Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by mvsgas

  1. As I posted before, generalizations will be one of the many challenges this module will have to face. People see Iraqi F-16C block 52+ with Aim-7 and think all block 52 can carry it. They see Egypt's block 40 and they say same thing about block 40. But the reality is it depends on the specific country and specific block. So as of right now, the only F-16 capable of carrying AIM-7 are; US ANG block 15 ADF and block 25 Egypt's block 40 ROCAF block 20 and 52 Iraqi Block 52 Not one of them the module we are getting in DCS. I am open to being proven wrong. If anyone can find a circa 2007, block 50 USAF F-16 with AIM-7 loaded in the air with tail code SW, WW or SP, show me please. Even better if anyone can find a USAF Technical Order (T.O.) 1F-16CM-1-1, 1F-16CM-1-2, 1F-16CM-34-1-1 and 1F-16CM-34-1-1-1 circa 2007 we can know for sure what weapons could be carried. Keep in mind tail code ED form Edwards AFB, ET or OT from Eglin AFB and WA from Nellis AFB do a lot of testing and evaluation and do not match operational F-16 capabilities. Edit The list is wrong. ROCAF does not have block 52. The list should be So as of right now, the only F-16 capable of carrying AIM-7 are; US ANG block 15 ADF and block 25 Egypt's block 40 ROCAF block 20 Singapore block 52 Iraqi Block 52
  2. Well, they are making an F-16C module of a specific country and a specific year and specific block. I am so , :smartass:
  3. https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2804963&postcount=451 and https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3800086&postcount=387
  4. AFAIK, never used outside of testing. Same can be said about F-16 AFTI, XL, VISTA etc.
  5. https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3800722&postcount=27
  6. Was never carried outside of testing by any country, any block.
  7. I am glad they picked a specific F-16, I have been saying that for years. This is from 2011.
  8. There are many guys here that work on different versions of the F-16, what is you guys input? What do you think?
  9. Trying to put the amount of modifications, upgrades, inspection of defective equipment or found design flaws in perspective; here is a list of some of the Time Compliance Technical Order (TCTO) of the F-16 in the last couple of decades. [ATTACH]204578[/ATTACH] This are just some of them circa 2010
  10. I worked on F-16 since 1997 to 2012. block 25 to 42 on 7 different bases and I have never seen an F-16 carry a LAU-88 (any version). Not in training, not while deployed flying combat missions. Never saw it on load barn (where weapons crews learn how to load them), so if the F-16 can carry it, it must have been above top secret. Someone is bound to post picture of a LAU-88 loaded on an F-16, but like a posted earlier
  11. GBU-39 where not introduce until OFP 5.1 or higher at around 2014 IIRC. No other module we have as of this moment is that new. Not the F/A-18, not the A-10C, not the AV-8B, etc. I do not think it would be reasonable to see that.
  12. AFAIK, no. Not only programing for the Modular Mission Computer (MMC) and other components, but also wiring to the wing so the aircraft can talk to the missile. It addition, due to its weight, it can only be carried on station 3 and 7. Also, with the AIM-7 on those stations, I am not sure if you would have the physical clearance to carry any other weapons on station 4 and 6 without them hitting the AIM-7 fins if the weapons on station 4 or 6 where ejected or deployed. The problem with this is no matter what ED decides to do, will be a case of damn if you do and damn if you don't. If they add it, someone is bound to "disagree" with it being available. That persons will have people that share the same opinion and they will all do thread after thread on how it should be removed. They same will happen if they don't add the AIM-7. Sadly this will not end here. There is so much misinformation and confusion of what specifically an F-16 can do, there are going to be many thread like this for a while. Before and after it is release.
  13. https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3510701&postcount=243
  14. Those are AIM-120C, AIM-9X and AGM-88 and A block 52. https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3800086&postcount=387
  15. It was not. Not part of the USAF/ANG F-16C with CCIP payload circa 2007
  16. The only photos, videos or manuals that will be relative to this module (if it stays the same and nothing changes, which we all know it can) Would have to be from Shaw AFB (tail code SW), Misawa AB (Tail code WW) and Spangdahlem AB (tail code SP) circa 2007. By this time Cannon AFB had lost its block 50 IIRC. No other unit used this F-16 operationally.
  17. What is PCGAS? What is a CCMD? They said a circa 2007 USAF/ANG CCIP F-16C, no AAQ-13, so no TFR. Last time I saw an USAF F-16 with a AAQ-13 installed was in 51 FW, 36 FS, Osan AB, ROK on a Block 40 circa 2001.
  18. If you are interested, Air Force Instruction (AFI) 11-218 will show you all the USAF, NATO, FAA and ICAO hand signal and meaning. You can find a copy in e-publishing.af.mil
  19. I tried to explain this here https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3745350&postcount=164 To add, CM it would be found on Technical Orders (T.O.) Specifically affected after CCIP program (i.e. 1F-16CM-34-1-1, 1F-16CM-1, etc.) For other T.O. is would still be CJ (block 50/52) or CG (block 40/42). CM does not specify a block or capabilities and it is still officially F-16C but it becoming common practice to refer to those F-16 after CCIP upgrade as CM. So when you look at the cover page of a 1F-16CM-34-1-1, it refers to the aircraft as a F-16C/D because that is the official designation. For those that are interested, Air Force Instruction (AFI) 11-2F-16V3 is available online in E-publishing.af.mil. It has no publishing restrictions and has a lot of information regarding F-16 operations. For example, it has been brought up before that the HUD in a F-16 is not a primary flight instrument.
  20. A track would be the best so we can duplicate. I have not seen this behavior. Hot start from LHA, vertical take off with vertical landing on Gaduata using Open Beta, Caucasus map. No bouncing [ATTACH]204423[/ATTACH] Cold start from LHA, short take off and rolling landing on Sukhumi [ATTACH]204424[/ATTACH]
  21. This is a direct PDF link https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a404426.pdf
  • Create New...