Is there aything new'er that can be added to F-5E to bring it into early 1990's?

[DmitriKozlowsky]

Is there aything new'er that can be added to F-5E to bring it into early 1990's

Can ED update F-5E realistically to bring it into at least late 1980's early 1990's?

AIM-9M and AIM-9 on wing pylons allowing carriage up to four.

Self protection jammer and expanded chaff/flare

ILS

radar upgrade

Some kind of INS nav system.

Pre revolution Shah Of Iran Air Force F-5E were photogrpahed with AGM-65 and AIM-7(M/F??)

Anything? Buhler? Anything

 

Right now DCS: F-5E is wearing 1960's GoGo boots and early 1970's bell bottoms, and navigates by dead reckoning in VFR only.

[nairb121]

The F-5 has been used by many countries in various upgraded configurations. Most of the stuff you listed has been on one variant or another... not necessarily all at once though, and generally not as early as the 90s. Ours is about as good as it would've been in the 90s, though some users had in-flight refueling and an expanded A-G capability (I know some 90s upgrades had Maverick capability). Most of the "big" stuff, with upgraded radars, INS/GPS, and limited BVR would've been in the 2000s-2010s.

Our F-5 isn't a 60s F-5A, it's a early 80s F-5E-3 - so it would not have actually been all that dated by the 90s, given the expected capabilities for its role as a cheap, reliable light fighter.

I've never seen anything on it carrying AIM-7 though, nor Maverick as early as pre-revolutionary Iran - do you have a photo you can share?

[DmitriKozlowsky]

19 hours ago, nairb121 said:

The F-5 has been used by many countries in various upgraded configurations. Most of the stuff you listed has been on one variant or another... not necessarily all at once though, and generally not as early as the 90s. Ours is about as good as it would've been in the 90s, though some users had in-flight refueling and an expanded A-G capability (I know some 90s upgrades had Maverick capability). Most of the "big" stuff, with upgraded radars, INS/GPS, and limited BVR would've been in the 2000s-2010s.

Our F-5 isn't a 60s F-5A, it's a early 80s F-5E-3 - so it would not have actually been all that dated by the 90s, given the expected capabilities for its role as a cheap, reliable light fighter.

I've never seen anything on it carrying AIM-7 though, nor Maverick as early as pre-revolutionary Iran - do you have a photo you can share?

My error. THose were Singapore F-5S(or ES) with Israeli mods for PYthon carry.  Google Earth sat data of Puento Arenas airport/airbase caught three Chilean AF F-5s on runway. I figure that Chilean F-5 had some equivalency to Brazilian F-5Ms.

 

After more then 10 years of DCS: F-5E (I got it in 2014) its now boring. I use F-5E for fixed recurrent stick&rudder practice, as its fast and easy to start and fly.

[dolfo]

Not expecting anything out of this, just stating the fact that INS, ILS (and also air-to-air refueling) was available in 1974.

Reference this 1974 manual
https://www.eflightmanuals.com/ITEM_EFM/SDETAIL_EFM.asp?mID=8997

 

Now imagine if the F-5 module was done by a third party like AERGES? We'd probably have an F-5E-1, F-5E-3, F-5F already done and an F-5M in the works...

 

[Kev2go]

On 10/4/2024 at 2:45 AM, DmitriKozlowsky said:

Is there aything new'er that can be added to F-5E to bring it into early 1990's

Can ED update F-5E realistically to bring it into at least late 1980's early 1990's?

AIM-9M and AIM-9 on wing pylons allowing carriage up to four.

Self protection jammer and expanded chaff/flare

ILS

radar upgrade

Some kind of INS nav system.

Pre revolution Shah Of Iran Air Force F-5E were photogrpahed with AGM-65 and AIM-7(M/F??)

Anything? Buhler? Anything

 

Right now DCS: F-5E is wearing 1960's GoGo boots and early 1970's bell bottoms, and navigates by dead reckoning in VFR only.

the F5E's in USAF and USN aggressors squadrons didnt have RWR or CM  even post cold war in the 1990s. That feature was not existent until the US navy  buybacks of Swiss F5E's going into retirement. Enter the US navy F5N circa 2006, although the Swiss F5E's did have INS and Digital Radios. the F5N  section of Natops manual references Aim9M/CATM-9M combability for wingtip pylons. But navy apparently also started removing guns from F5N's.

 

 

Edited December 5, 2024 by Kev2go

[Stackup]

On 12/4/2024 at 11:11 PM, Kev2go said:

the F5E's in USAF and USN aggressors squadrons didnt have RWR or CM  even post cold war in the 1990s. That feature was not existent until the US navy  buybacks of Swiss F5E's going into retirement. Enter the US navy F5N circa 2006, although the Swiss F5E's did have INS and Digital Radios. the F5N  section of Natops manual references Aim9M/CATM-9M combability for wingtip pylons. But navy apparently also started removing guns from F5N's.

So where exactly does ED get off saying they are modeling a specific version (F-5E-3) and saying all sorts of optional export equipment is off the table when they didn't even properly model the version they chose in the first place?  Why does our F-5E have some of the Swiss upgrades but not all?  Do we have a Swiss F-5E or a US F-5E?  Why is it more of an aggressor variant instead of the standard USAF F-5E (preferably with a proper early bare metal livery)?  Seems to me it is just another hodgepodge instead of a specific model despite what ED claims to the contrary.

[Kev2go]

On 12/7/2024 at 12:23 AM, Stackup said:

Do we have a Swiss F-5E or a US F-5E?  Why is it more of an aggressor variant instead of the standard USAF F-5E (preferably with a proper early bare metal livery)? 

Because the US never employed the F5E in any official combat capacity. IT was only ever adopted and operated as an aggressor aircraft.

 

On 12/7/2024 at 12:23 AM, Stackup said:

 

Seems to me it is just another hodgepodge instead of a specific model despite what ED claims to the contrary.

 youd be correct. it is not 100% accurate to any US variant.  IF it lacked RWR and CM, it would otherwise be accurate to a USAF aggressor operated F5E3. it makes sense from a pragmatic POV to include RWR and countermeasures, since  your F5E would  otherwise be really handicapped without those even in cold war multiplayer servers against contemporaries.

but i wonder why they didn't Do digital radios or INS at that point it would be a Swiss F5E3 or USN F5N. Maybe it was cutting development cost to omit additional radios and INS. I dont know the real reason but   i  would say it was not due to lack of documentation. Id be confident enough to assume they had the Natops manual as reference material that covered the F5N. ( given DCS F5E specifically mentions ALR87 rwr and CM combo) 

Edited December 9, 2024 by Kev2go

[NineLine]

To bring our F-5E more in line with the Swiss F-5E operating with US forces, we are open to investigating the addition of the digital radios and the INS. However, public information on the operations of these appear to be limited. If anyone is aware of such data, kindly message us and we’d be happy to take a look. Thanks all!

[nairb121]

1 hour ago, NineLine said:

To bring our F-5E more in line with the Swiss F-5E operating with US forces, we are open to investigating the addition of the digital radios and the INS. However, public information on the operations of these appear to be limited. If anyone is aware of such data, kindly message us and we’d be happy to take a look. Thanks all!

Is the 2006 F-5E/F/N NATOPS considered to be a public document? If it is, I assume your team would probably be aware of it already, but I wanted to confirm.

[NineLine]

40 minutes ago, nairb121 said:

Is the 2006 F-5E/F/N NATOPS considered to be a public document? If it is, I assume your team would probably be aware of it already, but I wanted to confirm.

2006 would probably still be controlled, but if you know of a valid legal place to download from then it could possibly be useable. I generally only see the older ones out there. 

[Xhonas]

4 hours ago, NineLine said:

To bring our F-5E more in line with the Swiss F-5E operating with US forces, we are open to investigating the addition of the digital radios and the INS. However, public information on the operations of these appear to be limited. If anyone is aware of such data, kindly message us and we’d be happy to take a look. Thanks all!

Since you are considering adding features to the F-5 remaster, please, consider listening to the community requests. Refueling probe, 4x Aim-9s and Mavericks... I know it wouldn't be accurate with the version you are simulating, but still, we have many "frankenjets" in DCS already. Adding the listed features would give more versatility to the module. You did something similar to the Hornet. The Walleye, our version of the Hornet didn't operate with the Walleye, yet, you decided to implement it to give more versatility to the players. So, why not do the same to the F-5? If you are very concerned with realism, a middle term would be creating tickboxes on the ME, that way, the mission designers could adjust which weapon / system would be available for the F-5. Doing that would be a huge PR win for you, just saying.

[Kev2go]

On 12/17/2024 at 12:30 PM, NineLine said:

To bring our F-5E more in line with the Swiss F-5E operating with US forces, we are open to investigating the addition of the digital radios and the INS. However, public information on the operations of these appear to be limited. If anyone is aware of such data, kindly message us and we’d be happy to take a look. Thanks all!

I was assuming ED already had such information. I dont see how the ALR87 rwr was even modelled if the development team didn't have a 2006 Natops manual F5E/F/N as reference material back when the module was being developed. 

 

Edited December 22, 2024 by Kev2go

[dolfo]

On 12/17/2024 at 6:30 PM, NineLine said:

To bring our F-5E more in line with the Swiss F-5E operating with US forces, we are open to investigating the addition of the digital radios and the INS. However, public information on the operations of these appear to be limited. If anyone is aware of such data, kindly message us and we’d be happy to take a look. Thanks all!

INS here:
Reference this 1974 manual
https://www.eflightmanuals.com/ITEM_EFM/SDETAIL_EFM.asp?mID=8997

Also AAR probe, hint hint.

[Kev2go]

11 hours ago, dolfo said:

INS here:
Reference this 1974 manual
https://www.eflightmanuals.com/ITEM_EFM/SDETAIL_EFM.asp?mID=8997

Also AAR probe, hint hint.

yeah it appears to be the same Inertial navigator thats referenced in the 2006 natops. So yeah guess this INS was available as early as 1974 for the customers that wanted it. 

[_BringTheReign_]

On 12/17/2024 at 12:30 PM, NineLine said:

To bring our F-5E more in line with the Swiss F-5E operating with US forces, we are open to investigating the addition of the digital radios and the INS. However, public information on the operations of these appear to be limited. If anyone is aware of such data, kindly message us and we’d be happy to take a look. Thanks all!

Hey @NineLine, would you also consider the Quad missile loadout of the Swiss F-5E's?

Edited January 13 by _BringTheReign_

[Thamiel]

On 12/17/2024 at 6:30 PM, NineLine said:

To bring our F-5E more in line with the Swiss F-5E operating with US forces, we are open to investigating the addition of the digital radios and the INS.

I wonder if the Swiss operated their F-5Es without NVGs.

[Stratos]

On 1/13/2025 at 9:54 PM, _BringTheReign_ said:

 would you also consider the Quad missile loadout of the Swiss F-5E's?

And the Alouette III behind it

Edited January 18 by Stratos

[twistking]

On 1/13/2025 at 9:54 PM, _BringTheReign_ said:

Hey @NineLine, would you also consider the Quad missile loadout of the Swiss F-5E's?

Quad missile loadout would add a lot to the module (double the firepower for people who suck at gunfighting) for minor development cost. It would make the little fighter much more deadly and with the ME loadout restriction feature, mission builders could always prohibit quad carriage if the limited firepower is what's desired for the scenario...

[twistking]

10 minutes ago, twistking said:

Quad missile loadout would add a lot to the module (double the firepower for people who suck at gunfighting) for minor development cost. It would make the little fighter much more deadly and with the ME loadout restriction feature, mission builders could always prohibit quad carriage if the limited firepower is what's desired for the scenario...

The Swiss F-5s were not able to carry Mavericks, were they?

[cailean_556]

Introduction

I know that 'in reality', the specific subject aircraft was very limited in what it could, and could not, carry. I know that in US service the F-5E was used mainly as an aggressor for DACT (Dissimilar Air Combat Training) or similar roles. I know that the F-5E we have in DCS is the F-5E-3. If we're going to hoist the flag of realism real high, then the F-5E-3 we have in DCS shouldn't be used for actual (as far as DCS goes) combat. 

However, I will point this out: the remaster module is called the "F-5E Remaster" and the (now deprecated) original module is also called the "F-5E Tiger II". There's no mention of the "F-5E-3 Tiger II/F-5E-3 Remaster". With that in mind, hear me out.

Improvements and capabilities have been added to modules before due to high demand, or because it suited, in the past. Point I'm making is the precedent of adding capabilities to aircraft that didn't have them previously is there. Looking at you, Ka-50 Blackshark III and A-10C II Tank Kiler.

To be fair, I've seen more people asking for an extra pair of AIM-9s, AGM-65 Mavericks and an IFR probe on the F-5E for nearly a decade than I have for an upgraded Ka-50, or the F-35. But I'm not on the forums or Discord often. So considering 'high demand' was one of the reasons cited for the development of the F-35, it stands to reason 'high demand' here might be worth a bit more consideration.

The F-5E represents a very broad range of aircraft that were tailored to meet the needs of their specific customer nations and/or were modified by their customer nations to suit their needs once delivered. They were 'modular by design' before being modular was a corporate buzzword, to cater for differing requirements (or incentives) among US allies. Local modifications, modifications fitted during the build based on customer specifications... Even today, some countries still use F-5s as lead-in fighter trainers - though admittedly far more advanced than the module we have in DCS.

4x AIM-9s

Adding an extra pair of AIM-9s to the F-5E is probably the "easiest" addition to add for ED. And, like the F-16 carrying 4x AGM-88s, there's evidence that this was trialed though not widely adopted - due to the cost-benefit of adding extra drag to a light, underpowered airframe - something DCS pilots don't worry about all that much. The aircraft already knows how to fire AIM-9s. To facilitate the missiles (both in reality and in DCS), the outer pylons need to be fitted with a missile rail (likely a LAU-7 given the timeframe, although they could very well have been LAU-100/101s that were taken off the wingtips - outside my wheelhouse). I am assuming the pylons themselves probably needed to be modified/rewired - something that isn't required in DCS. In terms of PVI, the only extra thing the pilot needs to do is flip the outer pylon arming switches, in addition to the wingtip switches. I can't say for certain the sequence of firing but given I've read that the pylons were super draggy (not unlike the dual R-60 rails on the MiG-21) it would make sense if the missiles on the pylons were fired first (to reduce drag), then the wingtips.

IFR Probe

The IFR probe is another "easy" addition - and while even the -3 never had them fitted, the airframe was absolutely capable of having it fitted because that's how they were designed from the factory. It requires a model of the IFR probe to be made (a fairly "simple" asset to make, considering) and then requires the coding in the background to facilitate aerial refueling. The probe itself could be an optional extra in the Mission Editor/Arming menu. Tiger Century Aircraft (Tiger Century Aircraft) might be a great place to start for advice, they've assisted several countries with upgrading their F-5 fleets - Chile, Brazil, the Philippines, Taiwan. They even have some basic info on their (modern) system for quad AIM-9s (though I'm unsure if they were the original developer of the system - still handy to know) here: Products — Tiger Century Aircraft.

I'm not demanding ED do the above (though I would honestly like it if they decided to...please?), but I'd be very surprised if any of the coders and artists working for ED, being used to churning out (relatively speaking) modules and assets month in and month out, couldn't achieve these "simple" additions in their sleep.

In addition to the radios and INS that ED is considering adding, if they can get documentation (as per NineLine), the above additions expand the capability of the module in DCS, enable it to simulate the aircraft of multiple other countries (in and around the locales we have, or are getting) and also provide incentive to purchase the Remaster for those not seeing the benefit (other than enhanced graphical fidelity).

AGM-65B Mavericks

The addition of AGM-65 Mavericks was fielded as early as the early 80s. This is where the 'mighty' F-5E-3 falls down because the display used in the -3 lacks the ability to show TV signals - which kills the -3's ability to use Mavericks. HOWEVER... With a not-insignificant-effort on behalf of the 3D artists, and much like the nuclear weapon operation panel installation and removal of the main-gear doors that occurs when a nuclear bomb is fitted to the MiG-21, we could go from the 'normal' F-5E-3 cockpit:

to this, if Mavericks are fitted to the aircraft (Taiwanese F-5E or F-5F with the AN/APQ-159-1 or -2 display, if it's an F):

That particular display allows the F-5E to aim and fire Mavericks. The dimensions appear extremely similar between the -1 and -3 radar displays and the cockpits are practically identical, save the display and External Stores selector. Moroccan F-5Es were rocking IFR probes and AGM-65B Mavericks during the West Saharan War in the late 70s/early 80s...

The External stores switch (which you may notice also has an extra position compared to the one in DCS currently) is turned right 1 place to 'AGM-65', the radar screen switches to display the Maverick seeker image, the missiles "warm up" (I think they actually cool down - don't they?) then displays the picture and the radar controls double as the controls for aiming and locking the Maverick... Ta-da! F-5E with Mavericks. So "simple", right? "Simple" because it's really anything but, but it's easier than making an entirely new F-5 module...

Alternatively, the Maverick cockpit/capability could be an ME/Rearming menu option.

While, realistically, such a modification to a F-5E-3 would take days, if not weeks, in DCS we don't have to worry about that aspect. Likewise, given the 'modular' nature of the F-5E in reality, if a country still using F-5Es today were to buy an F-5E-3 'back in the day', it is not outside the realms of plausibility that they could 'upgrade' that F-5E-3 to a standard that fit their needs relatively easily (TCA existing as a company is proof of that - but for more modern variants of the F-5, obviously). As far as I can tell, AGM-65s can be carried on either wing pylons - allowing up to 4x AGM-65s: a stupidly heavy and impractical load for a very small plane - but the F-16 can carry 4x AGM-88s in DCS so... They only seem to be the TV-guided AGM-65B versions (unsure about Laser or IR) - at least in the 80s.

Conclusion

What a proposal like the above has going for it over adding a late 90s/early 2000s F-5 with BVR and TGP and EW and all that jazz (which would rightly be a different module - namely an F-5EM, or an F-5E TIII, or F-5S) is that, despite the module subject being a -3, the additional capabilities were not outside the realms of F-5Es around the timeframe of this particular aircraft. 'F-5E Tiger II' is what it says 'on the box', after all. It's the same radar, the same engines, the same cockpit layout (except the Maverick specific items if using Mavericks) and the work required by ED is comparatively minor considering the work that went into module upgrades like the Ka-50 and A-10C.

Is this, or some similar request, in high demand? There are many, many instances of this request dating back nearly 10 years. Would more people consider buying the F-5 if this were to become a reality? You tell me. Who'd buy the Remaster, or the module if they don't own the original, if it came with the option of quad AIM-9s, AGM-65Bs and IFR?

Thanks for coming to my TED Talk...

[cailean_556]

On 1/18/2025 at 9:49 PM, twistking said:

The Swiss F-5s were not able to carry Mavericks, were they?

The Swiss Air Force is strictly anti-air/air policing, I don't believe they have a proper ground attack capability at all now (the Hawker Hunters were their CAS aircraft, after they were retired they had nothing).

Tigers were too expensive to outfit apparently, and the funding for AG weapons for the Hornets (one of the reasons they were acquired in the first place) was reallocated. I'm not sure if an AG capability will be re-adopted when they get their F-35s.

[WRCRob]

The interesting thing is that there is already an IFR mod out there and it is really only needing the "plumbing" hooked up and the switch panel wired in for it to be a fully functional thing. Now I am not sure l, but I would venture a guess that the asset could be had for a thank you shout out in a news letter or a trivial amount of exchange, and that would shave off 90% of the dev time for ED. The Aim9 pylons as you said @cailean_556 are a visual asset and a few lines of code away from activity. All of this is very low hanging fruit for ED to put a devs time into while waiting for something to compile and have a huge return on the investment with the customer bases perception of the company. It's just very frustrating to see this not become a thing. 

As much as I would love to also see a fully fitted out EM or Tiger 3 or the holy grail of an F-20. I can see the justification on ROI, and from how I've been thinking about it since I bought it, the Jeff fills that role nicely when you put a favorite livery to it (shout-out to D1tch3r for his sweet South East Asia camo livery). But if I ever win the lottery.....there will be a privately funded Tiger upgrade somehow to the modern versions or an F-20. 

[twistking]

13 hours ago, WRCRob said:

[...] All of this is very low hanging fruit for ED to put a devs time into while waiting for something to compile and have a huge return on the investment with the customer bases perception of the company. It's just very frustrating to see this not become a thing. [...]

I guess it's a tiny bit more work than that, but your argument is still valid. With ED being all about passion in their official communication, the F5 remaster feels distinctly lacking in just that.
One does not really get the feeling that it was developed by people who were themselves excited about it...

[BIGNEWY]

5 minutes ago, twistking said:

I guess it's a tiny bit more work than that, but your argument is still valid. With ED being all about passion in their official communication, the F5 remaster feels distinctly lacking in just that.
One does not really get the feeling that it was developed by people who were themselves excited about it...

And yet you are wrong. 

Look I get you may not be happy or something may not be to your liking but please dont take it out on our team, your wishes wont always be granted, you may have different wants than other people. 

thank you 

[BalkanBattler]

1 hour ago, BIGNEWY said:

And yet you are wrong. 

Look I get you may not be happy or something may not be to your liking but please dont take it out on our team, your wishes wont always be granted, you may have different wants than other people. 

thank you 

@BIGNEWY

Hey happy to see you here! Thank you for the F-5E remaster. Other members of your team (nineline) have expressed that ED is  willing to revisit some of the features of the Swiss F-5E's - could you forward to the devs that the Swiss did in fact fly with 4x sidewinders? For maybe 10 years the users have been asking for this feature in this forum, I can link many many posts. This is the specific model of Swiss F-5E we have in DCS now, so can you guys include it? 

We're not asking for pythons or missiles that were available to Columbian or other air forces. This is specifically a  swiss jet with 4x sidewinders (which was tested, validated, and certified by Northrop and the USAF for export)
null