Jump to content

Franken Sabre


Kev2go

Recommended Posts

.

 

Which means it was in progress as the time of the manual printing,

 

The Transition was never finished, and was optional to allies/export variants.

 

I'm also pretty sure that the Block and Modelling was done based on a restored F-86F and Manual Data Available.

 

 

Maybe i missing something Care to elaborate more why copy pasting an excerpt from Joe Baugher? It doesn't specifically say all of them werent upgraded. OR especially the ones that were still retained longer than 1954 in USAF or ANG service. That would otherwise be an assumption. IF we use that as a standards lets assume export F86F's may have been upgraded to more modern sidewinders like the Aim9E, before being sold back to the USAF or something ;)

 

but still that doesn't say otherwise that USAF didnt upgrade all of their own blocks 25-35 Sabres. WE should be looking at a USAF model of an F86F35, not exported versions of it or earlier versions. F86F35 would have been one of the later models of the F series to be completely sold off, given that main reason for producing block 35 was so the USAF had requirement for addressing the nuclear delivery role, Hence the LOW Altitude bombing system installed for toss bombing tactical nukes. So even if the F86F was no longer relevant as Fighter, it still had uses as a Nuke toss bomber untill enough Fighter bomber F100C/D huns came about. LABS would be uninstalled for non NATO allies. Block 35's werent that much produced because F86H and eventually F100, but the F86F block 35's soldiered on in USAF/ ANG service well into the late 50s, in some cases into the 60s given all the problems that HUns had in thier early life.

 

 

After all the manuals clearly state "USAF series" aircraft for the changes implemented.

 

http://www.forgottenjets.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/F-86.html

 

 

Example:

 

F-86F-35-NA s/n 53-1133

*USAF 561st FBS (388th FBW).

*1955: USAF 563rd FBS (388th FBW).

*USAF 7244th ABG.

*3/1961: Transferred to the Saudi AF.

*10/1968: Transferred to the Portuguese AF as spare parts.

 

 

 

F-86F-35-NA s/n 53-1122

*USAF 388th FBW.

*6/1969: Transferred to the Saudi AF.

*7 Squadron as 705.

*Assigned as a ground trainer to the Technical Training Institute at Dharan AB.

 

 

 

 

 

 

SAC from 1956, the last flight manual for F86F series i have is printed 1960 and was revised up to 1971.

 

 

Again id like to see this exact Museum piece that happens to be an former USAF F86F block 35 that have korean era 6/3 wing and in turn have Aim9B modification which was implemented post Wing modification. IF manual documentation was limited, than i dont know what to say. I found technical manuals from online sources, without much effort. The manual Has Performance charts for Sabres with the new wing type.

 

IT would be a different scenario vice versa, as not all sabres were upgraded with Aim9B before being sold off, given that sabres were no longer being used for AS, and outclassed by other platforms.

 

So ultimately it still makes more sense as the simplest soultion, to remove Aim9B and related avionics, to authentically represent a unmodified 1953-54 F86F35 utilizing korean era 6/3 wing. IN an ideal world it would be nice to split into two version, F86F35 ( early) F86F35 (mod F40 wing) with the aim9B upgrade, to represnt this late model , and more representative of the type of sabres used post korea by export users that got such specific blocks., but flight modeling changes require much more time and effort than a a few modest 3d modeling changing to avionics panels.

 

In turns of aerodynamics and overall performance, the F86F stays the same as the block 30 that saw use in Korea, but is more preferable to stay even without Aim9's because Block 35's had new manual bombing device ( fore pipper adjustment) and the bombing computer.


Edited by Kev2go

 

Build:

 

Windows 10 64 bit Pro

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z790 Motherboard, Intel Core i7 12700k ,Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 64gb ram (3600 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia RTX 3080 12gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; Samsung 970 EVo, , Samsung evo 860 pro 1 TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD,  WD 1TB HDD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or, could we accept that it falls within the realms of plausibility, and that the current version caters to a larger crowd, who may want to simulate Sabres of varying nationalities?

 

You could also do that with a f86f,s modified with f40 wing. In fact that would be fitting much more to export Sabres, f86f35 block in particular. With aim9 capability.

 

That being said there no environment for foreign conflicts anyways. We lack a Korean war scenario, but let's be honest if the f86fs main contemporary is the mig15bis, and not the mig17f, then it's a already more fitting for Korean era engagements than it is for small foreign conflicts like 1958 taiwan strait crisis or others.


Edited by Kev2go

 

Build:

 

Windows 10 64 bit Pro

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z790 Motherboard, Intel Core i7 12700k ,Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 64gb ram (3600 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia RTX 3080 12gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; Samsung 970 EVo, , Samsung evo 860 pro 1 TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD,  WD 1TB HDD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly... The Sabre isnt’t perfect and doesn’t fit any map perfectly.

A certain amount of make-believe is needed, and that’s my point.

Would a certain version or sub version of the Sabre actually add that much to the simulated experience..? I doubt it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly... The Sabre isnt’t perfect and doesn’t fit any map perfectly.

A certain amount of make-believe is needed, and that’s my point.

Would a certain version or sub version of the Sabre actually add that much to the simulated experience..? I doubt it.

 

Look at the level of standard in precise variation being applied to ED's F/A18C, or the upcoming F16C. OR 3rd party like HEatblur and their F14 tomcat(s), or for that matter DCS P51D25 and D30.


Edited by Kev2go

 

Build:

 

Windows 10 64 bit Pro

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z790 Motherboard, Intel Core i7 12700k ,Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 64gb ram (3600 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia RTX 3080 12gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; Samsung 970 EVo, , Samsung evo 860 pro 1 TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD,  WD 1TB HDD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes.

None of those are 100% exact simulations of their real counterparts. And they too simulate a specific configuration which won’t fit in every situation.

 

 

.......

 

In terms of 3d model and utilizing the particular avionics, thus least they do fit the ones they are suppose to be from that particular nation and military branch, they are modelled after.

 

There is a difference.


Edited by Kev2go

 

Build:

 

Windows 10 64 bit Pro

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z790 Motherboard, Intel Core i7 12700k ,Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 64gb ram (3600 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia RTX 3080 12gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; Samsung 970 EVo, , Samsung evo 860 pro 1 TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD,  WD 1TB HDD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the problems here is that the module is already released and missions and other content are built around it. Correcting the plane is fine, but consideration should be made for backwards compatibility.

 

 

I don't think it's a hard fix though, outside of the work done to actually change the module. DCS already supports multiple versions of aircraft in one module (L-39) and option check boxes (civil version for P-51, etc). The current F-86 should just be left as an option separate from the corrected version in one way or another.

Awaiting: DCS F-15C

Win 10 i5-9600KF 4.6 GHz 64 GB RAM RTX2080Ti 11GB -- Win 7 64 i5-6600K 3.6 GHz 32 GB RAM GTX970 4GB -- A-10C, F-5E, Su-27, F-15C, F-14B, F-16C missions in User Files

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a difference.

 

To you.

 

The way I see it, there will always be someone advocating another variant to suit this or that era/theater/country. I remember the original IL-2 series, that had some 30 versions of the Me-109. I’m not convinced that this made it superior. So unless you make every available version, someone is going to complain. And, there’s also a cost/benefit ratio that must be considered.

 

The developer may err on the side of plausibility and makes a module that can simulate different versions in one, if you know what I mean.

If your version didn’t have Sidewinders, don’t add them. Pretend a little.

That’s my take on this, anyway.


Edited by Goblin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the F-86F is going to updated to be more accurate, I would prefer a "split" like the P-51D. It would be nice to actually have a variant that served in Korea. The closest variant to the DCS F-86F would be the F-86F-30. Omit the Sidewinder controls and LABS to pretty much nail this variant. Omit the Sidewinder controls to have a spot-on F-86F-35. Perhaps the existing cockpit with LABS and Sidewinder controls could be a "checkbox" option?

 

The F-86F-40 is too different in flying qualities and appearance with the longer, slatted wings. A separate module would be justified.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the F-86F is going to updated to be more accurate, I would prefer a "split" like the P-51D. It would be nice to actually have a variant that served in Korea. The closest variant to the DCS F-86F would be the F-86F-30. Omit the Sidewinder controls and LABS to pretty much nail this variant. Omit the Sidewinder controls to have a spot-on F-86F-35. Perhaps the existing cockpit with LABS and Sidewinder controls could be a "checkbox" option?

 

The F-86F-40 is too different in flying qualities and appearance with the longer, slatted wings. A separate module would be justified.

 

^This, except right now there are no plans for a Korea Map, so when that happens, we can re-touch on this subject.

Windows 10 Pro, Ryzen 2700X @ 4.6Ghz, 32GB DDR4-3200 GSkill (F4-3200C16D-16GTZR x2),

ASRock X470 Taichi Ultimate, XFX RX6800XT Merc 310 (RX-68XTALFD9)

3x ASUS VS248HP + Oculus HMD, Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS + MFDs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the F-86F is going to updated to be more accurate, I would prefer a "split" like the P-51D. It would be nice to actually have a variant that served in Korea. The closest variant to the DCS F-86F would be the F-86F-30. Omit the Sidewinder controls and LABS to pretty much nail this variant. Omit the Sidewinder controls to have a spot-on F-86F-35. Perhaps the existing cockpit with LABS and Sidewinder controls could be a "checkbox" option?

 

The F-86F-40 is too different in flying qualities and appearance with the longer, slatted wings. A separate module would be justified.

 

True, although not as simple as that.

 

Although it would not require any 3d model or Fligt model changes the F-86F30 would be more than just removing sidwinder and labs controls. fairly different cockpit panels in the Front, and also different panels for Fuel tank controls in the sides, and no bombing computer, no manual bombing pipper type that is in the F-86F35.

 

Although i agree F86F30 is more fitting for Korea as that was the last version to see use in that war. F86F35 missed Korea, but in its standard 6/3 wing configuration is otherwise identical to performance to the F86F30.

 

if there was any separate sabre module that i would spend money and prefer over the F-86F40 ( technically USA never operated production F40's, only upgraded F25-F35 blocks with F40 wing post via retrofit) on would be the F-86H


Edited by Kev2go

 

Build:

 

Windows 10 64 bit Pro

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z790 Motherboard, Intel Core i7 12700k ,Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 64gb ram (3600 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia RTX 3080 12gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; Samsung 970 EVo, , Samsung evo 860 pro 1 TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD,  WD 1TB HDD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To you.

 

The way I see it, there will always be someone advocating another variant to suit this or that era/theater/country. I remember the original IL-2 series, that had some 30 versions of the Me-109. I’m not convinced that this made it superior. So unless you make every available version, someone is going to complain. And, there’s also a cost/benefit ratio that must be considered.

 

The developer may err on the side of plausibility and makes a module that can simulate different versions in one, if you know what I mean.

If your version didn’t have Sidewinders, don’t add them. Pretend a little.

That’s my take on this, anyway.

 

To you may be rationalizing inaccuracies, but not everyone has your lower standards.

 

I'm not advocating for a particular variant, besides pointing out in a bug report inconsistencies for features for the specific variant that it should be, that is actually supported by documentation. IE USAF series manuals for the F86F series. That is fact. Why does the Mig15bis get to be representative of a korean era version? IF it was a post war version Soviet pilots would be wearing G suits for EG.

 

Therefore a USAF variant should be represented to its accuracy, as this is the most common available documention ( if not the only type besides RCAF] Canadair sabers,but thats another story). Using documentation from country of origin should be the default where possible. A Aim9 less F86F35 is still not a Korean era aircraft. Itsdifferent from the F86F30 that was actually used in korea, but otherwise still the same in performance. That itself is already compromise on its own. And lets be honest whens the last time anyone used Gar8's ( aim9b) anyways. its more a of a niche weapon that carried at the cost of extra drag, and very situational against a small maneuverable target like the Mig15.

 

Going by the logic of "plausibility' just because it feels so is a very slippery slope.


Edited by Kev2go

 

Build:

 

Windows 10 64 bit Pro

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z790 Motherboard, Intel Core i7 12700k ,Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 64gb ram (3600 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia RTX 3080 12gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; Samsung 970 EVo, , Samsung evo 860 pro 1 TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD,  WD 1TB HDD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^This, except right now there are no plans for a Korea Map, so when that happens, we can re-touch on this subject.

 

There was no planned environment for the F4E, yet in comparison to prior modules Belsimtek had very specific feature list for the F4E, I did some fact checking, and it would have been authentic USAF model based on their feature descriptions. About a mid 1980s era F4E aircraft, but nonetheless even if that wasn't put on hold, that too would be stuck without any specific scenario, or campaigns but BST seemed to finally start moving to higher simulation standards that ED has with that planned module/.

 

How is that? did ED finally start enforcing higher standards and greater communication on 3rd parties after the fiasco of a certain 3rd developer starting with "V"?

 

Who knows but lets be honest If that F4E was released im sure no one would be asking for "plausible" fantasy features to be a criss cross of multiple versions or from other users.


Edited by Kev2go

 

Build:

 

Windows 10 64 bit Pro

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z790 Motherboard, Intel Core i7 12700k ,Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 64gb ram (3600 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia RTX 3080 12gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; Samsung 970 EVo, , Samsung evo 860 pro 1 TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD,  WD 1TB HDD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

+1 for slatted and fenceless wing. I'd like to be able to pretend it's a Canadair Sabre VI. Changing the visual model wouldn't break any missions. (It might break a lot of skins though, though maybe this is a good time for it as many older skins seem to be broken anyway.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone told Kev about the BS3 yet?

 

Just curious ;)

 

 

What about BS3? Yes i have following the discussions

 

 

ED eventually realized and self admit iglas aren't a realistic load out......

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3946153&postcount=400

 

 

Igla's are still being considered because Rotor head fans whine due of the Ka50 having no air defense( being partially justified due to being experimental/ pre production helo) , however even CHIZ acknowledges if the Igla ultimately gets added, theyl have a tick box in the settings menu for those who want to fly realistic. Thus based on user choice on SP, or for Multiplayer server admins, theyl can still restrict to a non fantasy version.

 

We dont have that choice for F86F35, however difference is as a pointed out, besides having "tickboxex" in settings there is an opportunity to remodel F86F35 to be accurate, both with missiles and without, as a F86F35 did exist with AIm9b, just not documented to be with current wing configuration.

 

 

Ultimately its not fair to compare a handful of experimental/ pre production evaluation helos, with various planned features and a couple upgraded to what where envisioned production standards, to a standardized mass production aircraft.

 

So lets please stay on topic with current aircraft instead of distracting with other projects that are WIP and not actually finalized and in the game yet.


Edited by Kev2go

 

Build:

 

Windows 10 64 bit Pro

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z790 Motherboard, Intel Core i7 12700k ,Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 64gb ram (3600 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia RTX 3080 12gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; Samsung 970 EVo, , Samsung evo 860 pro 1 TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD,  WD 1TB HDD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone told Kev about the BS3 yet?

 

Just curious ;)

 

Dont Troll.

Windows 10 Pro, Ryzen 2700X @ 4.6Ghz, 32GB DDR4-3200 GSkill (F4-3200C16D-16GTZR x2),

ASRock X470 Taichi Ultimate, XFX RX6800XT Merc 310 (RX-68XTALFD9)

3x ASUS VS248HP + Oculus HMD, Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS + MFDs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dont Troll.

 

You're right... that was super trolley... My bad.

Nvidia RTX3080 (HP Reverb), AMD 3800x

Asus Prime X570P, 64GB G-Skill RipJaw 3600

Saitek X-65F and Fanatec Club-Sport Pedals (Using VJoy and Gremlin to remap Throttle and Clutch into a Rudder axis)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...