ED Forums

ED Forums (https://forums.eagle.ru/index.php)
-   DCS: Eurofighter (https://forums.eagle.ru/forumdisplay.php?f=730)
-   -   What model / batch is the aircraft in? (https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=267620)

Kev2go 03-27-2020 08:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AeriaGloria (Post 4261539)
Even with HARMs they still need the capability to have American B61s integrated for NATO commitments. The Growler ticks all those boxes.

Im sure they would be just as uneasy opening up the Typhoon to US for HARM integration as they are about B61


and whats so uneasy about the missile alone? they can decide to choose their own way to integrate the missile. IN a digital era it really is not hard to make a munition compatible as long as pylon is the same MIL standard of serial data bus, and then if nessary designing your own software interface for a particular weapon mode.

The EF already can use us missiles like Aim9 and Aim120. they also have MIDS/Link 16 which is a US designed datalink pushed to be NATO standard. They already accepted those into operation.

I get nukes are more touchy,

Why is B61 so important? lobbing tactical nukes is kinda of redundant in era of guided standoff munitions, and especially with intercontinental ballistic missiles. Its not easy to penetrate modern air defenses without stealth. trying toss lob a nuke requires flying nearly right on top of your intended target.

Canada for eg is part of NATO but has decided to scrap any nuclear arsenal. With guided long range missiles and USA alone in nato having enough nukes to destroy earth 10 times over, on top off all that > it doesn't seem necessary. IS it really necessary to have a additional personal nuclear stockpile for national interests as long as your a NATO member?

AeriaGloria 03-27-2020 08:50 PM

Well the new B61 is guided, and I’m sure you’re right about HARMs maybe not being such a big deal, but I guess they decided to take over the nuclear carriage role from someone else in NATO(Turkey?, EDIT: never mind looks like Tornado was B61 certified, so they have been obligated to it for a long time) I don’t know, would have to do more research on it.

I would love to see Eurofighter do everything, but something DCS has taught me is how sensitive even allies can be with sharing military technology.

If the Typhoon ECR was ready for 2020 that would probably have changed things.

TLTeo 03-27-2020 09:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kev2go (Post 4261541)
F104 aint the best comparison as that is a much older aircraft design, and from a timeframe where avionics were analog. Back in those days you practically needed to have 2 separate A2A and A2G aircraft to be good at both roles
BY todays standards it an old way of doing things, and certainly not efficient on more modest military budgets.


I'm aware, all I'm saying is that it's how the Italian Air Force has always done it.

Miasma 03-28-2020 12:01 AM

I'm just praying we get ASRAAM at some point when they add other nationalities capabilities.

Spectre11 03-28-2020 04:04 AM

If looking at the screenshots I can see both T1 and T2 jets being shown. That's evident from the tactical serials and the cockpit layout.

Mandellorian 03-28-2020 05:48 AM

I`m not sure the Typhoon will go down the HARM route..not with SPEAR-EW in the works..Taking 12 Anti-radiation missiles while retaining a full air to air loadout is a nasty proposition.

bies 03-28-2020 08:03 AM

It would be the best to model Block 5, most modern and most common variant of Tranche 1. Previous blocks had been upgraded to Block 5 also since 2006.

The more modern variant the less realistic. Faithfully modeled Tranche 1 is a lot better than castrated and guestimated Tranche 2.

And Tranche 1 will fit the timeframe and will be compatible with other modern modules in DCS like F-16C, F/A-18C, AV-8NA, A-10C which are all modeled as 2003-2007 variantd. It allows realistic scenarios in both SP and MP.

AeriaGloria 03-28-2020 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bies (Post 4262011)
It would be the best to model Block 5, most modern and most common variant of Tranche 1. Previous blocks had been upgraded to Block 5 also since 2006.

The more modern variant the less realistic. Faithfully modeled Tranche 1 is a lot better than castrated and guestimated Tranche 2.

And Tranche 1 will fit the timeframe and will be compatible with other modern modules in DCS like F-16C, F/A-18C, AV-8NA, A-10C which are all modeled as 2003-2007 variantd. It allows realistic scenarios in both SP and MP.

On the recent EF block versions post it was said that in many ways T2 are functionally inferior to late T1, having a software advantage but things like AG gun going away before coming back

bies 03-28-2020 02:11 PM

Another reason to have Tranche 1 block 5.

Kev2go 03-28-2020 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bies (Post 4262427)
Another reason to have Tranche 1 block 5.

AS long as it has LGB , Litening TGP, IRIST ( the missile ) and/ or AIm132 ( if RAF version also come about), Il be more than happy. Not sure if RAF only had precision A/G that early on or if Luftwaffe version also had A/G capability with block 5.


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:34 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.