What model / batch is the aircraft in?

F16 also has BLOCK 70. by more and more nationalities and capabilities

But

We have only block 50

I hope we will get tranche 2, with AG capabilities. Because tranche 1 has only AA capabilities.

But great news, anyways - we will get the most modern aicraft for DCS till now. A modern, multirole aircfaft from our EU. Cool! :)

Yea, the real A/G capabilities started with Tranche 2. Although Tranche 1 block 5 is said to have introduced some initial A/G functions, unfortunately i think the block 5 is only really able to carry LGB's for buddy lasing. Im not even sure the EF can use unguided GP bombs?

Just to clear up a couple of misconceptions. The RAF declared a autonomous initial A/G capability shortly after Exercise Green Flag 2008 using Tranche 1 Blk 5 with Litening 3 LDPs and Paveway 2 (1000lb bombs). It was also capable of dropping 1000lb free fall bombs. It normally self-lased but did practice buddy lasing.

I know this because I was there.

holy shit, i love it!although i'm chinese,but,forget j-10ce and pl15,pick ef2000!

Just to clear up a couple of misconceptions. The RAF declared a autonomous initial A/G capability shortly after Exercise Green Flag 2008 using Tranche 1 Blk 5 with Litening 3 LDPs and Paveway 2 (1000lb bombs). It was also capable of dropping 1000lb free fall bombs. It normally self-lased but did practice buddy lasing.

 

I know this because I was there.

Yes General purpose For the UK version but not German one apparently . As for self designation of LGB's with a TGP can the same be verified for Luftwaffe within the same time frame ?( which is the version being focused on for now). IT also depends on which time period the source publications or revisions are able to be found.

as an Analogy Remember than F/A18C lot 20 in 1998 had different capabilities then the circa 2005 model we have in dcs, or if to compare hypothetical compare Lot 20 hornet to more recent timeframe , ( IE as an example only using older Litening 2 AT instead of newer Litening 2 G4 issued since 2008 )

There's also a difference in how the Typhoon has been operated between the UK and Germany/Spain/Italy.

In UK service it replaced the Tornado fairly quickly, so the multi-role capability was needed earlier. Italy and Germany are still flying their Tornadoes; Italy is replacing them with the F35, and Germany is expected to replace them with a mix of Super Hornets/Growlers and Typhoons. I don't know about Spain but I imagine they have the Hornets for A2G stuff.

There's also a difference in how the Typhoon has been operated between the UK and Germany/Spain/Italy.

 

In UK service it replaced the Tornado fairly quickly, so the multi-role capability was needed earlier. Italy and Germany are still flying their Tornadoes; Italy is replacing them with the F35, and Germany is expected to replace them with a mix of Super Hornets/Growlers and Typhoons. I don't know about Spain but I imagine they have the Hornets for A2G stuff.

The Luftwaffe replacement for the tornadoes is still to be decided, its not Super Hornets/Growlers AND typhoon, its OR. With the new proposed Typhoon ECR

I wasn’t expecting this! Good luck guys, you’re definitely going to need it. See you in a couple of years.

The Luftwaffe replacement for the tornadoes is still to be decided, its not Super Hornets/Growlers AND typhoon, its OR. With the new proposed Typhoon ECR

https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2020/03/26/germany-reportedly-moving-toward-a-split-buy-of-super-hornets-and-eurofighter-typhoons-to-replace-tornado-jets/

There's also a difference in how the Typhoon has been operated between the UK and Germany/Spain/Italy.

 

In UK service it replaced the Tornado fairly quickly, so the multi-role capability was needed earlier. Italy and Germany are still flying their Tornadoes; Italy is replacing them with the F35, and Germany is expected to replace them with a mix of Super Hornets/Growlers and Typhoons. I don't know about Spain but I imagine they have the Hornets for A2G stuff.

So why cant they just use 1 aircraft to fill role of a2a and a2g? Like the UK has been doing? If it's just a matter of quantity, then just by more ef's.

The ef is capable of multirole use. And I'm sure more weapon types could be integrated if needed.

Operating 2 different aircraft where training and logistics s are not interchangable for two different roles isnt the most practical or cost effective

So why cant they just use 1 aircraft to fill role of a2a and a2g? Like the UK has been doing? If it's just a matter of quantity, then just by more ef's.

I honestly don't know, I guess it's a matter of doctrine. In Italy, even in the 70s and early 80s when the main air to air and air to ground aircraft was the F-104, you had squadrons flying different roles with slightly different versions of the aircraft, rather than everyone doing both.

https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2020/03/26/germany-reportedly-moving-toward-a-split-buy-of-super-hornets-and-eurofighter-typhoons-to-replace-tornado-jets/

Ah thats very recent news, I hadnt seen that yet. Although it seems to be the plan not a confirmation right now.

I honestly don't know, I guess it's a matter of doctrine. In Italy, even in the 70s and early 80s when the main air to air and air to ground aircraft was the F-104, you had squadrons flying different roles with slightly different versions of the aircraft, rather than everyone doing both.

I always heard it’s becuase Typhoon ECR won’t be ready for a long time and they don’t want to open up the Typhoon to American nuclear integration, so the Growler is a MOTS solution for ECR replacement and NATO obligation to provide a nuclear platform

I always heard it’s becuase Typhoon ECR won’t be ready for a long time and they don’t want to open up the Typhoon to American nuclear integration, so the Growler is a MOTS solution for ECR replacement and NATO obligation to provide a nuclear platform

But the ECR is a 2 seater SEAD dedicated variant of EF. (its probably thier idea of a Growler). Its focus is not nuclear strike

i dont see why as an interim they cant made a a deal with USA to sell them some AGM88's and integrate those in for some form of SEAD capability for the single seat. ( since UK no longer produces ALARM and the MOD in thier infinite wisdom decided to scrap them from inventory)

If the older legacy platforms like F16 and Hornet have been able to do it all, why can't the EF being expanded on for additional versatility? Especially for nations with smaller defense budget.

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

I honestly don't know, I guess it's a matter of doctrine. In Italy, even in the 70s and early 80s when the main air to air and air to ground aircraft was the F-104, you had squadrons flying different roles with slightly different versions of the aircraft, rather than everyone doing both.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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

Another reason to have Tranche 1 block 5.

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.