see that you had an edit before I responded... I had the text box open for a while while checking the manual and didn't see your edit before responding. Cheers

[Temetre]

Btw, do we have any new info on the RWR? The more I look up and learn, the more questions I get.

So the "APR-46" in the development report was apparently a typo, they ment the APR-36. Thats the improved analogue RWR that the F-4 used, and the ALR-46 is then the digital RWR replacement. And a month ago:

Now HB is showing off the ALR-45/46 recently and only mentions that one in regards to the F-4E, calling it a final building block. Which is interesting, considering originally were just supposed to get the F-4E DSCG first, which would have the APR-36, as in the quote.

 

I also wonder, is the APR-36 alphanumeric or not? Its quite confusing, with different versions and the A-10 apparently even combining 36/46 parts.

Edited July 9, 2023 by Temetre

[SgtPappy]

2 hours ago, Temetre said:

Btw, do we have any new info on the RWR? The more I look up and learn, the more questions I get.

So the "APR-46" in the development report was apparently a typo, they ment the APR-36. Thats the improved analogue RWR that the F-4 used, and the ALR-46 is then the digital RWR replacement. And a month ago:

Now HB is showing off the ALR-45/46 recently and only mentions that one in regards to the F-4E, calling it a final building block. Which is interesting, considering originally were just supposed to get the F-4E DSCG first, which would have the APR-36, as in the quote.

 

I also wonder, is the APR-36 alphanumeric or not? Its quite confusing, with different versions and the A-10 apparently even combining 36/46 parts.

 

Excellent news (at least for me lol)! AFAIK, the -36 is a strobe only display, as it ever was fitted to the F-4. But someone correct me if there was an alphanumeric version.

[Temetre]

vor 34 Minuten schrieb SgtPappy:

Excellent news (at least for me lol)! AFAIK, the -36 is a strobe only display, as it ever was fitted to the F-4. But someone correct me if there was an alphanumeric version.

Sorry to disappoint you (me as well), but Cobra just made a statement that contradicts that apparently:

Looks like its till open if they do APR-36? Its quite strange.

[JNelson]

3 hours ago, Temetre said:

Btw, do we have any new info on the RWR? The more I look up and learn, the more questions I get.

So the "APR-46" in the development report was apparently a typo, they ment the APR-36. Thats the improved analogue RWR that the F-4 used, and the ALR-46 is then the digital RWR replacement. And a month ago:

Now HB is showing off the ALR-45/46 recently and only mentions that one in regards to the F-4E, calling it a final building block. Which is interesting, considering originally were just supposed to get the F-4E DSCG first, which would have the APR-36, as in the quote.

 

I also wonder, is the APR-36 alphanumeric or not? Its quite confusing, with different versions and the A-10 apparently even combining 36/46 parts.

 

The ALR-45, APR-36, and APR-25 are all similar family and the ALR-45 will be done for the early tomcat. 

The ALR-46 will be the RWR on release for the F-4E. As Cobra says we would like to do an APR-36 but no promises at this time.

Sorry for any confusion.

 

[Temetre]

vor 3 Minuten schrieb JNelson:

The ALR-45, APR-36, and APR-25 are all similar family and the ALR-45 will be done for the early tomcat. 

The ALR-46 will be the RWR on release for the F-4E. As Cobra says we would like to do an APR-36 but no promises at this time.

Sorry for any confusion.

Aye, thanks for the clarification. Personally I dont mind the confusion much, im sure its wasnt intentional and I like if Devs talk a bit more openly about this stuff.

Edited July 9, 2023 by Temetre

[SgtPappy]

11 hours ago, JNelson said:

The ALR-45, APR-36, and APR-25 are all similar family and the ALR-45 will be done for the early tomcat. 

The ALR-46 will be the RWR on release for the F-4E. As Cobra says we would like to do an APR-36 but no promises at this time.

Sorry for any confusion.

 

Aww darn. But thanks for the clarification.

Doesn't change any excitement I still have

[Святой]

Control+indication panel of AN/ALR-45 from https://www.prc68.com/I/RWR.shtml

[Святой]

Probably following threats

SAM LO: SA-2A/B/F (E-band)

SAM MID: SA-2C/E (G-band), SA-4 TT (G-band), likely SA-6 TA/TT/CW (G-H-bands), unlikely SA-8 TA (H-band)

SAM HIGH: SA-3 (I-band), unlikely SA-8 TT/MG (J-band), unlikely ZSU-23-4 Zeus (J-band)

AAA LO: Fire Can (E-band)

AAA/AI MID: Flap Wheel (I-band), Spin Scan of MiG-21 Fishbed-D (I-band), likely range-finders for MiG-21 Fishbed-C

AI HIGH: High Lark of MiG-25 Foxbat (J-band), Twin Scan of Su-15 Flagon (J-band), Jay Bird of MiG-21 Fishbed-J (J-band)

[JB3DG]

6 hours ago, Святой said:

Probably following threats

SAM LO: SA-2A/B/F (E-band)

SAM MID: SA-2C/E (G-band), SA-4 TT (G-band), likely SA-6 TA/TT/CW (G-H-bands), unlikely SA-8 TA (H-band)

SAM HIGH: SA-3 (I-band), unlikely SA-8 TT/MG (J-band), unlikely ZSU-23-4 Zeus (J-band)

AAA LO: Fire Can (E-band)

AAA/AI MID: Flap Wheel (I-band), Spin Scan of MiG-21 Fishbed-D (I-band), likely range-finders for MiG-21 Fishbed-C

AI HIGH: High Lark of MiG-25 Foxbat (J-band), Twin Scan of Su-15 Flagon (J-band), Jay Bird of MiG-21 Fishbed-J (J-band)

Actually the LO/MID/HIGH are the PRF indicators. HIGH PRF indicating that the SAM is tracking, not just scanning.

While this is for the APR-25, not the 45, it gives a little insight into how the older RWRs work: 

 

Edited August 28, 2023 by JB3DG

[Святой]

14 hours ago, JB3DG said:

Actually the LO/MID/HIGH are the PRF indicators. HIGH PRF indicating that the SAM is tracking, not just scanning.

No, these are radars grouped by frequency bands. PRF mode can be an additional light on each of these buttons, but not for all.

PRF change behavior is individual for each radar and may not indicate tracking / search mode.

For SA-2F PRF is changed means if the scope range is changed. Target tracking for missile attack, however, is possible in short scope range, which means high PRF.

[Somu]

I wonder if we can fly nigth missions with nvg in upcoming F-4 E. While nvg's are not used in F-14 A ,B flight period in dcs we can use them that's why i am asking

 

[LanceCriminal86]

2 hours ago, Somu said:

I wonder if we can fly nigth missions with nvg in upcoming F-4 E. While nvg's are not used in F-14 A ,B flight period in dcs we can use them that's why i am asking

 

The Tomcat squadrons did start using NVGs during the 90s, the NV compatible kits for the cockpits were being propagated somewhere in the mid-late 90s. Intruder squadrons had started NVG flying in the late 80s before Desert Storm and had NV compatible cockpit jets not far after. After the Intruder squadrons proved out the concept Hornet squadrons soon followed, and later on Tomcats.

As to the F-4E, while I've not seen any indications that the USAF had started NVG use with them before their retirement, the Turks and Greeks, and possibly other export customers that have held onto their jets into the 00s and beyond have been seen using them or likely have. As DCS doesn't seem to have the capacity to restrict NV usage based on date and/or operator skin, it wouldn't make sense to restrict the DCS NV function from being used. It would be more on the individual or maybe mission writer/server to set that. If you want USAF 70s-80s flying, don't use the NVGs. Theoretical 90s or export customers in the 90s-010s, use em.

[Harlikwin]

6 hours ago, LanceCriminal86 said:

The Tomcat squadrons did start using NVGs during the 90s, the NV compatible kits for the cockpits were being propagated somewhere in the mid-late 90s. Intruder squadrons had started NVG flying in the late 80s before Desert Storm and had NV compatible cockpit jets not far after. After the Intruder squadrons proved out the concept Hornet squadrons soon followed, and later on Tomcats.

As to the F-4E, while I've not seen any indications that the USAF had started NVG use with them before their retirement, the Turks and Greeks, and possibly other export customers that have held onto their jets into the 00s and beyond have been seen using them or likely have. As DCS doesn't seem to have the capacity to restrict NV usage based on date and/or operator skin, it wouldn't make sense to restrict the DCS NV function from being used. It would be more on the individual or maybe mission writer/server to set that. If you want USAF 70s-80s flying, don't use the NVGs. Theoretical 90s or export customers in the 90s-010s, use em.

No fast jets were using NVG's in any sense in the 80's beyond some very early testing. Q3 of 89 was the actual authorization to produce ANVIS on an actual production basis, and the first OMNI contract for ANVIS was in March 1990 (Omni2) for 10k units split between ITT ~6k tubes  and (Varian/EOS) 4k tubes. There was T&E being done before then but it was very limited and no one was going to war with those goggles. Fun fact the Very first Gen3 tube cost the US taxpayers over 1 million dollars, (Anvis prototypes used 2 of them). And NVG's weren't really in common use in the USAF till the later part of the 90's. For Europeans and other nations not really till the early 2000's for the most part if at all.

The US army was ahead of the curve compared to the Airforce and they were generally homicidal enough issue early Gen2 kit to helicopters crews that generally did a good job kill themselves in sufficient numbers that they helped formulate most of the requirements for the Gen3 tech that was developed. But continued to use Gen2 systems with severe restrictions on illumination levels that were required.

I won't cover the even more suicidal Russian uses/experiments that I'm aware of, but they made the US Army look amazingly good. But I'll give them points for bravery. 

For DCS purposes, NVG's aren't simulated past a fuzzy green screen effect, so it mostly doesn't matter, and ED can't even get the color right, nor the fact that sparklies don't really exist except for light starved environments, which don't actually exist in a cockpit.  

But for historical accuracy, the phantom shouldn't have NVG's at all. 

[LanceCriminal86]

1 hour ago, Harlikwin said:

No fast jets were using NVG's in any sense in the 80's beyond some very early testing. Q3 of 89 was the actual authorization to produce ANVIS on an actual production basis, and the first OMNI contract for ANVIS was in March 1990 (Omni2) for 10k units split between ITT ~6k tubes  and (Varian/EOS) 4k tubes. There was T&E being done before then but it was very limited and no one was going to war with those goggles. Fun fact the Very first Gen3 tube cost the US taxpayers over 1 million dollars, (Anvis prototypes used 2 of them). And NVG's weren't really in common use in the USAF till the later part of the 90's. For Europeans and other nations not really till the early 2000's for the most part if at all.

The US army was ahead of the curve compared to the Airforce and they were generally homicidal enough issue early Gen2 kit to helicopters crews that generally did a good job kill themselves in sufficient numbers that they helped formulate most of the requirements for the Gen3 tech that was developed. But continued to use Gen2 systems with severe restrictions on illumination levels that were required.

I won't cover the even more suicidal Russian uses/experiments that I'm aware of, but they made the US Army look amazingly good. But I'll give them points for bravery. 

For DCS purposes, NVG's aren't simulated past a fuzzy green screen effect, so it mostly doesn't matter, and ED can't even get the color right, nor the fact that sparklies don't really exist except for light starved environments, which don't actually exist in a cockpit.  

But for historical accuracy, the phantom shouldn't have NVG's at all. 

 

Well I'm glad you're just setting the universal rules of what "counts" for NVG use. Better go tell VA-65 in '87 and VA-35 in '88-'89 that it just didn't count and they were just playing around with it. I guess if it isn't a War Cruise it doesn't matter.

[Harlikwin]

14 hours ago, LanceCriminal86 said:

 

Well I'm glad you're just setting the universal rules of what "counts" for NVG use. Better go tell VA-65 in '87 and VA-35 in '88-'89 that it just didn't count and they were just playing around with it. I guess if it isn't a War Cruise it doesn't matter.

I mean if they were using ANVIS they were using prototypes. Simple as that, also likely in non NVG compatible pits and likely without LIF filters. If you have more info on that I'd love to hear it. 

 

Edited August 30, 2023 by Harlikwin

[LanceCriminal86]

2 hours ago, Harlikwin said:

I mean if they were using ANVIS they were using prototypes. Simple as that, also likely in non NVG compatible pits and likely without LIF filters. If you have more info on that I'd love to hear it. 

 

 

They were not using ANVIS, it was Cat's Eyes which was around by the earlier 80s (aka MXU-810/u). Tested at Pax River in '86 and those crews brought the concept and got approval to deploy with it in '87 on Coral Sea, after which the 6th Fleet made a standing requirement for A-6's to be NVG capable. VA-35 deployed on Roosevelt in '88 and was in the TEAM WORK exercise, with the A-6 crews on there remembering watching the northern lights using said NVGs. By my discussion with them, they either had HGU-66 helmets or HGU-55s with some fabricated mounts. The system wouldn't work on the HGU-33/43 obviously and they mentioned they had dedicated helmets for the Cat's Eyes setup. They did mention that pretty quick after the '87 cruise the concept and interest spread to the Hornet community, and apparently older Cat's Eyes promo material mentioned Intruder and Hornet squadrons had deployed with it. Apparently from old M4C and Arfcom threads Cat's Eyes wasn't fully phased out until around 2000.

https://rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/collection/goggles-head-mounted-display-nvg-hmd/night-vision-goggles-parts

 

I got no indications that they ditched or weren't using the capability during Desert Storm, and from what I'm seeing around or soon after the converted cockpit jets were happening. From what one guy said they ultimately had about 3/4 of their jets converted to the green cockpit with the rest being mainly used as their tankers. Photos of the Cat's Eyes are really scarce, as are pics of the HGU-66 in use of which I only ever was sent one from possibly a Hornet squadron cruise book page. The HGU-85 looks similar and has a central NV mount. Later on the HGU-68 and HGU-55 had a "banana" mount that clipped on, the metal clips visible when the NV wasn't mounted are pretty easy to spot. You can see VF-14 and VF-41 had such helmets in video/photos from Allied Force in 1999.

HGU-66, which were around/in supply in the 80s:

Either an HGU-66 with ears, or a HGU-55 with the modified mount for Cat's Eyes. Can also see the velcro tabs for camo helmet cover:

Eventually yes, ANVIS came in and it became more prolific but Cat's Eyes had been spread across the Intruders, Hornets, Marine AV-8s, and Tomcats through the 90s. You can tell where squadrons were set up for it if you see HGU-85 helmets, as that was the primary NVG compatible helmet in the 90s. Again commonly seen in photos with crews of the above jets. What led me to talking to the Intruder folks was the DTIC paper out there by CDR Rabens, "Night Vision for the F-14 Tomcat" which covered VF-11's F-14D use of it in the early-mid 90s and the eventual NV compatible cockpit retrofit kits. Right off the bat in the introduction was: "Naval tactical aircraft have been flying with night vision goggles (NVG's) since 1986 when VA-65 deployed in A-6E Intruders with NVGs. Shortly thereafter, F/A-18 Hornet Night Attack Program commenced." The paper was written around '94, and mentioned that Warminster NADC had been working on an NVIS compatible Tomcat cockpit for 8 years at that point, and that VF-11 had been using night vision for a few years before the proposals and development of their "affordable" NV compatible cockpit lighting kit.

As to the Intruder aircraft themselves originally the NV converted jets were given the X2X MODEX, ie. 521. So if you look around at earlier 90s photos and see Intruders with that MODEX range that aren't in high-vis paint/KA-6D, they have the NV green cockpit. But they were flying the jets without the lighting changes before that.

Other side note for that, look closely at A-6 Intruder patches and that's where the patches started to have green eyes, just as the patch had evolved with the E and TRAM additions that altered the ground radar lines.

 

--------

But on the original topic that I did respond to, yes the USAF didn't appear to have had the same NVG usage initiative, and I've seen nothing about F-4E squadrons in particular using them, unless F-4G squadrons started to before the last ones were retired.

BUT, as I also did say the Greeks and Turks have been seen using NV with their jets, and while the module technically doesn't cover those updated aircraft, the typical intent from HB is that they still want people to be able to operate those, and they would not restrict NV for that reason. Like I said, it's an element better left to servers or mission makers to choose whether they want to restrict NV for the F-4E. For historic USAF use it wouldn't make sense to have it, but for servers or missions based on modern Es from Turkey, Greece, or hell even Iran maybe, there would be reasons to allow it even if said countries don't have dedicated NV compatible cockpits.

[Harlikwin]

1 hour ago, LanceCriminal86 said:

They were not using ANVIS, it was Cat's Eyes which was around by the earlier 80s (aka MXU-810/u). Tested at Pax River in '86 and those crews brought the concept and got approval to deploy with it in '87 on Coral Sea, after which the 6th Fleet made a standing requirement for A-6's to be NVG capable. VA-35 deployed on Roosevelt in '88 and was in the TEAM WORK exercise, with the A-6 crews on there remembering watching the northern lights using said NVGs. By my discussion with them, they either had HGU-66 helmets or HGU-55s with some fabricated mounts. The system wouldn't work on the HGU-33/43 obviously and they mentioned they had dedicated helmets for the Cat's Eyes setup. They did mention that pretty quick after the '87 cruise the concept and interest spread to the Hornet community, and apparently older Cat's Eyes promo material mentioned Intruder and Hornet squadrons had deployed with it. Apparently from old M4C and Arfcom threads Cat's Eyes wasn't fully phased out until around 2000.

https://rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/collection/goggles-head-mounted-display-nvg-hmd/night-vision-goggles-parts

 

I got no indications that they ditched or weren't using the capability during Desert Storm, and from what I'm seeing around or soon after the converted cockpit jets were happening. From what one guy said they ultimately had about 3/4 of their jets converted to the green cockpit with the rest being mainly used as their tankers. Photos of the Cat's Eyes are really scarce, as are pics of the HGU-66 in use of which I only ever was sent one from possibly a Hornet squadron cruise book page. The HGU-85 looks similar and has a central NV mount. Later on the HGU-68 and HGU-55 had a "banana" mount that clipped on, the metal clips visible when the NV wasn't mounted are pretty easy to spot. You can see VF-14 and VF-41 had such helmets in video/photos from Allied Force in 1999.

HGU-66, which were around/in supply in the 80s:

Either an HGU-66 with ears, or a HGU-55 with the modified mount for Cat's Eyes. Can also see the velcro tabs for camo helmet cover:

Eventually yes, ANVIS came in and it became more prolific but Cat's Eyes had been spread across the Intruders, Hornets, Marine AV-8s, and Tomcats through the 90s. You can tell where squadrons were set up for it if you see HGU-85 helmets, as that was the primary NVG compatible helmet in the 90s. Again commonly seen in photos with crews of the above jets. What led me to talking to the Intruder folks was the DTIC paper out there by CDR Rabens, "Night Vision for the F-14 Tomcat" which covered VF-11's F-14D use of it in the early-mid 90s and the eventual NV compatible cockpit retrofit kits. Right off the bat in the introduction was: "Naval tactical aircraft have been flying with night vision goggles (NVG's) since 1986 when VA-65 deployed in A-6E Intruders with NVGs. Shortly thereafter, F/A-18 Hornet Night Attack Program commenced." The paper was written around '94, and mentioned that Warminster NADC had been working on an NVIS compatible Tomcat cockpit for 8 years at that point, and that VF-11 had been using night vision for a few years before the proposals and development of their "affordable" NV compatible cockpit lighting kit.

As to the Intruder aircraft themselves originally the NV converted jets were given the X2X MODEX, ie. 521. So if you look around at earlier 90s photos and see Intruders with that MODEX range that aren't in high-vis paint/KA-6D, they have the NV green cockpit. But they were flying the jets without the lighting changes before that.

Other side note for that, look closely at A-6 Intruder patches and that's where the patches started to have green eyes, just as the patch had evolved with the E and TRAM additions that altered the ground radar lines.

 

--------

But on the original topic that I did respond to, yes the USAF didn't appear to have had the same NVG usage initiative, and I've seen nothing about F-4E squadrons in particular using them, unless F-4G squadrons started to before the last ones were retired.

BUT, as I also did say the Greeks and Turks have been seen using NV with their jets, and while the module technically doesn't cover those updated aircraft, the typical intent from HB is that they still want people to be able to operate those, and they would not restrict NV for that reason. Like I said, it's an element better left to servers or mission makers to choose whether they want to restrict NV for the F-4E. For historic USAF use it wouldn't make sense to have it, but for servers or missions based on modern Es from Turkey, Greece, or hell even Iran maybe, there would be reasons to allow it even if said countries don't have dedicated NV compatible cockpits.

Thanks for the write up. Its interesting but I've never seen a picture of the Cats Eyes in use on a jet anywhere (including your post) (and your pics/links have that as 1991 set). They are literally a legend in the communities I know/talk to, literally no one has ever seen them/heard of them beyond "some guy said". And they must have been Gen2 tubes in 86 which makes it even more interesting/dangerous that they were using them and again, likely without LIF's. The FOV on them is only 30 deg as well, but since they are look thru it matters somewhat less. But again literally one or two squadrons using them does seem to make it a unicorn item. It makes sense intruders would use them since its a 2 man pit, so one guy could conceivably fly using "normal" instruments and the other guy would use the NVG's (this is how it was done in alot of helo's in the 80's). 
 

 

 

[LanceCriminal86]

1 hour ago, Harlikwin said:

Thanks for the write up. Its interesting but I've never seen a picture of the Cats Eyes in use on a jet anywhere (including your post) (and your pics/links have that as 1991 set). They are literally a legend in the communities I know/talk to, literally no one has ever seen them/heard of them beyond "some guy said". And they must have been Gen2 tubes in 86 which makes it even more interesting/dangerous that they were using them and again, likely without LIF's. The FOV on them is only 30 deg as well, but since they are look thru it matters somewhat less. But again literally one or two squadrons using them does seem to make it a unicorn item. It makes sense intruders would use them since its a 2 man pit, so one guy could conceivably fly using "normal" instruments and the other guy would use the NVG's (this is how it was done in alot of helo's in the 80's). 
 

 

 

In this case I have names and people via Facebook groups who can point to who and when, and while it started small with 2-3 crews in the squadron trained and with sets of NV, the purchases and proliferation picked up steam very quickly. And as said, it spread outside of the Intruder community quite quickly as well. It was claimed that the Marines were using them in the Gulf with their Harriers from one of the writeups. Dial back 8 years from 1994 and you'd have 1986, which lines up to when it was being developed at Pax and tested for use with the Intruder guys, so very likely the benefit was already seen and that kicked off the Tomcat cockpit initiative over with Warminster/NADC. The Intruder cockpits I'm seeing photos of converted jets by '93, trying to look more into when they started the conversions.

The main things it was providing, even with older gen tubes, was visual situational awareness at night to navigate and identify targets. From the feedback it was still a big deal in terms of what it brought vs no NVG at all, which is what kicked up the interest and requirements for ANVIS and further updates to that system. But Cat's Eyes was in the supply chain and in use at the same time, but like a lot of the other things I researched over on Arf in years past sometimes you just don't find pics at all. Or they show up years and years after you've stopped even thinking about a topic of research. As to the sets themselves, it sounded like there were some 7-800 sets in circulation in the 90s, and that they had to go through NSWC Crane for them, mounts, support, etc. and they were somewhat tightly controlled.

I will of course keep looking around, but it is also moderately likely that they didn't photograph it or felt like it was "close hold" at the time. Night Vision has had its share of secrecy around it as somewhat talked about in the ITAR/F-4G side, using the ITAR restrictions on NVG generations as an example. That, and this was before digital cameras became big and I can't really think of any film cameras or even camcorders that might have been able to film or photo at night enough to capture it without a flash. Cruise vids from '87 and '88-'89 haven't shown any clips.

I also haven't found too many resources on the Air Force's NV initiatives, when they started exploring, testing, pushing for ANVIS, etc. One of the Intruder guys mentioned working on the C-17s cockpit design study in 1991 and it was being set up for NV compatibility, so it seems like NV was becoming a priority. I may look into the F-4, F-111, A-10, etc. communities and see if anyone there has scoop.

 

Here's a VX-5 Intruder from '88 apparently with the NV mods

 

And well shoot, here's you a VX-5 Hornet pilot with Cat's Eyes, '89:

 

Edited August 30, 2023 by LanceCriminal86

[LanceCriminal86]

Still searching for more about when the Air Force really started to push for NVGs in the cockpit but coming up empty. For as much as Desert Storm is described as the war where we owned the night and how NVGs changed night warfare, I'm not finding a lot. But the Marines have been referenced as using the aforementioned MXU-810 in their Harriers at the time and the Harrier Night Attack and Night Attack Hornets existed at the time, the first NA F/A-18D rolled off the McD factory and was delivered to the Marines in '89.

I'm going to guess the F-117s didn't immediately need the NVGs with their FLIR but I'd really have thought there would be more coverage of NVG usage during the Gulf War. We know ANVIS was in the works and new aircraft were being designed as NV compatible, but I guess folks really didn't want to take photos of the ones in use. The search continues.

Also got further validation regarding Cat's Eyes being very tightly controlled, which is why you don't see them much outside in collections. NSWC Crane had a very tight line on them for issuing/maintenance and all the sets were to go back to them. Got that verified through someone else later in the mid-90s who used them in other Navy aircraft, eventually at least 700 of the roughly 800 sets Crane had issued out were returned last they had heard as it was phased out.

Obligatory Cat's Eyes photo from VX-5 in '90

http://www.chinalakealumni.org/1990/Rktr-900831-01.jpg

 

[Harlikwin]

On 8/30/2023 at 4:22 PM, LanceCriminal86 said:

In this case I have names and people via Facebook groups who can point to who and when, and while it started small with 2-3 crews in the squadron trained and with sets of NV, the purchases and proliferation picked up steam very quickly. And as said, it spread outside of the Intruder community quite quickly as well. It was claimed that the Marines were using them in the Gulf with their Harriers from one of the writeups. Dial back 8 years from 1994 and you'd have 1986, which lines up to when it was being developed at Pax and tested for use with the Intruder guys, so very likely the benefit was already seen and that kicked off the Tomcat cockpit initiative over with Warminster/NADC. The Intruder cockpits I'm seeing photos of converted jets by '93, trying to look more into when they started the conversions.

The main things it was providing, even with older gen tubes, was visual situational awareness at night to navigate and identify targets. From the feedback it was still a big deal in terms of what it brought vs no NVG at all, which is what kicked up the interest and requirements for ANVIS and further updates to that system. But Cat's Eyes was in the supply chain and in use at the same time, but like a lot of the other things I researched over on Arf in years past sometimes you just don't find pics at all. Or they show up years and years after you've stopped even thinking about a topic of research. As to the sets themselves, it sounded like there were some 7-800 sets in circulation in the 90s, and that they had to go through NSWC Crane for them, mounts, support, etc. and they were somewhat tightly controlled.

I will of course keep looking around, but it is also moderately likely that they didn't photograph it or felt like it was "close hold" at the time. Night Vision has had its share of secrecy around it as somewhat talked about in the ITAR/F-4G side, using the ITAR restrictions on NVG generations as an example. That, and this was before digital cameras became big and I can't really think of any film cameras or even camcorders that might have been able to film or photo at night enough to capture it without a flash. Cruise vids from '87 and '88-'89 haven't shown any clips.

I also haven't found too many resources on the Air Force's NV initiatives, when they started exploring, testing, pushing for ANVIS, etc. One of the Intruder guys mentioned working on the C-17s cockpit design study in 1991 and it was being set up for NV compatibility, so it seems like NV was becoming a priority. I may look into the F-4, F-111, A-10, etc. communities and see if anyone there has scoop.

 

Here's a VX-5 Intruder from '88 apparently with the NV mods

 

And well shoot, here's you a VX-5 Hornet pilot with Cat's Eyes, '89:

 

 

 

Thanks for putting that up, finally I have the unicorn photo.