Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

While watching this video (at 4:10):

I began to wonder whether it would be much work to add in an ILS receiver to the F-5. While the late 1980s USAF Aggressor F-5Es modeled in-game may not have been equipped with them, T-38s in the US and F-5Es flown by other nations possessed ILS receivers, and it would add a good deal of flexibility to the plane.

US manuals for the F-5E-1 include sections on ILS functionality and equipment, such as at page 1-100 to 1-106 of this manual: https://www.docdroid.com/51orrvC/northrop-f-5ef-flight-manual-pdf#page=111

And changes from the -3 subvariant I have seen do not mention that has changed. As the F-5 needs one more VOR/ILS panel and an added ILS mode to the existing TACAN/DF switch, and VOR/ILS functionality exists within other aircraft made by ED, this may be feasible with low developer workload.

The in-game Tiger is currently a fair weather fighter, unable to make a precision instrument approach, and would benefit greatly from all-weather landing capability.

Edited by SabreDancer
  • Like 2
Posted

Non-Precision approach minimums are sufficient for what the F-5 does. 
 600 ft  universally and as low as 400 in some spots  

If the F-5 needs an ILS, it shouldn’t even bother to sortie. 

  • Like 1

 

 

 

 

EDsignaturefleet.jpg

Posted

I understand non-precision approaches can handle the job well enough in-game, but it's more fun to have one than not. Foreign customers in real life felt the need to have it, after all, as did the US on their T-38s.

Posted
4 hours ago, SabreDancer said:

I understand non-precision approaches can handle the job well enough in-game, but it's more fun to have one than not. Foreign customers in real life felt the need to have it, after all, as did the US on their T-38s.

T-38 is a trainer and required the ILS for the curriculum. I imagine the foreign buyers put the ILS in for much the same reason, proficiency in procedures versus any combat usefulness. 
 

 

  • Like 2

 

 

 

 

EDsignaturefleet.jpg

Posted
13 hours ago, SabreDancer said:

The in-game Tiger is currently a fair weather fighter, unable to make a precision instrument approach, and would benefit greatly from all-weather landing capability.

 

For the record, IRL PAR approaches can get a plane not equipped with ILS or GPS down to 200 feet.

  • Like 1
Posted
3 hours ago, Cab said:

For the record, IRL PAR approaches can get a plane not equipped with ILS or GPS down to 200 feet.

I forgot about PAR/GSR. Those are pretty exciting IRL. 

TBH, the way the weather works in DCS makes ILS pretty useless. Trying to get ILS mins at one airport is going to sock in all the rest, generally speaking.

  • Like 1

 

 

 

 

EDsignaturefleet.jpg

Posted
5 hours ago, =475FG= Dawger said:

I forgot about PAR/GSR. Those are pretty exciting IRL. 

Yes, they certainly could be.

My guess is the USAF made the decision PAR’s were sufficient for the F-5 and saved money not installing ILS. 

Posted
2 hours ago, Cab said:

Yes, they certainly could be.

My guess is the USAF made the decision PAR’s were sufficient for the F-5 and saved money not installing ILS. 

Aggressor F-5’s were in the desert and if the equipment is installed it has to be maintained and the pilots have to maintain proficiency. Easy decision to not bother with ILS. And it really isn’t needed. 
 

In 15,000 hours flying all over the world in all kinds of weather, I probably needed ILS to see the runway less than 500 times, maybe a lot less than that. Never once in a desert. 

 

 

 

 

EDsignaturefleet.jpg

Posted
22 minutes ago, =475FG= Dawger said:

Aggressor F-5’s were in the desert and if the equipment is installed it has to be maintained and the pilots have to maintain proficiency. Easy decision to not bother with ILS. And it really isn’t needed. 
 

In 15,000 hours flying all over the world in all kinds of weather, I probably needed ILS to see the runway less than 500 times, maybe a lot less than that. Never once in a desert. 

My thoughts exactly. 
 

Except to be precise, I believe Aggressor F-5’s were also based in England and the Philippines.

  • Like 1
  • 8 months later...
Posted
On 3/19/2024 at 5:04 PM, =475FG= Dawger said:

Aggressor F-5’s were in the desert and if the equipment is installed it has to be maintained and the pilots have to maintain proficiency. Easy decision to not bother with ILS. And it really isn’t needed. 
 

In 15,000 hours flying all over the world in all kinds of weather, I probably needed ILS to see the runway less than 500 times, maybe a lot less than that. Never once in a desert. 

Some of the Navy F5 agressors were fitted with VOR/ILS

  • Like 1

 

Build:

 

Windows 10 64 bit Pro

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z790 Motherboard, Intel Core i7 12700k ,Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 64gb ram (3600 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia RTX 3080 12gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; Samsung 970 EVo, , Samsung evo 860 pro 1 TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD,  WD 1TB HDD

 

  • 1 month later...
Posted
On 3/19/2024 at 8:12 PM, SabreDancer said:

I'd love to have PAR available in DCS, as well.

How would that work in practice? The controller would guide pilots through radio?

  • Like 1

My improved* wishlist after a decade with DCS ⭐⭐⭐⭐🌟

*now with 17% more wishes compared to the original

Posted (edited)

Yep! They're pretty neat, from my experience. The controller has a radar which can tell exactly where you are in relation to the ideal glideslope and centerline, and gives you steering and descent commands to land. They're required to speak every so often, so there's constant communication. "Turn left 5 degrees, on glidepath. On course, on glidepath. Going left of course, on glidepath. Left of course, on glidepath. On course, on glidepath. On course, above glidepath. One mile to touchdown," so on and so forth.

It also requires no special equipment on the landing aircraft, which is nice.

Edited by SabreDancer
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...