HB F-4E Air Refueling?

[Bananabrai]

On 2/1/2023 at 12:25 AM, Czechnology said:

If we're talking if the F-4E is physically capable of A2A refueling, yes. Specifically, like said above, with a flying boom, and the naval variant when it comes out will use probe/drogue.
However, HB hasn't directly addressed if it will come out of the box with the capability or not. I would imagine it would, but could also easily imagine that being a feature that's having issues and needs to be held back for a later release.

tl;dr
We'll get it eventually

Birds like the F-16, F/A-18, Razbam's M2000 and also HBs F-14 came with AAR out of the box (from day one).
Of course, due to open beta there can be bugs at the beginning, but I would pretty safely assume that we can do AAR from day one.

[Kirk66]

On 2/12/2023 at 2:00 PM, Alpha said:

The Pilot flies the F4 into position using the tanker´s director lights. There is no need for any help from the backseat - and as you can´t really see the director lights from there tanking from the rear seat isn´t a thing.

Sorry, but that is incorrect. Tanking from the pit was not a problem; even as a WSO I was able to do it. During normal refueling, the WSO watched the boom and could tell the pilot when he was in the proper fore/aft position; once connected, he watched the "barber pole" marks on the boom and kept the pilot in the correct positon with trend information - much more accurate than the lights. Remember the director lights were made for big aircraft - bombers and transports.

There is a funny story about an F-4 crew that wanted to play a joke on their tanker; the WSO (who was pretty experienced) setup his flight jacket so it looked like he had his hands up on the canopy bow (where WSOs usually kept them) while he actually flew the jet - you can't see the back seat controls from a tanker; meanwhile the pilot also had his hands up on the mirrors, occasionally waving at the boomer. So from the boomers perspective, it looked like the F-4 just flew itself into position and refueled, unassisted. I REALLY wish I had a picture of that!

Vulture

[Alpha]

Well, as usual: it depends and techniques vary...  The director lights were a primary indicator of the proper position (to start with, worked quite alright for fighters as well) as were the boomer comments as well as those from the backseat (then again - there are WSOs hardly talking at all, some talk a lot and so on...). Then there´s the sight picture you´d fly as the pilot depending on which aircraft you´re tanking from. There´s seating position (for the director lights a lot of guys had to be either seat full up or full down), you could see boom/markings in the top mirror etc.

 

There might have been WSOs who could and would maintain the position on the boom for a while, but I can´t remember a wso (or IP, for that matter) fly into contact position from the back seat. I do agree that a wso could be very helpful - but you could AAR without him as well. Never heard of a WSO fly from pre-contact to contact and stay on the boom - but given the very forgiving nature of a computer simulation I´m sure there will be DCS-clips, sooner or later...  . 

Edited February 28, 2023 by Alpha

[Kirk66]

It's going to be fun trying - from both seats! I hope the feel of the CG change when filling up a 3-bag jet is reproduced; feeling the jet get more stable as the tanks filled up was interesting.

Cheers,

Vulture

[Kalasnkova74]

On 2/27/2023 at 11:53 PM, Alpha said:

Well, as usual: it depends and techniques vary...  The director lights were a primary indicator of the proper position (to start with, worked quite alright for fighters as well) as were the boomer comments as well as those from the backseat (then again - there are WSOs hardly talking at all, some talk a lot and so on...). Then there´s the sight picture you´d fly as the pilot depending on which aircraft you´re tanking from. There´s seating position (for the director lights a lot of guys had to be either seat full up or full down), you could see boom/markings in the top mirror etc.

 

There might have been WSOs who could and would maintain the position on the boom for a while, but I can´t remember a wso (or IP, for that matter) fly into contact position from the back seat. I do agree that a wso could be very helpful - but you could AAR without him as well. Never heard of a WSO fly from pre-contact to contact and stay on the boom - but given the very forgiving nature of a computer simulation I´m sure there will be DCS-clips, sooner or later...  . 

 

In Ed Cobleigh’s “War for the Hell of It”, he mentioned that flying AAR from the “pit” was not only no big deal but in fact preferred vs the front seat. According to “Fast Eddie” he got a better view of the boomer’s indicator marks on the probe from the backseat, so he had better situational awareness on being in position than flying from the front. 

He did a tour before the USAF had dedicated WSOs, so pilots could fly front or backseat depending on seniority or mission needs. 

[markturner1960]

Damn, I was really hoping it would be a drogue type system........although I can refuel the Viper, its the most tricky of all my modules - I find that there is a MUCH smaller cone of movement before you get a disconnect when using a boom as opposed to a drogue. Also, DCS has not bothered to give us any more detailed tanker comms, so if you slide out of the zone, you can often not realise ( I know you can put the fuel flow on the HUD, but would it too much to ask for a voice ?)

So if the Phantom is the same system, that's a shame. However, it is what it is and I will just have to git gud! 

[Northstar98]

6 hours ago, markturner1960 said:

Damn, I was really hoping it would be a drogue type system........although I can refuel the Viper, its the most tricky of all my modules - I find that there is a MUCH smaller cone of movement before you get a disconnect when using a boom as opposed to a drogue. Also, DCS has not bothered to give us any more detailed tanker comms, so if you slide out of the zone, you can often not realise ( I know you can put the fuel flow on the HUD, but would it too much to ask for a voice ?)

So if the Phantom is the same system, that's a shame. However, it is what it is and I will just have to git gud! 

Naval Phantoms (and variants derived from Naval variants B/J/S/N/K/M) have a probe and drogue system, but land based Phantoms (C, D and E and their variants) use the boom.

Edited March 21, 2023 by Northstar98

[Bananabrai]

On 3/21/2023 at 11:34 AM, Northstar98 said:

but land based Phantoms

IDF/AF F-4Es had a probe refitted. 

Could be a nice ME checkbox thing, like with the JF-17

[Northstar98]

11 minutes ago, Bananabrai said:

IDF/AF F-4Es had a probe refitted.

Yes, though looks like the image in my first reply to OP isn't loading properly.

[LanceCriminal86]

There's been no plans or intent stated or released to go down the rabbit holes of adding more to the export F-4Es other than some bonus pilot models for one or two nationalities. They've stated they're not going to model deeper into the EJ, Kurnass, Terminator, F-4F, etc. past skins and pilots. Doing so would open a whole Pandora's Box of "well you did Israel, what about the Japanese Phantoms? Turkish? Greek?", and the list goes on. They've already said many times about how the F-14 blew up as they added more desires and "bonus" functions, and that they didn't want the F-4 to turn into the same. They've been pretty tight so far on keeping to the USAF configurations for the mid-70s updates of the early blocks, and the 70s-80s updated late blocks (71- and on) with TISEO, DMAS, etc.

[Aussie_Mantis]

On 3/24/2023 at 7:39 PM, Bananabrai said:

IDF/AF F-4Es had a probe refitted. 

Could be a nice ME checkbox thing, like with the JF-17

What I find funniest is that the probes are literally just ripped off of A-4s and slapped onto F-4s. Very funny. 10/10.

[Kalasnkova74]

On 3/25/2023 at 5:00 AM, Aussie_Mantis said:

What I find funniest is that the probes are literally just ripped off of A-4s and slapped onto F-4s. Very funny. 10/10.

 

Even Tracor Systems got into the act with this F-4D.

[eatthis]

On 2/11/2023 at 11:01 PM, Diesel_Thunder said:

The F-4E was exclusively an Air Force variant and as such featured dual controls. So @Gianky, to answer your question, yes you can fly from the backseat.

On the subject of refueling, we rolled out the hydraulic cart again today to leak check the utility system, and we cycled the air refuel door a couple times. For those that have never seen it, here is what it looks like:

 

well i never knew that, great photo there!!

On 2/28/2023 at 12:58 AM, Kirk66 said:

Sorry, but that is incorrect. Tanking from the pit was not a problem; even as a WSO I was able to do it. During normal refueling, the WSO watched the boom and could tell the pilot when he was in the proper fore/aft position; once connected, he watched the "barber pole" marks on the boom and kept the pilot in the correct positon with trend information - much more accurate than the lights. Remember the director lights were made for big aircraft - bombers and transports.

There is a funny story about an F-4 crew that wanted to play a joke on their tanker; the WSO (who was pretty experienced) setup his flight jacket so it looked like he had his hands up on the canopy bow (where WSOs usually kept them) while he actually flew the jet - you can't see the back seat controls from a tanker; meanwhile the pilot also had his hands up on the mirrors, occasionally waving at the boomer. So from the boomers perspective, it looked like the F-4 just flew itself into position and refueled, unassisted. I REALLY wish I had a picture of that!

Vulture

oh that wouldve been a BRILLIANT picture haha

[Temetre]

Personally, I would love if we got the ability to make the AI do some of the refueling job. Like leave making contact to me, but have the WSO (aka Jester) keep the plane in position. Or just have an Iceman pilot do the entire refueling process.

Refueling is just such a difficult process in some planes, doubly so since you lack a real field of view or depths perception. VR helps a bit, but you still dont got any feel for the plane. Even the quality of your headtracking or throttle can make a difference.

The whole process just feels so rough and disorienting in games. And I feel like a F-4E might stretch the viability of refueling. Like, if theres a chance of failure, then you cant really plan missions around refueling.

Edited May 3, 2023 by Temetre

[Dragon1-1]

It probably won't be any harder to refuel than the Viper, however I agree that it should be possible to just have Jester fly the plane for this, too. After all, this was done on occasion. Particularly if you're exhausted after a mission, you could just tell Jester to handle getting gas on the way back while you sit back and watch.

[Temetre]

vor 30 Minuten schrieb Dragon1-1:

It probably won't be any harder to refuel than the Viper, however I agree that it should be possible to just have Jester fly the plane for this, too. After all, this was done on occasion. Particularly if you're exhausted after a mission, you could just tell Jester to handle getting gas on the way back while you sit back and watch.

Yeh absolutely this. Even with the F-18 i feel i can only somewhat reliably refuel when im in a top state of mind. F-16 i still wanna learn, im sure its gonna be bad xD 

The Phantom does scare me because of the stories about its rough handling tho. And it wont even have the F-16s FBW either.

[Dragon1-1]

I found it difficult with CH Fighterstick and downright easy when I switched to Winwing Orion. Get a good, precise stick (Orion is great because it's very smooth in the center) and a decent throttle that rotates instead of sliding (you can feel the grip angle much better than position). You can do it with a cheap stick/throttle combo with a lot of practice and a gentle touch, though. VR helps a lot, too. The key, in every case, is finding a good reference with which you can aim. Pitch ladder markings make for a good AAR sight, we won't have that on the Phantom, but I'm sure there'll be something on the canopy bow that could be of use.

[Temetre]

vor einer Stunde schrieb Dragon1-1:

I found it difficult with CH Fighterstick and downright easy when I switched to Winwing Orion. Get a good, precise stick (Orion is great because it's very smooth in the center) and a decent throttle that rotates instead of sliding (you can feel the grip angle much better than position). You can do it with a cheap stick/throttle combo with a lot of practice and a gentle touch, though. VR helps a lot, too. The key, in every case, is finding a good reference with which you can aim. Pitch ladder markings make for a good AAR sight, we won't have that on the Phantom, but I'm sure there'll be something on the canopy bow that could be of use.

If you find air-refueling easy, then you must be crazy xD

I think an expensive stick is basically required. I got a VKB Gladiator, so that helps, but I wouldnt even want to try it with my old T16000 or so, thats prolly way worse than even the CH stick. Ive actually done my first F-18 refueling without a dedicated throttle, but that was pretty rough.

Im going to try to get better, but IMO it would be very valuable to have an AI that can help with air-refueling, at least the post-contact stuff. Not everyone can afford the hardware, and personally I dont even feel very immersed trying to refuel. Thats one of the scenarios where the lack of perception and feedback just really hurts my experience. 

[Dragon1-1]

Actually, the T16000 is supposedly quite smooth, so there's that. I don't know about the Gladiator, but that should be good. I'd expect VR helps more, since you get stereoscopic vision, and that helps judge distance. However, in the end, it's all about sight picture. My technique is simple: put the 5 on the hose (right side of the 5 degree pitch ladder) and hold it there until you plug. Then, aim at the pod with the gun cross until full. The only thing you need to worry about then is throttle, which has been easy to manage in the Hornet since they fixed the engine response curve. Maybe I'm just good, but in the end, it's just formation flying. The technique also works for the Tomcat (AA HUD mode, you aim with the right 30), you just need to remember to put the wings to bomb and trim the ship before you try. With the Navy Phantom it'll probably be similar, with the USAF one the sight picture will be very different, but the essence remains the same.

[Temetre]

T16000 isnt really smooth, its just not as bad as most other cheap sticks. Which is a pretty low bar. The kinda milimeter precise controls I have to do with a VKB would be near impossible on that stick. As long as you arent a god at flightsims I suppose? Someone always did the crazy stuff.

Looks like the CH stick has at least seperate axises, that would be a big plus. 

vor 11 Minuten schrieb Dragon1-1:

Maybe I'm just good, but in the end, it's just formation flying. 

Tbh from pure guess you sound like someone thats been playing flight sim for 10+ years and has refueled hundreds of times^^

Its mostly training after all. But refueling has such a high bar its a lot less accessible. I would bet its actually easier in real life.

Edited May 3, 2023 by Temetre

[Alpha]

59 minutes ago, Temetre said:

I would bet its actually easier in real life.

No, it isn´t. 

[Temetre]

vor 13 Minuten schrieb Alpha:

No, it isn´t. 

So youre saying its harder when you got no feeling for the aircraft? No depths perception or peripheral vision to tell distance?

Ive heard pilots consistently saying that precision maneuvers are way easier in real planes.

And frankly, even just in VR refueling is easier, because at least you get some depths perception. Why would reality then be harder?

[Alpha]

Of course VR is better and I haven´t done it in ages in 2D on some computer, I´m only playing in VR. Having done actual AAR in real life I still feel there´s a bunch of factors not really simulated (or simulatable...) on any home computer.

 

In real life there´s a bunch of aerodynamic effects and influences you don´t get to a comparable degree in DCS. You can use 100% of the booms range of motion and nobody will abort your refueling for obviously poor performance. You can fall of the boom in any direction and there´s no damage to either boom or aircraft. There´s no rough air throwing you around - you´re always sitting at 1G somewhere. You´ll never get blinded like the sun can in real life. The psychological difference between a Simulation/Game and using real aircraft with real value and real people is "worlds apart". Tanking in DCS for a few minutes might make your wrist sore - that´s nothing compared to how you sometimes feel while doing that in a real jet. In the game if you can´t hack the tanking it isn´t really a problem. In the real world your mission is in danger, your peers are watching and might be getting into trouble due to your f... up.   I could go on and on, but you´ll get the point

 

Yeah - it´s a good simulation, it feels pretty comparable, you´ll see the same mistakes you usually do in real life, but still... it´s a game. Without getting too much off-topic: you can fly nice patterns in DCS in VR, doing all the right things and procedures. Take a (rear) seat in a real jet and you´ll instantly see and feel the difference. Just like some other form of "Entertainment" which can be had in front of a computer -  if you tried the real deal you know: it´s just not the same...

 

Edited May 3, 2023 by Alpha

[Dragon1-1]

2 hours ago, Temetre said:

Tbh from pure guess you sound like someone thats been playing flight sim for 10+ years and has refueled hundreds of times^^

I haven't, unless you count the fact I started with the other sim (where I never did much AAR) back in high school. I've been flying DCS since the pandemic started, so 2020, and have a few tens of refuelings, some with CH gear. Admittedly, I was very comfortable with CH at that point, due to using it a lot over the years. I am, however, quite meticulous when training, and I fly VR. It's ultimately a lot like riding a bike. It seems impossible until you get it, then it's easy. Get the sight picture right (particularly the pitch ladder bit, that did it for me), line up and just walk straight into the basket. For booms, practice at dusk when you can see both the lights and the tanker.

23 minutes ago, Alpha said:

In real life there´s a bunch of aerodynamic effects and influences you don´t get to a comparable degree in DCS. You can use 100% of the booms range of motion and nobody will abort your refueling for obviously poor performance. You can fall of the boom in any direction and there´s no damage to either boom or aircraft. [...] You´ll never get blinded like the sun can in real life.

TBH, I hope that those, at least, can be addressed. VR isn't bright enough to physically blind you, but we can simulate that somewhat better than we currently do (of course, then we'd need working visors). Improved AAR physics are supposedly being worked on, which should fix some of that. I think DCS AAR system was mostly designed around probe and drogue refueling (likely a LOMAC holdover, Russians use a similar system) with the boom refueling bolted on, and that results in the experience being somewhat subpar. The basket leaves a lot more to the pilot.

Of course, things like variations in G aren't possible even with a motion platform. There will be a lot of difference in the feel, even if we can get closer. For what is worth, though, I heard pilots describe it as easy or even relaxing. In fact, I heard some RL Viper jocks say that if you can AAR on a 2D screen, you'd breeze through it in a real jet, mostly because of depth perception. So it seems it varies by plane, the Viper, with its sidestick and FBW, is remarkably easy to fly in general, so AAR is probably easier than in other jets, too. 

[Temetre]

vor 2 Stunden schrieb Alpha:

In real life there´s a bunch of aerodynamic effects and influences you don´t get to a comparable degree in DCS. You can use 100% of the booms range of motion and nobody will abort your refueling for obviously poor performance. You can fall of the boom in any direction and there´s no damage to either boom or aircraft. There´s no rough air throwing you around - you´re always sitting at 1G somewhere. You´ll never get blinded like the sun can in real life. The psychological difference between a Simulation/Game and using real aircraft with real value and real people is "worlds apart". Tanking in DCS for a few minutes might make your wrist sore - that´s nothing compared to how you sometimes feel while doing that in a real jet. In the game if you can´t hack the tanking it isn´t really a problem. In the real world your mission is in danger, your peers are watching and might be getting into trouble due to your f... up.   I could go on and on, but you´ll get the point

To be fair, I cant say its harder than in real life, I dont know myself. And sure its more comfortable. But that also doesnt really change that im missing sense that I'd have in real life, and that makes tanking frustrating. In VR its easier because I get some sense back, tho I cant really play DCS in VR for performance reasons.

Its like, the skill to solve that problem in DCS is to find geometric patterns on a 2D screen... thats just not the real deal, thats an arbitrary video game challenge created by technical limitations.

vor 1 Stunde schrieb Dragon1-1:

Of course, things like variations in G aren't possible even with a motion platform. There will be a lot of difference in the feel, even if we can get closer. For what is worth, though, I heard pilots describe it as easy or even relaxing. In fact, I heard some RL Viper jocks say that if you can AAR on a 2D screen, you'd breeze through it in a real jet, mostly because of depth perception. So it seems it varies by plane, the Viper, with its sidestick and FBW, is remarkably easy to fly in general, so AAR is probably easier than in other jets, too. 

Thanks, thats exactly what I hear from pilots. A lot of flying-stuff is a lot easier because you get a lot more sensory input. Both visual and feeling. Playing 2D you get only visual, and an inferior visual version of that! Even VR isnt perfect.

I would also hope that refueling IRL is easier, considering how much eg NATO air forces rely on that stuff. Like, you get tired, dehydrated pilots that need to pee after hour long missions, and then they need to refuel before they can do a carrier landing xD 

vor 1 Stunde schrieb Dragon1-1:

I haven't, unless you count the fact I started with the other sim (where I never did much AAR) back in high school. I've been flying DCS since the pandemic started, so 2020, and have a few tens of refuelings, some with CH gear. Admittedly, I was very comfortable with CH at that point, due to using it a lot over the years. I am, however, quite meticulous when training, and I fly VR. It's ultimately a lot like riding a bike. It seems impossible until you get it, then it's easy. Get the sight picture right (particularly the pitch ladder bit, that did it for me), line up and just walk straight into the basket. For booms, practice at dusk when you can see both the lights and the tanker.

Yeah I ment this kinda sims in general. Youve got a TON of experience, played sims for a long time, and apparently do a lot of training, including VR. Probably puts you in the <5% of sim pilots or so, even in DCS (obviously made up number, but Id bet on it^^).

I like doing stuff like aerial refueling myself, but with the level of difficulty and artificial challenge I also wouldnt mind some workarounds till one got it down.

Edited May 3, 2023 by Temetre