Avimimus Posted October 1, 2023 Posted October 1, 2023 On 8/26/2023 at 2:44 AM, Harlikwin said: Please enlighten us on the Canadian nuclear weapons program? Were moose of unusually large size involved. Also, we must know if Red Green was. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction It is also an open secret that we retain sone breakout/incipient capacity (i.e. we could probably field weapons within a couple of years if we really felt threatened).
MiG21bisFishbedL Posted October 1, 2023 Posted October 1, 2023 On 8/25/2023 at 8:44 PM, Harlikwin said: Please enlighten us on the Canadian nuclear weapons program? Were moose of unusually large size involved. Also, we must know if Red Green was. It might as well have involved Red Green. There was no "program" as I recall it, but rather they depended on US-provided nukes. The CF-104's job until 1970, as brem pointed out, was a nuclear strike platform for the RCAF. They were to scream in, at treetop level, toss bomb their nukes, then try to get home. They were optimized for the role to the degree that they even removed the M61 to replace it with an extra fuel tank. Come 1970s, the Canadian Armed Forces has a lot of doctrinal changes, the CF-104s became conventional ground attack aircraft and even regained their gun. They also had some limited air intercept capacity, although I'm unsure if squadrons ever received any Sidewinders. 3 Reformers hate him! This one weird trick found by a bush pilot will make gunfighter obsessed old farts angry at your multi-role carrier deck line up!
SOLIDKREATE Posted October 19, 2023 Posted October 19, 2023 On 9/8/2023 at 10:56 PM, Spirale said: You should try the Viggen I just became a Killer Dorito owner. AVIONICS: ASUS BTF TUF MB, INTEL i9 RAPTORLAKE 24 CORE, 48GB PATRIOT VIPER TUF 6600MHz, 16GB ASUS TUF RTX 4070ti SUPER, ASUS TUF 1000w PSU CONTROLS: LOGI X-56 RHINO HOTAS, LOGI PRO RUDDER PEDALS, LOGI G733 LIGHTSPEED MAIN BIRDS: F/A-18C, MIRAGE F1
MiG21bisFishbedL Posted October 19, 2023 Posted October 19, 2023 5 hours ago, SOLIDKREATE said: I just became a Killer Dorito owner. Once you come to grips with the Viggen's oddities and the kind of mission it very specifically flies, it's some of the most fun you'll have in DCS. Reformers hate him! This one weird trick found by a bush pilot will make gunfighter obsessed old farts angry at your multi-role carrier deck line up!
Temetre Posted October 19, 2023 Posted October 19, 2023 (edited) Am 8.9.2023 um 19:55 schrieb foxmagnet: I hope we get many variants as we did in Mirage F1, but if I have to pick one out of many, I would choose multi-role version of F-104. Flying fast and high is good, but many multiplayer servers include ground targets so flying fast while shooting at ground targets is even better. I am slightly coping about AS.34 Kormoran right now. Good thing is, the 104G is the most common and used variant, and also multirole. I feel like ground strikes in the 104 probably wont be very fun tho. The plane is very light and has very little lift, and the 15 AoA limit will probably force you to fly very flat trajectories with bombs. A silver lining could be the bombing computer of the 104G tho, I think it has a dive toss bombing computer similar to A4 and F4. Edited October 19, 2023 by Temetre 3
Bremspropeller Posted October 19, 2023 Posted October 19, 2023 48 minutes ago, Temetre said: A silver lining could be the bombing computer of the 104G tho, I think it has a dive toss bombing computer similar to A4 and F4. It doesn't AFAIK. The NASARR didn't have that feature in the 105 and I'd be surprised if it had in the 104. It's gonna be depression-bombing only. Both the 104G and 105 were initially thought to bring light and cozyness in the mid-high kT range, not waste time with conventional bombing.The bombing computer is gonna be a LABS type with the "idiot-loop" delivery method. CRV-7 rockets supposedly were fun, though. Same story, depression settings and a bit of Kentucky-windage. 3 So ein Feuerball, JUNGE!
Bananabrai Posted October 19, 2023 Posted October 19, 2023 27 minutes ago, Bremspropeller said: It doesn't AFAIK. The NASARR didn't have that feature in the 105 and I'd be surprised if it had in the 104. It's gonna be depression-bombing only. Both the 104G and 105 were initially thought to bring light and cozyness in the mid-high kT range, not waste time with conventional bombing.The bombing computer is gonna be a LABS type with the "idiot-loop" delivery method. CRV-7 rockets supposedly were fun, though. Same story, depression settings and a bit of Kentucky-windage. I also didn't hear of particular good bombing equipment in the 104G. 1 Alias in Discord: Mailman
Temetre Posted October 19, 2023 Posted October 19, 2023 (edited) vor 54 Minuten schrieb Bremspropeller: It doesn't AFAIK. The NASARR didn't have that feature in the 105 and I'd be surprised if it had in the 104. It's gonna be depression-bombing only. Both the 104G and 105 were initially thought to bring light and cozyness in the mid-high kT range, not waste time with conventional bombing.The bombing computer is gonna be a LABS type with the "idiot-loop" delivery method. CRV-7 rockets supposedly were fun, though. Same story, depression settings and a bit of Kentucky-windage. I know it was different for Americans, but did the german air force really just buy a fighter/bomber for nuclear weapons from the nuclear share program? I know that was a factor compared to mirage, but it seems a bit strange if conventional ordinance wasnt planned in from the beginning. The 104G was specifically built for german interest in a fighter bomber. Tbh I find it hard to find definitive edition on the 104G bombing computer. Ive read about labs, but also claims some got upgraded later with dive toss capability. Also mentions of early F-104Gs with a "Mergenthaler Linotype M-2 bombing computer". edit: This is a reprint from a "flight international" magazine apparently, so idk how good the info is. But here: Tbf idk if thats a more complex ballistic computer or a dive toss system. Edited October 19, 2023 by Temetre
Bremspropeller Posted October 19, 2023 Posted October 19, 2023 (edited) 1 hour ago, Temetre said: I know it was different for Americans, but did the german air force really just buy a fighter/bomber for nuclear weapons from the nuclear share program? I know that was a factor compared to mirage, but it seems a bit strange if conventional ordinance wasnt planned in from the beginning. The 104G was specifically built for german interest in a fighter bomber. Yes and no. It wasn't purely nukes, but in the context of NATO doctrine back in the day, it would have factually have been mostly a one-way nukes galore mission. Conventional missions were a thing and were trained for - most jets were in a "conventional" configuration IIRC. But again, given the initial doctrine (which changed in the late 60s to a more conventional approach), it factually was "how to bring a nuke the fastest and farthest". Ironically, the 104 actually excelled in that mission as it was fast, had a low RCS and a pretty good range (farther than the F-4 by about 50% according to a pilot that knows). Conventional warfare doctrine later showed the 104's limitations. Which partially is the reason why the Luftwaffe went for the F-4F with two fighter wings (actual fighter mission, secondary ground attack) and two fighter-bomber wings (fighter bombers with secondary fighter mission). They also replaced the RF-104G with the RF-4E (two recce-wings). 1 hour ago, Temetre said: Tbf idk if thats a more complex ballistic computer or a dive toss system. I think it's a LABS type computer, which in essence is a dumb CCRP if you think about it. Edited October 19, 2023 by Bremspropeller 2 So ein Feuerball, JUNGE!
Hiob Posted October 19, 2023 Posted October 19, 2023 Also keep in mind, that it is not an exclusive rational matter, but also a matter of political "I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine". "Muß ich denn jedes Mal, wenn ich sauge oder saugblase den Schlauchstecker in die Schlauchnut schieben?"
TLTeo Posted October 19, 2023 Posted October 19, 2023 (edited) I have a non-nuclear weapons manual for the German Air Force F-104G (not gonna post it just in case), but it refers repeatedly to the Dash 34 and only really mentions sight settings and depression tables, rather than e.g. target designations etc. The only exception is when high altitude level bombing is discussed, in which case the manual states "or in some specialized instances using the F-104G radar is a method of determining the correct release point." So my gut feeling is indeed, conventional weapons delivery should -for the most part- be visual only, and the LABS-y stuff is mostly for nukes only. Regarding the 104's role, for many other air forces it's important to remember that the conventional strike role was taken up by other aircraft (e.g. the F-84F, G-91, Mirage, F-5, Draken, depending on the operator/year) so focusing on nuclear delivery first and foremost kinda makes sense in the Cold War. Obviously that changed post Vietnam, but for many European operators it wasn't long after that that the F-16 or Tornado came online anyway. Edited October 19, 2023 by TLTeo 3
Temetre Posted October 19, 2023 Posted October 19, 2023 vor 4 Stunden schrieb Bremspropeller: Yes and no. It wasn't purely nukes, but in the context of NATO doctrine back in the day, it would have factually have been mostly a one-way nukes galore mission. Conventional missions were a thing and were trained for - most jets were in a "conventional" configuration IIRC. But again, given the initial doctrine (which changed in the late 60s to a more conventional approach), it factually was "how to bring a nuke the fastest and farthest". Ironically, the 104 actually excelled in that mission as it was fast, had a low RCS and a pretty good range (farther than the F-4 by about 50% according to a pilot that knows). Conventional warfare doctrine later showed the 104's limitations. Which partially is the reason why the Luftwaffe went for the F-4F with two fighter wings (actual fighter mission, secondary ground attack) and two fighter-bomber wings (fighter bombers with secondary fighter mission). They also replaced the RF-104G with the RF-4E (two recce-wings). Yeh maybe that was just the big mistake by the Bundeswehr. vor 4 Stunden schrieb Bremspropeller: I think it's a LABS type computer, which in essence is a dumb CCRP if you think about it. Aw thats a shame. Probably means its mostly for nukes and not conventional arms.
Temetre Posted October 19, 2023 Posted October 19, 2023 vor 1 Stunde schrieb TLTeo: The only exception is when high altitude level bombing is discussed, in which case the manual states "or in some specialized instances using the F-104G radar is a method of determining the correct release point." Btw sounds like Dive Laydown. Not dive toss though, thats the really cool mode where you just point the nose.
Bremspropeller Posted October 19, 2023 Posted October 19, 2023 18 minutes ago, Temetre said: Yeh maybe that was just the big mistake by the Bundeswehr. That's a deep rabbithole to go down into. But then again, the Bundeswehr's default setting is *tumbleweed*. 1 So ein Feuerball, JUNGE!
Avimimus Posted October 22, 2023 Posted October 22, 2023 On 10/19/2023 at 11:49 AM, Bremspropeller said: CRV-7 rockets supposedly were fun, though. Same story, depression settings and a bit of Kentucky-windage. It'd be pretty cool to get the CRV-7... exceptionally high velocity rockets with very high kinetic potential and very low dispersion. 1
MiG21bisFishbedL Posted October 24, 2023 Posted October 24, 2023 On 10/22/2023 at 10:14 AM, Avimimus said: It'd be pretty cool to get the CRV-7... exceptionally high velocity rockets with very high kinetic potential and very low dispersion. That would be absolutely baller and reason alone to get the F-104 outside of it being an F-104. Reformers hate him! This one weird trick found by a bush pilot will make gunfighter obsessed old farts angry at your multi-role carrier deck line up!
Avimimus Posted October 25, 2023 Posted October 25, 2023 17 hours ago, MiG21bisFishbedL said: That would be absolutely baller and reason alone to get the F-104 outside of it being an F-104. Yeah, it'd be nice to finally see them in the sim... definitely would make me more likely to pick up the F-104 at the pre-order level. 1
MiG21bisFishbedL Posted October 25, 2023 Posted October 25, 2023 5 hours ago, Avimimus said: Yeah, it'd be nice to finally see them in the sim... definitely would make me more likely to pick up the F-104 at the pre-order level. I'll def grab it since I'm so happy with what Aerges delivered in the F.1 1 Reformers hate him! This one weird trick found by a bush pilot will make gunfighter obsessed old farts angry at your multi-role carrier deck line up!
Saguanay Posted October 31, 2023 Posted October 31, 2023 On 10/1/2023 at 4:56 PM, MiG21bisFishbedL said: It might as well have involved Red Green. There was no "program" as I recall it, but rather they depended on US-provided nukes. The CF-104's job until 1970, as brem pointed out, was a nuclear strike platform for the RCAF. They were to scream in, at treetop level, toss bomb their nukes, then try to get home. They were optimized for the role to the degree that they even removed the M61 to replace it with an extra fuel tank. Come 1970s, the Canadian Armed Forces has a lot of doctrinal changes, the CF-104s became conventional ground attack aircraft and even regained their gun. They also had some limited air intercept capacity, although I'm unsure if squadrons ever received any Sidewinders. https://rcaf.museum/history/rcaf-aircraft/cf-104-operations 2
TLTeo Posted October 31, 2023 Posted October 31, 2023 1 hour ago, Saguanay said: https://rcaf.museum/history/rcaf-aircraft/cf-104-operations The part about night time low level navigation and delivery is insane o.O
Saguanay Posted November 7, 2023 Posted November 7, 2023 (edited) There is a story about a target range in Europe. Bad low weather. Some USAF F4s came in and was talking to range about the weather. Didn't look like it would happen. Some CF104s checked in and continued to the targets. Our guys whacked the targets and headed home. The F4s just checked out and RTB. I'll find the reference for that one. This is a different story and in Europe. https://www.vintagewings.ca/stories/skip-hit Edited November 7, 2023 by Saguanay 2
Stratos Posted November 15, 2023 Posted November 15, 2023 I love those aviation stories! will use Kola map to bomb Soviet targets. 1 I don't understand anything in russian except Davai Davai!
Avimimus Posted January 3, 2024 Posted January 3, 2024 On 10/31/2023 at 10:23 PM, TLTeo said: The part about night time low level navigation and delivery is insane o.O Well we did call them 'widowmakers' for a reason. I didn't know we used Giant Tiger liveries though!
71st_AH Rob Posted January 16, 2024 Posted January 16, 2024 (edited) 1 hour ago, Saguanay said: It was a demo skin for 439 SQN. If I recall, it was specifically for 'Tiger Meet' in 1968(?) Maybe Giant Tiger got it from them? Interestingly, Tiger Meet and Giant Tiger were both founded in 1961, coincidence? Edited January 16, 2024 by 71st_AH Rob
Recommended Posts