F-15E?

JHMCS did not really exist at all in 2005 on the F-15E, it’s not that it wasn’t common, it wasn’t in any operational units. We were still doing PACS-45 at that point and were still on suite 4, we barely had smart weapon capability in part ofthe fleet. LANTIRN was still the primary pod, and we were migrating from LITENING to SNIPER for the aircraft in theater.

 

Not sure what the hornet has to do with any of this really.

Its a comparable example from a sister service is all i was trying to point out.

Like you yourself said F15E were still mostly using latirns on 05.... not Snipers

just like the Hornets and Supers were mostly still using nitehawks and not newer AtFLirs at this time frame, because they were just being in early process of adoption and production and lacking in numbers at the time.

BUt I suppose it is a fair point if JHMCS wasnt actually adopted at all in 2005 then i guess it can be a feature that can be not added. I guess it all depends on RAzbam team what features they want to add. As per answered question Sniper was confirmed.

Its a comperable example to what your saying...

 

F15E were still mostly using latirns on 05....

 

just like the Hornets ans Supers were mostly still using nitehawks and not newer respective TGP ( Sniper and Atflir)

Agree to disagree. And I’m still not sure where you are trying to go with the topic. You said the SNIPER and JHMCS were both fielded around the same time in ‘05. They were not. ED has not stated they are modeling any particular year/avionics suite at this point other than what year their documentation is dated. The only comment was that they were implementing NVG, we modded aicraft in the 2000-2001 timeframe, so long before we had either of those.

Agree to disagree. And I’m still not sure where you are trying to go with the topic. You said the SNIPER and JHMCS were both fielded around the same time in ‘05. They were not. ED has not stated they are modeling any particular year/avionics suite at this point other than what year their documentation is dated. The only comment was that they were implementing NVG, we modded aicraft in the 2000-2001 timeframe, so long before we had either of those.

i never said JHMCS was being fielded specifically for the F15E in that very year. just that 2005 they were already entering service within the US aviation branches,

However as per your statement that seems just about right that JHMCS was not adopted for the F15E until years later ( until at least 2009 at the earliest)

https://defense-update.com/20081007_jhmcs_f15.html

i never said JHMCS was being fielded specifically for the F15E in that very year. just that 2005 they were already entering service within the US aviation branches,

 

However as per your statement that seems just about right that JHMCS was not adopted for the F15E until years later ( until at least 2009 at the earliest)

 

https://defense-update.com/20081007_jhmcs_f15.html

This is the F-15E thread? JHMCS systems are not fundamentally equal and serve different capabilities depending on the aircraft, avionics suite, HOTAS functionality, etc. you can’t just take bits and pieces and accurately model a system just for the sake of making it a feature.

My statement would yave no reason to be inaccurate. ;). I was around the first units to get the capability. I knew the guys that installed it, along with many of the other upgrades that came around the same time. I don't have a need to guess or speculate.

This is the F-15E thread? JHMCS systems are not fundamentally equal and serve different capabilities depending on the aircraft, avionics suite, HOTAS functionality, etc. you can’t just take bits and pieces and accurately model a system just for the sake of making it a feature.

 

My statement would yave no reason to be inaccurate. ;). I was around the first units to get the capability. I knew the guys that installed it, along with many of the other upgrades that came around the same time. I don't have a need to guess or speculate.

They are not the same? How fundamentaly different could it possibly be? Please Do explain.

From OS information available its stated that JHMCS in its design has 95% commonality across the board of 3 Platforms ( F18/ F16/ F15) within US service it was primarily being aimed at.

The aircraft of which they were standardized be it the USAF F16, F15 ( minus A/S eagle), and F/A18 are all multi-mission aircraft that have capabilities that overlap

If it was so fundamentally different then there wouldn't really be a single "standardized" JHMCS

 

you can’t just take bits and pieces and accurately model a system just for the sake of making it a feature.

 

 

Last page Timghetta ( Developer) just answered that their most up to date manual is from 1993, yet had said that the team is opting for the Sniper ATP inclusion for the F15E.

They are not the same? How fundamental different could it possibly be? ITs stated that JHMCS in its design has 95% commonalty across the board of various platforms it was intended to be integrated with across the various US branches

 

The aircraft of which they were standardized be it the USAF F16, F15 ( minus A/S eagle), and F/A18 are all multi-mission aircraft that share at least some of the same tasks that they must undertake to complete various missions.

 

If it was so fundamentally different then there wouldn't really be a single "standardized" JHMCS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Last page Timghetta ( Developer) just answered that their most up to date manual is from 1993, yet had said that the team is opting for the Sniper ATP inclusion for the F15E.

It’s like saying Link-16 is the same across all the different airframes. They are not. Different airframes, different HOTAS, different mission sets, fielded and implemented by different companies. Real life is a lot different than reading it in a news article. Boeing could be helping them out with the JHMCS or not giving them anything, who knows, we’ll just have to wait and see. i haven’t seen anything to confirm or deny.

Upgrading the TGP is a bit different when you are making enhancements on a system that functions in much the same way as the legacy system did vs implementing something that you have no starting point for. There are still functions such as CCTV that were different and it will be a wait and see game to see if they get it right or not. They also could have data on the SNIPER outside of what’s in the -34 as the manufacturers also put out supplemental guidance. Just because they are choosing to implement doesn’t mean they have to wing it and guess.

It’s like saying Link-16 is the same across all the different airframes. They are not. Different airframes, different HOTAS, different mission sets, fielded and implemented by different companies. Real life is a lot different than reading it in a news article. Boeing could be helping them out with the JHMCS or not giving them anything, who knows, we’ll just have to wait and see. i haven’t seen anything to confirm or deny.

 

Upgrading the TGP is a bit different when you are making enhancements on a system that functions in much the same way as the legacy system did vs implementing something that you have no starting point for. There are still functions such as CCTV that were different and it will be a wait and see game to see if they get it right or not. They also could have data on the SNIPER outside of what’s in the -34 as the manufacturers also put out supplemental guidance. Just because they are choosing to implement doesn’t mean they have to wing it and guess.

agree to disagree.

its not fundamentally different . Only difference related to Fixed HUD Symbology across different aircraft being replicated in the corresponding aircraft's JHMCS. And thats doing crosscheck comparisons between whats represented in various Sims and comparing various Images and/or JHMCS footage publicly available to corresponding aircraft, which is very fair and true description on whats was stated in various articles.

as you say its speculation to assume what Razbam mat know or not know on JHMCS functionality or if Boeing will throw them a bone with regards to development .But of course at the end of the day its thier call if the add it or not. ( they havent confirmed yet whether or not JHMCS will be included)

besides just like Razbam put the F15 on hold due to not having the Code related to the foundations of A/G mapping technologies ( something ED has to develop and will share) they could always ask ED for the JHMCS code to jumpstart the progress into such a functionality, and merely substitute certain code pertaining with the necessary HUD Symbology that the F15 would use.

there is less guestimation at stake here than with the M2000C. Or at least seeming that way due to what the myself or the community could find in comparison.

agree to disagree.

 

 

and drawing experience from others sims i agree with article.

 

its not fundamentally different . Only difference related to Fixed HUD Symbology across different aircraft being replciated in the corresponding aircraft's JHMCS.

 

 

 

as you say its speculation to assume what Razbam mat know or not know on JHMCS functionality.

 

 

besides just like Razbam put the F15 on hold due to not having the Code related to the foundations of A/G mapping technologies ( something ED has to develop and will share) they could always as ED for the JHMCS code to jumpstart the progress into such a functionality, and merely substitute certain code pertaining with the necessary HUD Symbology that the F15 would use.

 

The only difference will be with the basic HUD symobology that is already present in the Regular fixed HUD. otherwise targeting aspects should otherwise be the same.

 

there is less guestimation at stake here than with the M2000C. Or at least seeming that way due to what the myself or the community could find in comparison.

or not....

Actually We have not know the actual F/A-15E block build by RAZBAM, except cockpit have the old UFC:

https://www.facebook.com/RazbamSims/photos/a.316309961788982.75719.316077818478863/1815191185234178/?type=3

That have a aircraft previously to a Block 46

http://www.avialogs.com/index.php/aircraft/usa/mcdonnelldouglas/f-15eagle/to-1f-15e-1-flight-manual-f-15e-aircraft.html

Weapons systems has unknown yet.

Wow, I wasn't aware that Dash One for F-15E is available. I checked a year ago and all I could find was an A and C models

It’s like saying Link-16 is the same across all the different airframes. They are not. Different airframes, different HOTAS, different mission sets, fielded and implemented by different companies. Real life is a lot different than reading it in a news article. Boeing could be helping them out with the JHMCS or not giving them anything, who knows, we’ll just have to wait and see. i haven’t seen anything to confirm or deny.

 

Upgrading the TGP is a bit different when you are making enhancements on a system that functions in much the same way as the legacy system did vs implementing something that you have no starting point for. There are still functions such as CCTV that were different and it will be a wait and see game to see if they get it right or not. They also could have data on the SNIPER outside of what’s in the -34 as the manufacturers also put out supplemental guidance. Just because they are choosing to implement doesn’t mean they have to wing it and guess.

I do hope Razbam have asked you to help them out as a subject matter expert on this!

Just out of interest, would you be able to give us a rough idea of what the (headline) capabilities of an F-15E would be at different points in time? i.e. for example if they picked a 1990 version, what would be the main capabilities/weapons you'd be using, and then how that changed by 1995, 2000, 2005? It'd be really useful in understanding what we might end up with!

I do hope Razbam have asked you to help them out as a subject matter expert on this!

 

Just out of interest, would you be able to give us a rough idea of what the (headline) capabilities of an F-15E would be at different points in time? i.e. for example if they picked a 1990 version, what would be the main capabilities/weapons you'd be using, and then how that changed by 1995, 2000, 2005? It'd be really useful in understanding what we might end up with!

We’ll just have to wait and see what’s on the table as far as modeling goes, wheather they give some sort of timeline for a model or whether it will be a bit of a cocktail on systems they can/can’t model. Most of the stuff people are asking for is post 2000 era capabilities so it will be hard to model unless they have additional documentation/support from somewhere. And there is still plenty of stuff I know about but am not really a SME on, can’t openly pass on information about, etc.

Some more UFC images were posted on Facebook, looks like they textured the switches and knobs.

next addon?

Some photos of the F-15E I came across in a book.

NAVFLIR in HUD

Targeting pod

SA Page

Radar

TFR

Photos via

Steve Davies / FJPhotography.com

Some ACES II seat textures.

Hope you guys like them.

Rain;

Aren't this the old Sea Water Activated Release System (SEAWARS)? You guys still use those or do you guys use the Universal Water Activated Release System (UWARS)?

Last time I saw those was on the late 1990's (circa 1998 )

Rain;

Aren't this the old Sea Water Activated Release System (SEAWARS)? You guys still use those or do you guys use the Universal Water Activated Release System (UWARS)?

[ATTACH]191945[/ATTACH]

 

Last time I saw those was on the late 1990's (circa 1998 )

Good question. Notmally there was nothing additional to the buckles, but I have fingerbanged those before at some point, I just can’t remember when/where. Maybe AFE swapped the risors at some point during my time? Maybe they were on trainer seats? I really can’t rememeber to be honest.

Definetly UWARS now.

Is there any indication as to what RAZBAM is going to do about a backseater AI for singleplayer and for multiplayer without a friend?

I was thinking maybe they could somehow license the use of heatblur's Jester AI for the F-14 and then adapt that AI framework to the F-15E?

Heck ED should look into that for the eventual F-4E WSO!

I feel like it would be an enormous boon to the 3rd party devs to share resources when it makes sense financially and what not because it makes no sense to me that Razbam would need to spend countless months developing the same type of AI or system that is already built.

If they did share it, it would be cool if they could do voice over work again with someone else so that we dont have the same guy in our ear switching between say the F-14, F-15E and F-4E or any other two seat aircraft.

While I am rambling it could be really neat and immersive if for the F-4E and F-14A they recorded Jester voice overs with a guy of Persian origin to have the correct accent when flying an Iranian F-4 or 14! Could do that for multiple countries that flew the F-4E.

Is there any indication as to what RAZBAM is going to do about a backseater AI for singleplayer and for multiplayer without a friend?

 

I was thinking maybe they could somehow license the use of heatblur's Jester AI for the F-14 and then adapt that AI framework to the F-15E?

 

Heck ED should look into that for the eventual F-4E WSO!

 

I feel like it would be an enormous boon to the 3rd party devs to share resources when it makes sense financially and what not because it makes no sense to me that Razbam would need to spend countless months developing the same type of AI or system that is already built.

 

If they did share it, it would be cool if they could do voice over work again with someone else so that we dont have the same guy in our ear switching between say the F-14, F-15E and F-4E or any other two seat aircraft.

 

While I am rambling it could be really neat and immersive if for the F-4E and F-14A they recorded Jester voice overs with a guy of Persian origin to have the correct accent when flying an Iranian F-4 or 14! Could do that for multiple countries that flew the F-4E.

Is there anything the back-seater can do that the front-seater can't? Probably won't be as much need for a Jester-type AI if not, you could just leave the seat empty when you don't have a friend and fill it when you do.

Is there anything the back-seater can do that the front-seater can't? Probably won't be as much need for a Jester-type AI if not, you could just leave the seat empty when you don't have a friend and fill it when you do.

I couldn't see any reason why the pilot would be unable to slew the TPOD, especially with a JHMCS , I definitely know he can work the radar unlike the F-14. But in the missions the F-15E was designed for it is a good idea for the pilot to be concentrating fully on flying the aircraft down low, at night, through an IADS, while the Wizzo is running the targeting systems and helping you navigate, which in DCS cause its a game isnt quite as needed but it would be nice to have and far more realistc

Is there anything the back-seater can do that the front-seater can't? Probably won't be as much need for a Jester-type AI if not, you could just leave the seat empty when you don't have a friend and fill it when you do.

System operation is essentially the same, but your TGP, RWR/ICS, etc switches are on the back seat console. The GIB also has a little more HOTAS functionality with the L/R hand controllers. Can all still be done through hand-jamming buttons, but the GIB can work multiple displays at the same time.

Is there any indication as to what RAZBAM is going to do about a backseater AI for singleplayer and for multiplayer without a friend?

Huh, that is interesting and it confirms what I thought about the ability of the pilot to control the jet's systems.... I do hope that one day hey do implement some sort of WSO AI, that would be super cool

More important to me would be true and flawless multiplayer backseat functionality.

No one has delivered in that regard so far for a complex combat aircraft.

The L-39 is leader in that field but far from perfect.

next addon?