First In, Last Out! F-4E Wild Weasel Trailer and Manual release!

[Stackup]

[doedkoett]

I don´t get it - is it against the law to fly SEAD/DEAD missions in an F-4E in DCS, or is it the use of the "Weasel" callsign in the video that is the great heresy?

Maybe SEAD is only Wild Weasel if it´s from the Wild Weasel region of Vietnam, else it´s just sparkling SEAD... 
 

[Vampyre]

2 minutes ago, Gunfreak said:

There are 2 ways to use the term wild weasel.

1. Relating to the specific aircraft in the wild weasel program (the only truly valid use according to you)

2. Wild Weasel is a code name given by the United States Air Force (USAF) to an aircraft of any type equipped with anti-radiation missiles and tasked with the suppression of enemy air defenses (SEAD): destroying the radar and surface-to-air missile (SAM) installations of enemy air defense systems.[1][2] 

 

The video showed an F-4E doing SEAD/DEAD well with the second definition of Wild Weasel. The video says F4E not F4G. 

 

So you going full nuclear with:

 

Is rather way way way beyond anything within reason.

It seems wikipedia has done you a disservice. Wild Weasel today is just a mission set with specially trained aircrew focusing on SAM Suppression. Wild Weasel was more than just a mission set in the 60's 70, and 80's and the usage of the term was more restricted. In the time of the F-4E in USAF service it was more hardware focused. Once the program became defunct somewhere in the early 90's the term was focused more on the mission. This is a mix of historical inaccuracy and modern terminology. The F-4E of the type depicted in the video was never a part of a Weasel hunter/killer team or ever to perform the mission due to the nature of the mission its squadron, the 20th FS, was performing at the time. 

If it is as you say "way way beyond anything within reason" then let me point this out-

 Was the 20th FS a Wild Weasel Squadron? No

 Was the DSCG F-4E a Wild Weasel platform? No

 Did the 20th perform the Weasel mission? No

 Is the video historically accurate? No

 Is the DSCG F-4E being advertised as a Wild Weasel? Yes

So my conclusion is that the video was intended to build hype for the upcoming release and using the term Wild Weasel for an aircraft in a squadron that was not and had never been assigned the mission is false. It is advertising that is false. Again, I'm not saying it was intentional on the part of Heatblur. Whoever made the video probably doesn't know the history.

 The low knowledge gamers who don't know, don't care for the most part. Those who do, point out the discrepancy.

 

[Elf1606688794]

30 minutes ago, Vampyre said:

 The low knowledge gamers who don't know, don't care for the most part. Those who do, point out the discrepancy.

Elitism at it's finest, errr worst.

[Stackup]

10 minutes ago, Vampyre said:

Was the 20th FS a Wild Weasel Squadron? No

 Was the DSCG F-4E a Wild Weasel platform? No

 Did the 20th perform the Weasel mission? No

 Is the video historically accurate? No

 Is the DSCG F-4E being advertised as a Wild Weasel? Yes

So my conclusion is that the video was intended to build hype for the upcoming release and using the term Wild Weasel for an aircraft in a squadron that was not and had never been assigned the mission is false. It is advertising that is false. Again, I'm not saying it was intentional on the part of Heatblur. Whoever made the video probably doesn't know the history.

 The low knowledge gamers who don't know, don't care for the most part. Those who do, point out the discrepancy.

Do you really believe the video intended to be historically accurate?  No, it's for building hype as you said.  As such, they made up a fake mission, in a fake conflict to show off the SEAD capabilities of the F-4E.  How is that false advertising?  The F-4E is perfectly capable of the mission set as shown in the video, whether it would have been technically classified as a Wild Weasel mission 50 years ago or not.

We aren't in the 60s, 70s, or 80s anymore and like it or not, Wild Weasel has become the common term the majority of people associate with the mission depicted in the video.  So they used the terminology people in general are familiar with.  In other words they catered to the majority of their audience who is paying them by buying their aircraft.  It doesn't matter that this particular squadron never did this in real life because DCS is a game!  It's not real life and neither is the mission depicted in the video.  Most of DCS is historically inaccurate anyways, with made up missions and conflicts, AI units from the wrong time period that fly like UFOs and see through terrain and clouds, aircraft missing weapons because they haven't been added yet, etc.  It's pretty laughable to expect a marketing video to be a perfectly historical representation of an aircraft because that's not the goal of marketing a game.  Heatblur is simulating the F-4E the aircraft, not making a documentary film on its real life usage.

You've made your point that you dislike the video based on the historical innaccracies.  That's fine and you're entitled to your own opinion, but the video wasn't made for perfect historical accuracy, it was made to advertise the DCS: F-4E module and show it performing the SEAD role.  It did what it was made to do perfectly.

[Elf1606688794]

4 minutes ago, Stackup said:

Do you really believe the video intended to be historically accurate?  No, it's for building hype as you said.  As such, they made up a fake mission, in a fake conflict to show off the SEAD capabilities of the F-4E.  How is that false advertising?  The F-4E is perfectly capable of the mission set as shown in the video, whether it would have been technically classified as a Wild Weasel mission 50 years ago or not.

We aren't in the 60s, 70s, or 80s anymore and like it or not, Wild Weasel has become the common term the majority of people associate with the mission depicted in the video.  So they used the terminology people in general are familiar with.  In other words they catered to the majority of their audience who is paying them by buying their aircraft.  It doesn't matter that this particular squadron never did this in real life because DCS is a game!  It's not real life and neither is the mission depicted in the video.  Most of DCS is historically inaccurate anyways, with made up missions and conflicts, AI units from the wrong time period that fly like UFOs and see through terrain and clouds, aircraft missing weapons because they haven't been added yet, etc.  It's pretty laughable to expect a marketing video to be a perfectly historical representation of an aircraft because that's not the goal of marketing a game.  Heatblur is simulating the F-4E the aircraft, not making a documentary film on its real life usage.

You've made your point that you dislike the video based on the historical innaccracies.  That's fine and you're entitled to your own opinion, but the video wasn't made for perfect historical accuracy, it was made to advertise the DCS: F-4E module and show it performing the SEAD role.  It did what it was made to do perfectly.

[SgtPappy]

Now that that's over... does anyone know if the Shrike is only useable against the SA-2 and SA-3? I seem to remember that the SA-6 was impervious to it in 1973 in Egypt and Syria, but I also know there several variants of seeker heads that we may or may not be able to equip. I wonder if they can be used against higher digit SAM systems.

[Elf1606688794]

2 hours ago, SgtPappy said:

Now that that's over... does anyone know if the Shrike is only useable against the SA-2 and SA-3? I seem to remember that the SA-6 was impervious to it in 1973 in Egypt and Syria, but I also know there several variants of seeker heads that we may or may not be able to equip. I wonder if they can be used against higher digit SAM systems.

I looked this up. There were multiple variants of the Shrike and only 2 had the Mark 49 Mod 1 seeker that was capable of homing in on the SA-6 radar. Those two variants were the AGM-45A-9A and AGM-45B-9A.

Edited February 5 by Elf1606688794

[Elf1606688794]

@IronMike are there any plans for the AGM-78 Standard?

[Stackup]

2 hours ago, Elf1606688794 said:

@IronMike are there any plans for the AGM-78 Standard?

They said not for the F-4E because of the cockpit modifications the STARM requires.  I do believe they are planning to get it onto the A-6E and it did make an erroneous appearance in the original store description of the F-4E so it is at least on their radar.

[Vampyre]

20 minutes ago, Stackup said:

Do you really believe the video intended to be historically accurate?  No, it's for building hype as you said.  As such, they made up a fake mission, in a fake conflict to show off the SEAD capabilities of the F-4E.  How is that false advertising?  The F-4E is perfectly capable of the mission set as shown in the video, whether it would have been technically classified as a Wild Weasel mission 50 years ago or not.

We aren't in the 60s, 70s, or 80s anymore and like it or not, Wild Weasel has become the common term the majority of people associate with the mission depicted in the video.  So they used the terminology people in general are familiar with.  In other words they catered to the majority of their audience who is paying them by buying their aircraft.  It doesn't matter that this particular squadron never did this in real life because DCS is a game!  It's not real life and neither is the mission depicted in the video.  Most of DCS is historically inaccurate anyways, with made up missions and conflicts, AI units from the wrong time period that fly like UFOs and see through terrain and clouds, aircraft missing weapons because they haven't been added yet, etc.  It's pretty laughable to expect a marketing video to be a perfectly historical representation of an aircraft because that's not the goal of marketing a game.  Heatblur is simulating the F-4E the aircraft, not making a documentary film on its real life usage.

You've made your point that you dislike the video based on the historical innaccracies.  That's fine and you're entitled to your own opinion, but the video wasn't made for perfect historical accuracy, it was made to advertise the DCS: F-4E module and show it performing the SEAD role.  It did what it was made to do perfectly.

Yes, Heatblur know their audience. It was made for the masses who don't know or care about the history. That was one of my points and I appreciate the agreement on that part. I maintain that the advertising is false in regard to the F-4E as a Wild Weasel. I have said multiple times that the people who know (mainly the been there done that veterans) are pointing out the squadron discrepancy which is what my original post was partially in response to. On that we have to agree to disagree it seems.

  Being low knowledge, in this case, is not a bad thing per se, it just means there is much more to learn and I hope others will delve into the history more. Now, some here seem to be offended by my points like I am saying they themselves have to be or do something or I have somehow attacked them. I have never once said or done that. I point out discrepancies in the video and somehow that is distressing in some way. They are arguing points not made and overlooking/ignoring what was actually typed or in the worst case, putting their words into my mouth. Like I said before, tempest in a teacup. It means little in the grand scheme of things.

 Now, getting away from the videos accuracy issues and when we ignore the history and go with the modern usage of the call sign, The F-4E is far from being a "perfectly capable Weasel". The F-4E is a poor Weasel substitute as it is not capable of detecting, classifying, locating and attacking a site within seconds and Shrike is a poor performing ARM. I think that will become more obvious once it releases... especially with Skynet and similar scripts (or ED's SAM AI rework) which integrate the SAM networks making them much more potent than they are currently. Judging by the F-14, I have no doubt that Heatblur are doing an outstanding job on this module so much so that I preordered on day one. I look forward to using it not as a half measure Weasel, but as the third generation fighter bomber it is.

23 minutes ago, Elf1606688794 said:

Elitism at it's finest, errr worst.

Ah, an ad hominem. Thank you for confirming the solidity of my points by responding with, essentially, nothing.

[LorenLuke]

1 hour ago, Vampyre said:

6 hours ago, Elf1606688794 said:

Elitism at it's finest, errr worst.

Ah, an ad hominem. Thank you for confirming the solidity of my points by responding with, essentially, nothing.

Except you prove it earlier in your message.

1 hour ago, Vampyre said:

Yes, Heatblur know their audience. It was made for the masses who don't know or care about the history.
[...]
Being low knowledge, in this case, is not a bad thing per se, [...] Now, some here seem to be offended by my points like I [...] somehow attacked them. I have never once said or done that.

It's hard to see how calling people 'low knowledge' or saying they 'don't know or care about the history' on a forum about historical jets can't be seen as anything but an attack.

[Kalasnkova74]

2 hours ago, Vampyre said:

Yes, Heatblur know their audience. It was made for the masses who don't know or care about the history. That was one of my points and I appreciate the agreement on that part. I maintain that the advertising is false in regard to the F-4E as a Wild Weasel.

It is not- for two reasons. 

First, in American service the F-4E was used from Day 1 in the Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses role. In “Palace Cobra” pilot Ed Rasimus wrote of his time flying the SEAD mission, back when Vietnam was two countries and The Bee Gees were a group of talented & anonymous British musicians. Back when the F-4G was only a document on a Pentagon planners desk, the F-4E would fly alongside F-105 Wild Weasels to drop CBU on whatever hostile sites the Bears called out. The USAF never funded enough dedicated Wild Weasel aircraft to cover its global force needs , and thus augmented the Wild Weasel units with F-4Es. The practice continued with the adoption of the F-4G to replace war-worn Thuds. This is one big reason why the standard USAF F-4E was wired for AGM-45 ; it was understood even at the planning stages that the F-4E would operate with the F-4G to prosecute the SEAD mission. Lacking the APR-38/47 suite the F-4E couldn't cut, track and locate signals. But it didn’t have to. The F-4G EWO would call out which way to turn and when to shoot, and the F-4E(s) would launch their Shrikes/ Mavericks/ etc as needed. 

When the F-4E was phased out of the active Air Force inventory for the F-16, the “helper” job transferred to the Viper - and is how it got the SEAD mission today. 
 

If that’s not enough Weasel credibility, consider the Israelis. In October 1973 onward, they used the F-4E as a SEAD platform. The AGM-78 Standard ARM was integrated & fired on their versions of the F-4E, and SEAD missions- executed not much differently from the trailer- was the type’s bread and butter during the Yom Kippur war. Many Kurnasses were lost in this job, including the disastrous “Model 5” strike against SA-6 batteries they couldn’t detect.

Now, you’re technically correct that advanced signal processing , sorting, analysis and ARM handoff was only done one the F-4G variant with a dedicated EWO: but the F-4E was historically heavily used in the SEAD mission, and thus the trailer’s intent doesn’t remotely represent fraud. It’s splitting hairs to suggest a EWO-pilot pair represents a Wild Weasel SEAD mission, but the F-4Es flying with them - or Israeli Kurnasses working a SAM site - isn’t. 
 

[Gunfreak]

9 hours ago, SgtPappy said:

Now that that's over... does anyone know if the Shrike is only useable against the SA-2 and SA-3? I seem to remember that the SA-6 was impervious to it in 1973 in Egypt and Syria, but I also know there several variants of seeker heads that we may or may not be able to equip. I wonder if they can be used against higher digit SAM systems.

The manual simply states that only the A model can be used on this F4.

If they means all variations of the A or a few select ones. I don't know.

Apparently it's the A-9 seekerhead that goes for the 1S91 radar on the SA-6

[ben_der]

16 minutes ago, Gunfreak said:

The manual simply states that only the A model can be used on this F4.

If they means all variations of the A or a few select ones. I don't know.

Apparently it's the A-9 seekerhead that goes for the 1S91 radar on the SA-6

It states that, because at the time of writing only the A Model was available. 

We haven't found any technical limitations so far that would inhibit the use of the B once it becomes available.

[Gunfreak]

1 hour ago, ben_der said:

It states that, because at the time of writing only the A Model was available. 

We haven't found any technical limitations so far that would inhibit the use of the B once it becomes available.

But will we get all A models? Like the A-9 to go after SA-6s?

[ben_der]

1 hour ago, Gunfreak said:

But will we get all A models? Like the A-9 to go after SA-6s?

ED showed some while ago that they reworking the Shrike. When those become available we'll implement them of course.

[Elf1606688794]

10 hours ago, Vampyre said:

Ah, an ad hominem. Thank you for confirming the solidity of my points by responding with, essentially, nothing.

Quote

ad hominem /hŏm′ə-nĕm″, -nəm/

adjective

1. Attacking a person's character or motivations rather than a position or argument.
   "Debaters should avoid ad hominem arguments that question their opponents' motives."
2. Appealing to the emotions rather than to logic or reason.
3. Of or relating to ad hominem

You have repeatedly attacked others motivations, players and Heatblur, and then to say I had an ad hominen attack is ridiculous and nothing more than projection on your part.

You saying players are "low knowledge" or "they don't care about history" while standing on your pedestal refusing to acknowledge the role and capability of the F-4E in SEAD missions is elitist and dishonest. And coming from somone that professes to care about history? Well, let's just say it doesn't help your credibility.

[Elf1606688794]

17 hours ago, doedkoett said:

I don´t get it - is it against the law to fly SEAD/DEAD missions in an F-4E in DCS, or is it the use of the "Weasel" callsign in the video that is the great heresy?

Maybe SEAD is only Wild Weasel if it´s from the Wild Weasel region of Vietnam, else it´s just sparkling SEAD... 
 

I laughed at the Champagne/sparkling wine reference. Well played sir, well played.  

[Elf1606688794]

11 hours ago, Vampyre said:

Yes, Heatblur know their audience. It was made for the masses who don't know or care about the history. That was one of my points and I appreciate the agreement on that part. I maintain that the advertising is false in regard to the F-4E as a Wild Weasel. I have said multiple times that the people who know (mainly the been there done that veterans) are pointing out the squadron discrepancy which is what my original post was partially in response to.

I guess you better quit the game then since we don't have every single variant/livery/weapon/map to make missions that are historically accurate.

If Heatblur had put an F-4G livery on an E for a video on SEAD, you'd still be griping. Most of us understand which livery was used doesn't really matter because that wasn't the point of the video, although I bet it did make some German players happy to see it. (The livery.)

I am going to enjoy doing SEAD missions with the Phantom I worked on and you won't have to partake in that if you don't want to. Beautiful isn't it?

[Omega417]

The video creator could have put our Phantom in a French Navy livery, and had it attacking a British Rapier site, and still called it a Wild Weasel mission. The term has been taken over for a modern meaning.

I personally prefer SEAD/DEAD, but HUNTER/KILLER is also pretty cool. But its way easier to ask a wingman to Weasel that missile site so we can have a better chance at destroying it.

[Stackup]

 

7 hours ago, ben_der said:

It states that, because at the time of writing only the A Model was available. 

We haven't found any technical limitations so far that would inhibit the use of the B once it becomes available.

The AGM-45B is already in game though and available to put on the ED AI unit...   What makes it unavailable for the Heatblur F-4E?

Edited February 5 by Stackup
formatting and post removed my text

[Teknetinium]

Epic Trailer! Love This work! Makes me want to Fly F-4 even if I'm a REDFOR fanboy

[Nodak]

Never mind you don't really have a historical map for an American Wild Weasel in the first place, but who really cares.  LoL

[Gunfreak]

5 minutes ago, Nodak said:

Never mind you don't really have a historical map for an American Wild Weasel in the first place, but who really cares.  LoL

I mean we are getting Iraq, and the F4(G that is) did wild weaseling during Desert Storm and even into the 90s during northern/southern watch. One of the few Ameican F16 air to air kills was during a SEAD mission when the F16 shot down a mig, while defending its F4G buddy.

And I'll use the E as G(I would love an actual G) just as I've used the F16 as an F16A. In DCS he get what we get. There is no plan or its all kinda spaced out play pen. We have to pretend you're flying a P47 razorback in 43 when you P47 is a 1945 P47. Our P51s are also 1945. That's how DCS is, its not because we don't know or don't care. It's that we have no choice.