DCS: F-16CM Block 50 by EDSA Discussion Thread

All recent modules have statements like that (designed for VR). It just means that the proportions are correct, unlike the cockpits of older modules: FC3, A-10C, MiG-21, ... and so on.

so our F16 will have GPS module, but not Embedded with INS.

when did EGI make its way onto USAF fleets? HAF manual revision shows they had EGI panel as early as 2003, USAF didn't upgrade to EGI until post 2007?

Our F/A-18C Lot 20 doesn't have EGI either :-)

Our F/A-18C Lot 20 doesn't have EGI either :-)

Certainly A10C does and its from 2005, and its fine if USAF Vipers from 2007 timeframe simply didn't have it at that point in time. Im not asking for a feature that wasn't available at that time. The questions was with regards when did the AF update to EGI if export operators utilizing the same block had it earlier?

and according to past discussions with regards to what features were introduced when, Hornet Lot 20's should apparently have EGI.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2919850&postcount=761

the Hornet NATOPS manual itself references EGI implementation which on the list of aircraft changes, came before upgrades like AMPCD, JHMCS or Link 16.

Just because there isnt a obvious "EGI" label on any navigation related stuff on the Sensor Panel doesn't mean it isnt there. its simply different setup to the F16 because even Super Hornets don't have "EGI" section on the Sensor panel. Similarly There is no GPS mode flip switch either.

when you use IFA function, that essentially allows you to complete alignment while taxing or flying straight and level, due to GPS, and then utilizing AINS mode for the GPS to make corrections to the INS system.

so our F16 will have GPS module, but not Embedded with INS.

 

 

 

 

when did EGI make its way onto USAF fleets? HAF manual revision shows they had EGI panel as early as 2003, USAF didn't upgrade to EGI until post 2007?

Wow, I love this pic for some reason.

Looking pretty good.

the Hornet NATOPS manual itself references EGI implementation which on the list of aircraft changes, came before upgrades like AMPCD, JHMCS or Link 16.

Earlier lot hornets without GPS got EGI first, as an mid-life update. It was never built into the legacy jet from the factory. Later lot hornets like ours that had GPS + INS and never got updated with EGI because GPS + INS works just fine. While most of the fleet got the tactical updates.

That's usually how new things get implemented older jets get them first because they're due for overhauls first. The lot 20 hornet we have is correct for that time period.

Earlier lot hornets without GPS got EGI first, as an mid-life update. It was never built into the legacy jet from the factory. Later lot hornets like ours that had GPS + INS and never got updated with EGI because GPS + INS works just fine. While most of the fleet got the tactical updates.

 

That's usually how new things get implemented older jets get them first because they're due for overhauls first. The lot 20 hornet we have is correct for that time period.

This's right.Embedded Global Positioning System /INS (EGI)，®161925 thru 163175。No EGI was installed on the production model.

Earlier lot hornets without GPS got EGI first, as an mid-life update. It was never built into the legacy jet from the factory. Later lot hornets like ours that had GPS + INS and never got updated with EGI because GPS + INS works just fine. While most of the fleet got the tactical updates.

 

That's usually how new things get implemented older jets get them first because they're due for overhauls first. The lot 20 hornet we have is correct for that time period.

AFAIK only the marines used those F/A18A's ( deduced based on buno #'s) upgraded with EGI which along with additional upgrades different from anything applied from USN F18C resulted in the USMC F/A18A++, however without the other upgrades making it the A++ a early lot F/A18A with EGI alone would otherwise be very redundant.

AFAIK only the marines used those F/A18A's ( deduced based on buno #'s) upgraded with EGI which along with additional upgrades different from anything applied from USN F18C resulted in the USMC F/A18A++, however without the other upgrades making it the A++ a early lot F/A18A with EGI alone would otherwise be very redundant.

So in this case having the newer jet means we don't get EGI because GPS + INS works well enough, however because capability upgrades like the ability to employ 9x in the HOBS envelope and tactical data links are much higher priority, most lot hornets including newer airframes got them.

I'm sure the viper community is the same. Just because a newer system comes along doesn't mean everyone gets it. In fact newer aircraft are gonna be the lowest priority for non-critical performance enhancement upgrades such as a fully embedded GPS + INS verses what the aircraft already came with; that's considered sufficient.

Not a hard and fast rule either though. An aircraft may have an accident and have to go in for depot work, where they may or may not decide to throw some improvements in, while its tore apart, or something along those lines. For example say in the legacy hornet one of the displays crapped out. they would probably take the opportunity to swap them with the color ones from the super hornet if the OFP state permitted it and they had them on hand, rather then the outdated green ones.

So in this case having the newer jet means we don't get EGI because GPS + INS works well enough, however because capability upgrades like the ability to employ 9x in the HOBS envelope and tactical data links are much higher priority, most lot hornets including newer airframes got them.

 

I'm sure the viper community is the same. Just because a newer system comes along doesn't mean everyone gets it. In fact newer aircraft are gonna be the lowest priority for non-critical performance enhancement upgrades such as a fully embedded GPS + INS verses what the aircraft already came with; that's considered sufficient.

 

Not a hard and fast rule either though. An aircraft may have an accident and have to go in for depot work, where they may or may not decide to throw some improvements in, while its tore apart, or something along those lines. For example say in the legacy hornet one of the displays crapped out. they would probably take the opportunity to swap them with the color ones from the super hornet if the OFP state permitted it and they had them on hand, rather then the outdated green ones.

This is not feasible, F-18C`s AMPCD driver can only use LDDI, color display can only use HSI under DMS. After AMC&D, the F-18 has the ability to display color on three monitors.

This is not feasible, F-18C`s AMPCD driver can only use LDDI, color display can only use HSI under DMS. After AMC&D, the F-18 has the ability to display color on three monitors.

it is feasible, to put in new displays. they just will have some limitation as to what they display. Besides AMC&D is a mission computer used in Super Hornets not in the Legacies.

What about RNZAF skin for New Zealand....we 'almost' had them lol :disgust: :bye_3::bye_3:

LOL - yeah, I have one of the kitsets the RNZAF had made to celebrate the purchase that made it to the stores, then were re-called...

Damn, that pics are classy! Cockpit looks like ready to fly:)

For everyone asking "why not this version...why not that version...are we gonna get this or that...

Have a look here:

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions.html

This is probably one of the most concise breakdowns of blocks and features you're gonna find and illustrates a very important point...there are more versions of Vipers than Carter's little pills. If you really look into the details,

ED has selected a specific block of aircraft that offers the widest range of capabilities.

The bulk of the discussion has been about the systems and capabilities the Viper we are getting will have.

My question is are there any significant external spotting features because of these upgrades?

For everyone asking "why not this version...why not that version...are we gonna get this or that...

 

Have a look here:

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions.html

 

This is probably one of the most concise breakdowns of blocks and features you're gonna find and illustrates a very important point...there are more versions of Vipers than Carter's little pills. If you really look into the details,

 

ED has selected a specific block of aircraft that offers the widest range of capabilities.

There's so many versions that you won't please everyone unfortunately. But the block we are getting is solid.

There's so many versions that you won't please everyone unfortunately. But the block we are getting is solid.

Gesendet von meinem SM-G975F mit Tapatalk

For everyone asking "why not this version...why not that version...are we gonna get this or that...

 

Have a look here:

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions.html

 

This is probably one of the most concise breakdowns of blocks and features you're gonna find and illustrates a very important point...there are more versions of Vipers than Carter's little pills. If you really look into the details,

 

ED has selected a specific block of aircraft that offers the widest range of capabilities.

Gesendet von meinem SM-G975F mit Tapatalk

The article about block 50 does say that it supports Harpoon missiles.

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G975F mit Tapatalk

Do you have a direct link? Because the only thing i can find in your quoted link is the F-16 C/D Block 50/52 article which states:"...The Block 50/52 is capable of carrying the new JDAM munition, the AGM-154A/B JSOW and is the first F-16 version to integrate the AGM-84 Harpoon antishipping missile....." So no clear statement which one could carry it. I would love to see it on the F-16 but i doubt our version can do it.

Do you have a direct link? Because the only thing i can find in your quoted link is the F-16 C/D Block 50/52 article which states:"...The Block 50/52 is capable of carrying the new JDAM munition, the AGM-154A/B JSOW and is the first F-16 version to integrate the AGM-84 Harpoon antishipping missile....." So no clear statement which one could carry it. I would love to see it on the F-16 but i doubt our version can do it.

Block 50's have the capability to fire the AIM-120AMRAAM, the new AGM-65G Maverick missile and thePGU-28/B 20mm cannon round. The Block 50/52 is capable of carrying the new JDAM munition, the AGM-154A/B JSOW and is the first F-16 version to integrate the AGM-84 Harpoon antishipping missile. The AGM-137 TSSAM stand-off attack missile was also foreseen in its weaponry, but subsequently cancelled. The aircraft can launch the Harpoon in line-of-sight, bearing-only, and range/bearing modes. The addition of the Harpoon gives the F-16 a significant standoff range anti-shipping capability, especially when combined with optional 600-gallon fuel tanks.

Gesendet von meinem SM-G975F mit Tapatalk

From the link posted by Sierra

 

Block 50's have the capability to fire the AIM-120AMRAAM, the new AGM-65G Maverick missile and thePGU-28/B 20mm cannon round. The Block 50/52 is capable of carrying the new JDAM munition, the AGM-154A/B JSOW and is the first F-16 version to integrate the AGM-84 Harpoon antishipping missile. The AGM-137 TSSAM stand-off attack missile was also foreseen in its weaponry, but subsequently cancelled. The aircraft can launch the Harpoon in line-of-sight, bearing-only, and range/bearing modes. The addition of the Harpoon gives the F-16 a significant standoff range anti-shipping capability, especially when combined with optional 600-gallon fuel tanks.

 

 

Gesendet von meinem SM-G975F mit Tapatalk

Yes that is what i quoted....

But thats the same as if i would say the "Leopard1/2 tank was using a 105mm and 120mm gun", it's not clear which version used what weapon, thats what iwanted to say.

The Block 50/52 can indeed support the Harpoon.

However the USAF/ANG did not elect to support the Harpoon on their Block 50/52's, and thus this module, which is a USAF/ANG Block 50 CM from 2007 will not have the Harpoon available.

When it comes to F-16, there are so many versions, and sub variants of versions, domestic updates by some of the operators etc. etc, that there isn't necessarily such a thing like a singular type of Block 50.

I've predicted that version choice will be an issue if and when ED decides to do an F-16. I wasn't wrong :).

So many types that support one thing but not another, it was never going to make everyone happy no matter which version was chosen. The one that is coming though, has a lot of very nice toys, so it should please you F-16 lovers :).

The Block 50/52 can indeed support the Harpoon.

 

However the USAF/ANG did not elect to support the Harpoon on their Block 50/52's, and thus this module, which is a USAF/ANG Block 50 CM from 2007 will not have the Harpoon available.

Are you (or anyone) able to clarify?

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

The Block 50/52 can indeed support the Harpoon.

 

However the USAF/ANG did not elect to support the Harpoon on their Block 50/52's, and thus this module, which is a USAF/ANG Block 50 CM from 2007 will not have the Harpoon available.

However, does mean that USAF doesn't use the Harpoon or the CM is not capable of of using them?

Gesendet von meinem SM-G975F mit Tapatalk