F-8 Crusader

I am very excited about this, F-8 will be awesome as would the Phantom. Now if we could get the Thud and the Mig17...wow!

I'm really looking forward to this one. It will go well with the A4 on ops with my friends.

F-104 is a bonus.

 

 

 

The third (I think) Crusader to launch was an RF-8G from VFP-62. I was on the previous Shangri-La deployment to the Med with that squadron.

http://decatur58.org/Sea_Stories.htm

Shots of Bellinger getting his Silver Star. They didn't use his jet for the scene's, "Limpy Dick" wouldn't have been good publicity.:D

F-8 and F-4 + Vietnam map = heaven.

The F4 will be an updated 80's version as I heard it. So maybe a fictional VN part deux or something. Same thing for the AH-1S.

DCS really needs to pick a decade to work on IMO...

While the updated F-4E has some new toys, for the most part, it will fight air-to-air at the same capability as any slatted F-4E in 1972. Just restrict the missiles to appropriate variants: AIM-7E2 and AIM-9J. The APQ-120 radar went through a few updates, but unless Belsimtek/ED has access to some unusually accurate radar data, I suspect there will be little difference in gameplay. It is in the area of the RWR and possibly the presence of TISEO that the newer F-4E will perform noticeably better.

The MiG-21bis has a little more power (and a little more weight) than a MiG-21MF, but is very similar in overall capability despite an improved radar.

The F-8 will be at no significant disadvantage in air-to-air due to the newer, updated variants other than the RWR functionality, if that is even modeled accurately enough to see the differences in a way that affects the outcome of a dogfight.

But, I would really appreciate having some true Vietnam variants of aircraft. The F-4B and/or nearly identical F-4C would be my first choice for a Vietnam era F-4 as well as a MiG-21F-13 for a Vietnam era MiG-21. The early years (65-68) were the most challenging for both sides.

Maybe someone will work on an F-4J at some point. Then you'll have your early 70s spec carrier Phantom.

While the updated F-4E has some new toys, for the most part, it will fight air-to-air at the same capability as any slatted F-4E in 1972. Just restrict the missiles to appropriate variants: AIM-7E2 and AIM-9J. The APQ-120 radar went through a few updates, but unless Belsimtek/ED has access to some unusually accurate radar data, I suspect there will be little difference in gameplay. It is in the area of the RWR and possibly the presence of TISEO that the newer F-4E will perform noticeably better.

 

The MiG-21bis has a little more power (and a little more weight) than a MiG-21MF, but is very similar in overall capability despite an improved radar.

 

The F-8 will be at no significant disadvantage in air-to-air due to the newer, updated variants other than the RWR functionality, if that is even modeled accurately enough to see the differences in a way that affects the outcome of a dogfight.

 

But, I would really appreciate having some true Vietnam variants of aircraft. The F-4B and/or nearly identical F-4C would be my first choice for a Vietnam era F-4 as well as a MiG-21F-13 for a Vietnam era MiG-21. The early years (65-68) were the most challenging for both sides.

Yeah this is one of those things in DCS that I wish we could solve. We have specific planes at high fideleity. But would it be worth it for devs to develop "variants" of those planes, at a guess probably not at this point since a shiny new module would probably sell better.

One thing I've thought about for "variants" is if there could be a way to "disable" certain systems on various aircraft to reflect a more primitive version of it. You can of course do it with limiting munitions, but it would be interesting to have an early mig21 with the SPO10 (damaged) automatically or something like that. Obviously it wouldn't help with different engines or anything like that, but it could be a way to get more "types" of planes into DCS, especially if Devs somehow supported it. I'm sure the F18 could be "turned down" to early 90's levels pretty easily.

The trouble with having very specific variants very accurately modelled is of course that DCS just doesn't have any 'grand scenario' it aims for, so the more accurate the specific models get, the further strewn out across the decades they become, all by themselves, cold, alone and forgotten.

The trouble with having very specific variants very accurately modelled is of course that DCS just doesn't have any 'grand scenario' it aims for, so the more accurate the specific models get, the further strewn out across the decades they become, all by themselves, cold, alone and forgotten.

Oh I know.

Though there does seem to be a "focus" now on modernish naval air, we have the ~2000's hornet, 90's and soon 80's era F14. And a harrier that is "ish" somewhere post 2k systems wise. Plus at some point we will likely get a later model A6 from heatblur from the rumint.

I actually think the focus on Nav air is good one, since that was largely used for force projection for many decades. So I think we will be able to do 80s-early 2k with that plane set. And then maybe earlier as well with the F8 and maybe the Razbam A7 if they do that one.

Corsair module incoming, AI (and possibly module) Intruder incoming. Forrestal class incoming. F4 module incoming.

Mig 17/19/21 and Huey already up and running.

Chuck in a map and some era appropriate weaponry and we are good to go for Vietnam :)

Corsair module incoming, AI (and possibly module) Intruder incoming. Forrestal class incoming. F4 module incoming.

 

Mig 17/19/21 and Huey already up and running.

 

Chuck in a map and some era appropriate weaponry and we are good to go for Vietnam :)

Who has a MiG-17? The MiG-15 is visually an effective stand-in, but a bit underpowered and underperforming.

I would greatly appreciate a 1965-72 Vietnam map with period correct bases and ground objects, especially air defense assets. But it sure would be nice if there were dedicated Vietnam era variants of all of the aircraft listed above. While I favor 1965-68 era, the plane set favors 1972 with the MiG-19 in the mix.

Needed: MiG-19S as adapted by the Chinese and sold to Vietnam, MiG-21MF, and a slightly backdated F-4E possibly even unslatted with the early gun muzzle or better yet an F-4D so that May 10, 1972 can be played out correctly. A 1972 F-4J would me much appreciated as well.

Corsair module incoming, AI (and possibly module) Intruder incoming. Forrestal class incoming. F4 module incoming.

 

Mig 17/19/21 and Huey already up and running.

 

Chuck in a map and some era appropriate weaponry and we are good to go for Vietnam :)

Um nope.

Corsair is years out at best.

Intruder will be a 80's or 90's version most likely

Mig17??? Where?

Mig19 (wrong bird for VN, they used the J-6)

Mig21 (wrong bird for VN, they used the earlier PF/PFM not the bis)

Huey (well change the weapons on it and I think its right for late war at least)

Admitedly you can "pretend" that some of the DCS models are close, but in reality the functionality of many of the planes is off or way off. I know people don't want to hear it but a 60's bird is gonna be way different and less capable than the 70's or 80's version of the "same plane".

At best we might hope for a map to do a 70's/80's/90's era VN part Deux...

Fact is we will have to suspend disbelief. They won't be able produce era correct variants so we'll use "close enough" and pretend. Cest la vie.

Admitedly you can "pretend" that some of the DCS models are close, but in reality the functionality of many of the planes is off or way off. I know people don't want to hear it but a 60's bird is gonna be way different and less capable than the 70's or 80's version of the "same plane".

The simple fact of the matter is, that I can fly a early 90s US F-4E in a 1960s Vietnam style map. Limiting the weapons will go a long way, and it will be perfectly compatible with online servers. I cannot fly an early F-4B in a 1990s style map and be anything better than a supersonic trainer in terms of effectiveness.

The F-4E we're getting will have a role on servers populated with F-18s, F-18s, MiG-29s and SU-27s. The modernization of its avionics to give it a decent ground attack capability allows it to serve as an accurate precision striker. An F-4B offers no greater capability than an F-5, with greater hassle.

I don't know about you, and I suspect you'll disagree with me, but I'd prefer an aircraft I can take onto a multiplayer server effectively but only can approximately play the role of it's more primitive counterpart, than getting a period accurate aircraft that has no role in 90% of servers.

Interesting to read this, it seems there was effectively an F-8J 'early' and F-8J 'late'. It's from the crusader organization website, so I assume the writer is an ex-pilot and the text has been eyeballed by many other ex-pilots.

https://www.f8crusader.org/history.htm

The F-8J was, by most folks recollection, one of the worst Navair aircraft program fiascoes since the Cutlass.

 

The intent was to improve the F-8E with better radar, tail armament in the form of armor plate protection for the UHT actuators, better cruise and landing flight characteristics with 2-section leading edge droops and BLC, improved approach power compensator with a UHT rate input, improved ECM and wing pylon fuel drop tank capability. There were a few more things like new wiring, UHF radio and APR-30 RWR gear. The airplane was rushed to the fleet with only limited carrier suitability testing.

 

Squadrons on the Bon Homme Richard and Ticonderoga got to be the carrier suitability testers for the fleet by default.

 

The aircraft was woefully overweight by almost 2000 lbs. and underpowered. With BLC on you lost about 800 lbs of thrust. Flight control rigging was optimized to achieve the slowest approach speed with apparently little consideration for anything else. The result was a dangerous aircraft around the boat, especially at night. Although the approach speeds were down around the 120 knot range at max trap weight, you couldn't see over the nose and wave-off capability was pathetic. Squadrons tried various things to deal with the poor waveoff performance. The Tico played with "trim drag" by altering the C.G. of the aircraft through fuel management. They would intentionally leave fuel in the aft cluster for this purpose. The Bonny Dick placed limits on temperatures that we could fly using 90 degrees for day and 85 for night. (The ship promptly installed a thermometer that could be read in tenths and at 84.9 degrees at night we would launch.) We also were taught the "pulse technique" waveoff. For this you would rotate the aircraft to almost a stall while simultaneously applying full power. With the sink rate halted, you would then ease off and climb out. Imagine that maneuver at night.

 

To add to your worries, you could actually fly the airplane below the minimum speed required to operate the RAT (Marquardt emergency ram air turbine). The thought that you could be on final at night, operating off the RAT and then lose all electrical power was frightening to say the least.

 

Gradually during the cruise, Navair responded to the problems and sent teams to WestPac to begin incorporating the fixes. To relieve the weight problem the armor plate in the tail was removed and the ALQ-51 was re-installed to replace the newer, but heavier ALQ-100. The visibility over the nose was improved by changing the flight control rigging and increasing the approach speed to around 128 kts. The RATs were reworked to allow for safe operation at approach speeds. The wave-off capability was improved by incorporating a "war emergency thrust" throttle position. A spring was added to the leading edge of the throttle quadrant that would stop the throttle at the MRT position unless you pushed it further against the spring and into the WEP position. We were instructed to get used to using WEP by practicing during fouled deck waveoffs until the first engine hot section inspection showed that we were destroying the engine's burner cans. It seems that WEP was just intentionally allowing you to overspeed the engine for additional power and it played hell on the burner cans. The ultimate fix came with the improved J57-P400 series engines about a year later. Eventually, Navair made all the necessary mods and the J served well until its retirement.

Hope they decide on the lighter F-8E instead, much better choice IMO.

Has there been a single Navy programme that didn't go through severe problems at one or many points? The Tomcat had a propensity for exploding early on, the initial Phantoms were laughable, the testing squadron's evaluation of the Hornet was unfavourable around the boat, the first Corsair was a deathtrap and the second one was woefully underpowered, the very Crusader had a reputation of Ensign Eliminator from the get-go.

Has there been a single Navy programme that didn't go through severe problems at one or many points? The Tomcat had a propensity for exploding early on, the initial Phantoms were laughable, the testing squadron's evaluation of the Hornet was unfavourable around the boat, the first Corsair was a deathtrap and the second one was woefully underpowered, the very Crusader had a reputation of Ensign Eliminator from the get-go.

While the reality was often tragic, I hope we can get some of these quirky dangerous planes. More fun to fly something that fights back imo. (F104 plz :joystick:).

Well its a cold war era jet and not much secrets stuck in them. I would love to see a latest model of the Crusader like the J or K.

Well its a cold war era jet and not much secrets stuck in them. I would love to see a latest model of the Crusader like the J or K.

The would devs need to have the respective documentation though to be able to model it. Just because they might not be classified anymore doesn't mean they're easy to get by.

Well its a cold war era jet and not much secrets stuck in them. I would love to see a latest model of the Crusader like the J or K.

We're getting the F-8 Juliet so no worries on that front.

Whoa Lucas......The mighty Corsair was not a death trap!! You just had to stay ahead of the plane. If you got behind on power and tried to fix it by pouring on the coals then yes, that giant prop and all of that torque would throw your non paying attention ass right into the water, but that's 100% pilot error, not the plane's fault.

A very interesting interview with an F-8J pilot popped up in my YouTube subscriptions, definitely worth checking out.

https://www.fighterpilotpodcast.com/episodes/050-f-8-crusader/?fbclid=IwAR3AHjboX_5oyP23BJ_93UcQdE6qIic9mBC8-SXP8lAalK4zcauNUQxPqs8

Thanks for sharing