F-4E bombing modes real world usage?

[SuperKermit]

I just started reading into the manual and came across all those different bombing modes. Now I wonder if and under what circumstances they would be used IRL. 

Which of them were a thing for conventional bombing, which ones only nuclear?

Which ones will be useful for DCS (multiplayer)?

I am mostly into A2A and would like to know, which modes are the most effective and efficient ones. 


 

[felixx75]

In DCS you will probably choose the method that gives you the best results or the most fun (or a combination of both factors).

[SuperKermit]

vor 7 Stunden schrieb felixx75:

In DCS you will probably choose the method that gives you the best results or the most fun (or a combination of both factors).

That’s correct. But not very helpful though 

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

8 hours ago, SuperKermit said:

which ones only nuclear?

As far as I understand, the default nuclear delivery mode that crews trained on IRL was over-the-shoulder, because that maximised the chances of getting out of the blast zone in time. I suspect however, that most pilots saw a nuclear delivery as a one-way ticket (as in: they didn't expect to make it back to base). Good thing it never happened...

Edited February 13 by Raven (Elysian Angel)
typo

[Zabuzard]

I personally can't really elaborate on real world usage; however, I can summarize the modes quickly to give an overview.

Lets start with the loft/toss modes. You got 4 of them:
* LOFT - toss your bomb at a lower pull angle forward.
* Timed Over The Shoulder - toss your bomb at a high pull angle (above 90°)
* Toss - the same, high angle. But this time you designate the target by clicking Bomb Button right above it, instead of over the IP
* TLADD - similar to Loft, but meant to be used from low level and with drogue weapons

Next, we have a set of more basic modes:
* Timed Level - you compute a timer for a preplanned alt/speed etc, fly over the IP, hit hit the button and the timer runs down. Keep flying straight and level, bombs go away.
* Direct - you hit the button and bombs go away immediate, simple. Could also be used for manual mil-bombing
* Offset - you enter the target on the computer by means of an offset to the IP. Once over the IP, press the button and the plane guides you towards the target and auto-releases.

Last but not least, your bread and butter methods of accurate bomb delivery: Variations of Dive Toss:
* Dive Toss - the classic. Dive, put nose on target, WSO "locks" the ground return. Pull up and auto-release
* TGT FIND: same as Dive Toss, but the target is designated by the Pave Spike TGP. This is probably the most flexible way. Put the TGP on target, hold bomb button and auto-release as soon as there's is a solution. Pretty much like CCRP
* DIVE LAYDOWN - like Dive Toss, but for high drag bombs. You pull out level and fly straight until ballistic solution
* LAYDOWN - like Dive Laydown, but without the dive. also for high drags. You precompute a certain mil setting based on alt/speed. Fly that profile level. Once the target is under the pipper, press and hold bomb button and keep flying straight, auto-release

Technically, with the Pave Spike, there is another backup bombing mode called "Release On Range". There, bombs release as soon as the measured slant range goes below a set range threshold.

In practice, most people will likely use Dive Toss and TGT FIND (if they have a Pave Spike), and Dive Laydown for high drag bombs.

The four toss modes are a lot of fun, but obviously fairly inaccurate.

Offset can be interesting if you have very bad visibility on the target area. Timed Level can be good if you drop a whole trail of bombs or cluster ammunition, as it allows you to just release level from high altitude with no visibility (above clouds).

[SuperKermit]

vor 2 Stunden schrieb Zabuzard:

In practice, most people will likely use Dive Toss and TGT FIND (if they have a Pave Spike), and Dive Laydown for high drag bombs.

The four toss modes are a lot of fun, but obviously fairly inaccurate.

Offset can be interesting if you have very bad visibility on the target area. Timed Level can be good if you drop a whole trail of bombs or cluster ammunition, as it allows you to just release level from high altitude with no visibility (above clouds).
 

Fantastic, thanks! That was exactly the information I was looking for!

[IronMike]

There is one more mode, which is beacon bombing - but if, we will only implement that later, as beacons for bombing are currently not present in DCS. This would be the best and most accurate mode for bombing in IMC conditions.

[SuperKermit]

vor 1 Stunde schrieb IronMike:

There is one more mode, which is beacon bombing - but if, we will only implement that later, as beacons for bombing are currently not present in DCS. This would be the best and most accurate mode for bombing in IMC conditions.

And how would that work?

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

7 hours ago, IronMike said:

There is one more mode, which is beacon bombing - but if, we will only implement that later, as beacons for bombing are currently not present in DCS. This would be the best and most accurate mode for bombing in IMC conditions.

I hope DCS gets to include such detail to the core one day

They’ll probably have to at some point, since as others have stated that era is where the future lies if ED wants to keep increasing the fidelity of the sim…

[IronMike]

9 hours ago, SuperKermit said:

And how would that work?

Ground troops place a beacon that knows range and distance to a target. The beacon then gets shielded and hidden. It is not active until pinged by the F-4's radar. Once it does, I am simplifying, it transmits bearing and range to target and once overflown, iirc, like the IP, hold bomb button and steer on target and it will release. So you can do it in full cloud cover, etc. Potentially you could place such beacons a year in advance, for certain potential future targets, say like a factory building, a bridge etc, undiscovered, until needed.

There is yet another mode, skyspot. It is similar to beacon, but it is rather a radar signal/ pencil beam pointed into a specific direction, which you intersect with the airplane, and get similar info as with beacon. This mode will not be implemented, at least for the moment we do not plan on implementing it.

Edited February 17 by IronMike

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

11 hours ago, IronMike said:

The beacon then gets shielded and hidden.

Imagine that scenario on multiplayer servers: a helo flies in at treetop level with a team of special forces aboard carrying that beacon.

Or even as a part of the dynamic campaign this would offer excellent utility to helicopters

[Dragon1-1]

12 hours ago, IronMike said:

There is yet another mode, skyspot. It is similar to beacon, but it is rather a radar signal/ pencil beam pointed into a specific direction, which you intersect with the airplane, and get similar info as with beacon. This mode will not be implemented, at least for the moment we do not plan on implementing it.

Was Combat Skyspot even present on the F-4 that you're making? I know it was used with the D model Phantoms in Vietnam a lot near the war's midpoint, but not so much afterward.

[QuiGon]

22 hours ago, SuperKermit said:

And how would that work?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lima_Site_85

Quite an interesting read

Edited February 17 by QuiGon

[Kirk66]

On 2/17/2024 at 7:06 AM, Dragon1-1 said:

Was Combat Skyspot even present on the F-4 that you're making? I know it was used with the D model Phantoms in Vietnam a lot near the war's midpoint, but not so much afterward.

Absolutely. We practiced Skyspot when I was flying F-4Es in the 36th TFS in Korea in 1978. Never actually dropped anything, but we would go through the whole procedure to exercise the ground stations. Interesting at first, but a bit boring - more of a B-52 thing...

[Dragon1-1]

In that case, I trust HB will find a way to implement the system sooner or later.  However, I'd imagine it would need a core implementation of ground-directed bombing from ED. Which I hope will happen because it will be right at home in WWII and Korea, too, provided the system is flexible enough to simulate all the way the concept was developed over the years. 

It might be boring, but hey, at least you're not dropping JDAMs.  As per Dos Gringos, all you need for that is a monkey, so to speak.  

[LorenLuke]

Worth noting that CTLD has radio beacon drops.

I don't know if the target information for beacon bombing is stored in the beacons themselves or not as described, but having some sort of potential for a special options menu or the like to implement this as a feature alongside them would be neat.

[Temetre]

Am 13.2.2024 um 13:34 schrieb SuperKermit:

I just started reading into the manual and came across all those different bombing modes. Now I wonder if and under what circumstances they would be used IRL. 

You already got good answers, but ive heard some anecdotes about Dive Toss. Apparently some pilots disliked it, but a few also got really well trained in it and had really good results. So its definitely been used to effect, even if it wasnt always popular.

I imagine thats also gonna be the most commonly used mode, its amazing in the A4 SKyhawk.

Edited February 21 by Temetre

[SuperKermit]

Am 21.2.2024 um 17:04 schrieb Temetre:

You already got good answers, but ive heard some anecdotes about Dive Toss. Apparently some pilots disliked it, but a few also got really well trained in it and had really good results. So its definitely been used to effect, even if it wasnt always popular.

I imagine thats also gonna be the most commonly used mode, its amazing in the A4 SKyhawk.

 

To my understanding Dive Toss was not very popular amongst some of the pilots because the system itself was not very reliable. I remember one quote: "when it worked, it was very precise. But a lot of times the system was inop." 

[Kalasnkova74]

8 hours ago, SuperKermit said:

To my understanding Dive Toss was not very popular amongst some of the pilots because the system itself was not very reliable. I remember one quote: "when it worked, it was very precise. But a lot of times the system was inop." 

Dive Toss was a scandal back in the TAC days,as the system was inop so often it wasn’t possible for crews to quality. Squadrons started falsifying their statistics instead of reporting the issues until a Wing got busted. 

[Temetre]

Aye, so also might be a maintenance issue in Vietnam? Or pilot mistake, wouldnt be the first time that causes issues with new tech (see Sparrow^^).

[Kalasnkova74]

1 hour ago, Temetre said:

Aye, so also might be a maintenance issue in Vietnam? Or pilot mistake, wouldnt be the first time that causes issues with new tech (see Sparrow^^).

The Dive Toss scandal happened after the Vietnam War. Since the crews were mandated to qualify with the system, but qualifying was infeasible due to  inoperative equipment , most squadrons and wings in TAC simply lied about the sorties by “pencil whipping” their stats.
 

Anyone who told the Generals the system wasn’t working earned a carpet dance because the brass would point to another Wing -which was publishing fraudulent data- and ask why the honest units couldn’t do the same thing. Eventually Holloman AFB got busted for an Air Force wide crime; Captain (at the time) Ron Keys’ letter explains it further 

 

Lie about your
DOC capability because you’re afraid to report you don’t have the sorties to hack
it. “Yes, sir, losing two airplanes won’t hurt us at all.” The party line. I listened to a
three-star general look a room full of us in the face and say that he “didn’t realize
that pencil-whipping records was done in the Air Force. Holloman, and dive toss
was an isolated case, I’m sure.” It was embarrassing—that general looked us in
the eye and said, in effect, “Gentlemen, either I’m very stupid or I’m lying to you.” 

 

 

[Temetre]

Am 23.2.2024 um 20:11 schrieb Kalasnkova74:

The Dive Toss scandal happened after the Vietnam War. Since the crews were mandated to qualify with the system, but qualifying was infeasible due to  inoperative equipment , most squadrons and wings in TAC simply lied about the sorties by “pencil whipping” their stats.
 

Anyone who told the Generals the system wasn’t working earned a carpet dance because the brass would point to another Wing -which was publishing fraudulent data- and ask why the honest units couldn’t do the same thing. Eventually Holloman AFB got busted for an Air Force wide crime; Captain (at the time) Ron Keys’ letter explains it further 

 

Lie about your
DOC capability because you’re afraid to report you don’t have the sorties to hack
it. “Yes, sir, losing two airplanes won’t hurt us at all.” The party line. I listened to a
three-star general look a room full of us in the face and say that he “didn’t realize
that pencil-whipping records was done in the Air Force. Holloman, and dive toss
was an isolated case, I’m sure.” It was embarrassing—that general looked us in
the eye and said, in effect, “Gentlemen, either I’m very stupid or I’m lying to you.” 

Ive also seen Zabu on the Discord mention some pretty big bugs: For example it was like, whenever the target altitude would be above current planet altitude, the pod would just go stupid and revert to fallback mode. 

They did make a version with fixed software and stuff later. I think the HB F-4 will have both versions.

[Zabuzard]

Ive also seen Zabu on the Discord mention some pretty big bugs: For example it was like, whenever the target altitude would be above current planet altitude, the pod would just go stupid and revert to fallback mode. 
They did make a version with fixed software and stuff later. I think the HB F-4 will have both versions.

yeah, there are pretty much 3 logic issues in the pod from which one got fixed in a upgrade:
- when u laser, the pod will reject the measured slant range if it differs from the manually computed slant range (based on baro alt and tgt alt entered in panel) by too much. this is a safety mechanism to not throw the pod completely off when u accidently lase against ur wing or similar (masked), since the pod does the "stabilization" math based on the slant range. however, in certain situations this measurement difference could lead to rejecting ur accurate measurement. there's a button to force accepting the laset range and pilots for into a habit of hammering the button all the time. this got patched later and the pod will autoaccept laser range if the target is "forward" (around 0 deg pod pitch)

- the pod can't handle the logic for the controls above 0 degrees (looking up), they invert and calculation is bad

- the pod can't handle targets that are computed to be above u. this can either happen bc u attempt to attack uphill or bc u entered a wrong tgt alt on the panel or bc ur barometric altimeter is set incorrectly regarding local pressure. in this case, the pod pretty much freaks out. it tries to move the camera to the computed invalid position and the immediately throws the pod into memory mode since it's outside of gimbal limits. attempting to leave memory mode will instantly kick it back in again. this was called the "idiot mode". in the heat of the moment, they usually disabled the ins integration to the pod, which regains full control but without stabilization

[Kirk66]

For all the whining about dive toss and Pave Spike, when I was using them they were definitely the way to go if you expected to hit anything in a tactical scenario, such as a pop attack on a target at Red Flag. Dive Toss worked - when maintained. What a surprise! Spike was a bit crude but when you understood the pitfalls (which are not really a big problem if you are paying any attention and do some proper mission planning) was a pretty good way to deliver LGBs. 

RTFM, plan the mission, fly the plan, RTB and drink Weed in the club afterwards.

 

[G.J.S]

10 hours ago, Kirk66 said:

. . . RTB and drink Weed in the club afterwards.

 

Ahhh, that green and gold label that is usually seen just before a period of forgetfulness!
Had to join in on a round once, and all I could think as I swallowed it was “f#ck me!!?!”.

Strong stuff. Now a lot more widely available . . . . For research purposes of course.

Edited April 7 by G.J.S