Jump to content

Update of the F-5E to the F-5N level?


Kongamato

Update of the F-5E to the F-5N level?  

454 members have voted

  1. 1. Update of the F-5E to the F-5N level?



Recommended Posts

As far as I know, there are no plans of updating the 80´s F-5E to a more advanced real life model, as the F-5N "Adversary", at present in service with the US NAVY and Marine Corps, but I would like to know if there would be interest in the comunity for this model.

 

It could be a payware update for the people that already have the F-5E (without losing the F-5E, obviously, you would have the F-5E and F-5N), and people that doesn´t have it could choose to buy the F-5E, the F-5N, or both for a discount.

 

It would be mostly an update of the avionics: INS and a better radar AN/APG-69 among other things.

 

Wouldn't it be an amazing and realist sparring for the Hornet and the Tomcat? Tigers could fight with the new radar (the one designed for the F-20) and avionics "mano a mano" with Hornets and Tomcats, and not only take off to be massacred by them. Also, there would be INS and ILS, so the plane would be "Night and All weather" and not only a "Day fighter". And foru sure, that update would revitalize the interes of the comunity in this great bird and would not be a work as long an difficult as a brand new plane.

 

2012-12-17_181833-panel.jpg

 

2012-12-17_181811-tiger.jpg

 

https://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_display.asp?cid=1100&ct=1&tid=1050


Edited by Kongamato
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every new plane Is welcome, but dcs Is not about balance but about accurate simulation. And f-5 e Is accurately simulated. I vote no because I'd prefer resources to be put on other projects.

 

The F-5N could be accurately simulated. It´s not the F-35 or the F-22, with all the systems being "Top Secret". It´s the same plane with INS, a newer (but 20 years old) radar and some others avionics. And the F-5N is actually used by the NAVY and USMC against the Tomcats and Hornets in real life training, not the F-5E.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meh, that's very little gain for a lot of work. We'd still end up with an Aggressor plane, with the same armament, but some gizmos that have limited use because you can already add a GPS with the GNS 430 and the radar won't be able to actually guide any new munitions with it.

 

If we were to get a different Tiger variant I would propose the older F-5E-1 series as received either by Brazil or Morocco. Those had ILS/VOR receivers, factory-installed air-to-air refuelling probe provisions, no countermeasures or RWR, the older AN/APQ-153 radar with the much more gainly round radome, manually-actuated combat flaps, a dorsal fin to aid in directional stability, a second radio (VHF) and in some units an inertial navigation system was added. This would make the Tiger much more hands-on aircraft to contend with contemporary fighters like the MiG-19, MiG-21, Mirage III and so on, while also greatly enhancing its ability to operate in primitive conditions where TACAN or divert fields aren't readily available with VOR and tankers being the alternatives, which by extension also means more pylons dedicated to actual ordnance instead of taking more bags than the centreline 275 tank.

 

Another alternative is the Saudi models introduced with Peace Hawk IV, which had all the aforementioned capabilities but retained the RWR, chaff/flare dispensers and 159 radar.

 

PS: We already have compressor stalls and flameouts, it's just that the F-5 is incredibly resistant to them in real life. Start at angels 30,000, accelerate as fast as you can then put the nose vertical and wait. You'll very often flame out both engines, which then leads to a relight scramble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we were to get a different Tiger variant I would propose the older F-5E-1 series as received either by Brazil or Morocco. Those had ILS/VOR receivers, factory-installed air-to-air refuelling probe provisions, no countermeasures or RWR, the older AN/APQ-153 radar with the much more gainly round radome, manually-actuated combat flaps, a dorsal fin to aid in directional stability, a second radio (VHF) and in some units an inertial navigation system was added. This would make the Tiger much more hands-on aircraft to contend with contemporary fighters like the MiG-19, MiG-21, Mirage III and so on, while also greatly enhancing its ability to operate in primitive conditions where TACAN or divert fields aren't readily available with VOR and tankers being the alternatives, which by extension also means more pylons dedicated to actual ordnance instead of taking more bags than the centreline 275 tank.

 

Another alternative is the Saudi models introduced with Peace Hawk IV, which had all the aforementioned capabilities but retained the RWR, chaff/flare dispensers and 159 radar.

 

.

 

It would work for me. What I want actually is an all weather fighter with INS and ILS, although just adding ILS, INS, air-to-air refueling, disabling the automatic flaps and slats and maybe an INS wouldn't justify, for me, a payware update. More likely a free update or a unexpensive one, just a few bucks.

 

The new and "modern" (90´s technology instead of 70´s) radar and the new screen in the cockpit would be the key of considering it a full update to a new version of the plane. I have said the F-5N because this version is currently being used by the US NAVY and the USMC, and I thought it would be more attractive for most of the users (specially new ones) than the older Saudi or Morocco versions.

 

Truth is, this module, as it is right now, has lost attractive since there are more capable and "sexy" planes in the DCS universe. It needs a "boost" IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as I know, there are no plans of updating the 80´s F-5E to a more advanced real life model, as the F-5N "Adversary", at present in service with the US NAVY and Marine Corps, but I would like to know if there would be interest in the comunity in this model.

 

I am all in for the new upgraded versions of existing modules, as long for few things:

 

1) They are all as a DLC for the "base module", meaning you need to buy the original (in this case F-5E) first before you can buy the upgraded variant (in this case F-5N). This way the developer/studio can sell more, and those who want to get the latest and greatest version, can get it.

 

2) That it doesn't go for money laundry, where base module is some kind cheap one that you don't like but need to get to have the wanted one. In this case like you don't need to buy a Mig-21F so you can get the Mig-21Bis. But more like that Bis would be the base module and then you could buy those older versions like F and special ones Bis/T.

This would open the future for new variants in many other modules, like Mi-24P to be the main module, get change to buy a Mi-24V and Mi-24VP as extra modules.

 

Sure people would love the free stuff, but I am as well considered that it needs to be two way street, that customers gets great content, but then developers get good customer base and fair money from a easier upgrade variants. Like how big difference is between Mi-24P and Mi-24V? Can't be at all as big difference as between Mirage 2000C and Mirage 2000-5.

 

This, because developers need to invest lots of time to research and find information, make the base flight modeling and then all the systems. So based to the Wags interview information that the flight modeling is in his opinion the most demanding, then if the flight modeling doesn't change radically (V vs P) then the systems (12.7mm vs 30mm etc) should be easier job to get extra good fair price like 29€ extra over usual 69€ per module.

 

 

Personally I would love to see all kind variants out there, more fitting at different eras etc. As long it is fair and generalistic for the major part of customers.

 

Meaning, after buying MiG-21Bis, I would just for one weekend fun buy a MiG-21F-13. It wouldn't be big deal.

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The F-5N could be accurately simulated. It´s not the F-35 or the F-22, with all the systems being "Top Secret". It´s the same plane with INS, a newer (but 20 years old) radar and some others avionics. And the F-5N is actually used by the NAVY and USMC against the Tomcats and Hornets in real life training, not the F-5E.

 

I'm not saying f-5n can't be simulated, I Just say we already have an accurate f-5 simulation and I'd prefer to see different airframes: tornado ids, an english or european fighter - there are many, some century series one, f-111, and so on. Not to mention Red ones because ED has limitations being in Russia. I'm not for putting resouces in doing different versions of already simulated modules.


Edited by nessuno0505
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Truth is, this module, as it is right now, has lost attractive since there are more capable and "sexy" planes in the DCS universe. It needs a "boost" IMO.

 

I do not agree. Mig-21 and Mig-19 have limited capabilities too. F-5 has the capabilities of a 70s fighter and Is ok against other fighters of the same period. It requires different approach vs bvr with f-15, but It Is not less fun nor less rewarding. To be true It Is more because It needs an older style pilot rather than a computerized systems manager.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not agree. Mig-21 and Mig-19 have limited capabilities too. F-5 has the capabilities of a 70s fighter and Is ok against other fighters of the same period. It requires different approach vs bvr with f-15, but It Is not less fun nor less rewarding. To be true It Is more because It needs an older style pilot rather than a computerized systems manager.

 

Imagine that you don´t have the F-5E and you want to buy a module today. Between the Tomcat and the F-5E, which one would you buy? Which one is more sexy and capable? They both are old school planes that need that older style pilot rather than computerized systems... Would you prefer to be Maverick or the uncknown soviet pilot of Mig-28?

 

And, for the same period of time (80´s - 90´s) there is also the Hornet, the Harrier, the Viggen, the M-2000... I don´t think, right now, they are selling a lot of F-5E. If they want to sell a few Tigers, they have to upgrade the plane.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not saying f-5n can't be simulated, I Just say we already have an accurate f-5 simulation and I'd prefer to see different airframes: tornado ids, an english or european fighter - there are many, some century series one, f-111, and so on. Not to mention Red ones because ED has limitations being in Russia. I'm not for putting resouces in doing different versions of already simulated modules.

 

Well, let´s play to be the C.O. of ED and let´s say we know the way to maximize the efficiency of the resources of the company, as it seems you are doing. Doesn´t have sense to revitalize an older module with a low expensive (in terms of man/hours of work) update and get a few extra bucks to use in making new planes? With this update, you don´t have to do the most difficult and time draining task: to create the flight physics. Also, you don´t have to make a new 3D model, just some changes in the cockpit, you don´t have to make the investigation from a brand new plane or to purchase the license for a new plane... Not a lot of work, and your old, exhausted module will provide a some fresh money again.

 

I´m sure that people that really love the F-5E and fly it will love to purchase a new version of the bird and any improvement the company can make, even paying a few bucks. People that actually doesn´t care about the plane, of course, don´t need or want a new version of it and would prefer any other product. All those "NO" votes in the poll, actually tell me that those people actually doesn´t love or care about the Tiger. Probably they don´t have it, or they never fly it.


Edited by Kongamato
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I own and fly the f-5, while I do not own the tomcat nor the hornet.

Moreover, hornet is mid 2000 (aim-9x and fox3), harrier I do not know exactly but I think earlier, mirage 2000c is '90 something (just fox1), viggen is cold war era (no mfcd for example). Four different periods of time and four different capabilities.

F-5e is late '70s and '80s, the same as mig-21 and the eagerly awaited f-4 phantom II, a bit newer than mig-19. It is intended to be flown against this kind of planes, with ground assets and AI planes of the same era. What is really missing is an appropriate historical map, if anything.

If you think f-5e is not appealing because it's less capable than a tomcat or a hornet, then maybe you should suggest ED to remove mig-15, f-86 and l-39 from the store, not to talk about the warbirds.

I do not want a later f-5, I'd prefer to see the f-4 and a vietnam map, for two things.

The author of the topic asked an opinion, I've given mine. I've also said that any new plane is welcome, but since everything cannot be done due to resources and developing times, I prefer to vote against.

A last thing: ED does not need my advices to manage its resources, but a main module (f-5 e) with a lot of sub-DLCs, earlier or later versions, is not a business choice with which I'd agree as a customer: it would mean microtransactions and I would not like it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A better way to introduce different variants is to give discounts to those who already own the module. For example, both the F-5E and N would cost full price, but once you have the -E or -N, the cost of the other is 30% less or whatever.

 

 

That said, given that the main constraint for all 3rd party devs is how many resources they have, I'd rather they focus on new modules than expanding the F-5 with slightly different variants. It's not like the aircraft had major changes like the fighter and attack versions of the Viggen for example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I own and fly the f-5, while I do not own the tomcat nor the hornet.

Moreover, hornet is mid 2000 (aim-9x and fox3), harrier I do not know exactly but I think earlier, mirage 2000c is '90 something (just fox1), viggen is cold war era (no mfcd for example). Four different periods of time and four different capabilities.

F-5e is late '70s and '80s, the same as mig-21 and the eagerly awaited f-4 phantom II, a bit newer than mig-19. It is intended to be flown against this kind of planes, with ground assets and AI planes of the same era. What is really missing is an appropriate historical map, if anything.

If you think f-5e is not appealing because it's less capable than a tomcat or a hornet, then maybe you should suggest ED to remove mig-15, f-86 and l-39 from the store, not to talk about the warbirds.

I do not want a later f-5, I'd prefer to see the f-4 and a vietnam map, for two things.

The author of the topic asked an opinion, I've given mine. I've also said that any new plane is welcome, but since everything cannot be done due to resources and developing times, I prefer to vote against.

A last thing: ED does not need my advices to manage its resources, but a main module (f-5 e) with a lot of sub-DLCs, earlier or later versions, is not a business choice with which I'd agree as a customer: it would mean microtransactions and I would not like it.

 

It seems that you don´t understand what I have said pretty clearly, or you don´t want to understand it, and also you put things in my mouth that I haven´t say. I´m not going to continue this conversation with you, I´m sorry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A better way to introduce different variants is to give discounts to those who already own the module. For example, both the F-5E and N would cost full price, but once you have the -E or -N, the cost of the other is 30% less or whatever.

 

 

That said, given that the main constraint for all 3rd party devs is how many resources they have, I'd rather they focus on new modules than expanding the F-5 with slightly different variants. It's not like the aircraft had major changes like the fighter and attack versions of the Viggen for example.

 

I agree. I do not want to go off-topic, but razbam said they plan an av-8b plus in the future, besides the /na version. Even if the main difference between /na and plus is the ground radar, they also said the presence of the radar in the nose changes the flight behaviour and so the flight model, thus they'll sell the plus as a completely different module. I've got nothing against the plus, to be true I prefer it over the /na; we'll see if razbam will offer a discount for people who already bought the /na. It will be interesting to see what will happen.

 

 

It seems that you don´t understand what I have said pretty clearly, or you don´t want to understand it, and also you put things in my mouth that I haven´t say. I´m not going to continue this conversation with you, I´m sorry.

 

You asked a vote and I gave you mine. To each his own ideas. I will be glad to evaluate the purchase of a newer f-5 version if it will be available one day, but I will not tear off my clothes to convince someone to develop it.


Edited by nessuno0505
Link to comment
Share on other sites

... All those "NO" votes in the poll, actually tell me that those people actually doesn´t love or care about the Tiger. Probably they don´t have it, or they never fly it.

 

I can as easily say that you do not understand or care about the F-5E, and just want shiny toys to play with.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeah pretty much this, op didnt see the results he wanted so resorts to slinging mud

 

If you like this plane, it´s obvious that you would like more variants and improvements, and would pay for it. I´m not into helos, and I would´t care about new versions of the Huey, for example. Also, there are planes that I have purchased, and I actually doesn´t fly a lot, like the Mustang. I would´t care about a new version of the mustang if there were one. I suppose that people that doesn´t want a new version of the F-5E is because they actually don´t fly a lot the plane or they don´t even have it. As simple as that.

 

But.. Eh! I´m suppose I´m just "slinging mud"...


Edited by Kongamato
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really do not care for any of the F-5N features but would pay for the 1974 export variant as described in the 1F-5E(I)-1.

 

https://www.eflightmanuals.com/ITEM_EFM/SDETAIL_EFM.asp?mID=8997

 

You want and older version of the F-5E? Great. Make a poll you too. I would vote YES, because I really like this plane and I want to see as much versions and improvements as possible of she in ED universe.

 

By the way, I have said in other comment that I would be OK with other version of the F-5E. The one of Marocco or the one of Arabia Saudi, for example. ILS, INS and aereal refueling. I have said the F-5N in the poll because I have thought that it would be the most attractive one right now for most of the people, because is the version that is being used right now by the NAVY and the USMC and is the most realistic "sparring" against the new Tomcats and Hornets in DCS. But I would be OK even with an F-5A, the version that the air force of my country used for decades and already uses for training (F-5B). Because I like this plane, and I want more of she.

 

But I suppose that actually I just want "shiny toys"...


Edited by Kongamato
Link to comment
Share on other sites

that's hella projecting. i enjoy the f-5 for its insight into aircraft development history, to see what aircraft of its timeperiod were like. you seem to only be able to think in terms of more-and-less and winning-and-losing, which really have nothing to do with the airplanes. when you're agnostic about the systems and operation of the aircraft, all you are left with is its outer mold line, that is it say, you're in it for the vanity, that you just like the aircraft for how it looks, because that is really all what different variants of the f-5 have in common in the end. that is again, not really about the airplane, because an airplane is more than a work of art, it is a functional tool.

 

furthermore, you seem to have stopped at the notion that the only way to enjoy something is to have more of it. you don't appreciate the concept that contrast compliments enjoyment, that comparisons resulting from diverse experiences, both positive and negative, only serve to highlight each subject's unique qualities. is the f-5n different enough from the f-5e to create valuable juxtaposition? not really when set beside that of a mig-19, f-8, or ee lightning.

 

as for the matter of flying the f-5e against other players, i'll have you know that for those of us who fly the f-5 against more advanced aircraft, do it precisely because it is so limited in capabilities. that is the whole point of working for an f-5 victory. you will gain no respect from your opponents for your desire to increase your odds of winning through more advanced piloting aids.

 

in the end though, the deciding matter is one of reality. i never said i didnt want an f-5n, if one dropped off a tree, i'd pick it up. but modules don't grow on trees, the world doesnt run on votes, and consensus doesnt always go your way.


Edited by probad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my opinion the F-5E is OK the way it is. I don't need an upgrade. Would be too much the same as the one we already have.

A-10A, A-10C, A-10C II, AV-8B, F-5E, F-16C, F/A-18C, F-86F, Yak-52, Nevada, Persian Gulf, Syria, Supercarrier, Combined Arms, FW 190 A-8, FW 190 D-9, Spitfire LF Mk. IX, Normandy + WWII Assets Pack

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that's hella projecting. i enjoy the f-5 for its insight into aircraft development history, to see what aircraft of its timeperiod were like. you seem to only be able to think in terms of more-and-less and winning-and-losing, which really have nothing to do with the airplanes. when you're agnostic about the systems and operation of the aircraft, all you are left with is its outer mold line, that is it say, you're in it for the vanity, that you just like the aircraft for how it looks, because that is really all what different variants of the f-5 have in common in the end. that is again, not really about the airplane, because an airplane is more than a work of art, it is a functional tool.

 

furthermore, you seem to have stopped at the notion that the only way to enjoy something is to have more of it. you don't appreciate the concept that contrast compliments enjoyment, that comparisons resulting from diverse experiences, both positive and negative, only serve to highlight each subject's unique qualities. is the f-5n different enough from the f-5e to create valuable juxtaposition? not really when set beside that of a mig-19, f-8, or ee lightning.

 

i never said i didnt want an f-5n, if one dropped off a tree, i'd pick it up. but modules don't grow on trees, the world doesnt run on votes, and consensus doesnt always go your way.

 

If you like something, you want more and better of that. As simple as that. If for you something is just "meh" at best, you don't care. For you, it´s OK as it is. Again, as simple as that. you can use use as much verbiage as you want. I don´t need it because I´m telling a simple truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMHO, INS would be nice, but I'm not so sure about the gains of having a more advanced radar without some BVR missiles to accompany it.

 

I'd prefer if they made a variant with Mavericks and more Sidewinders.

 

Now, I really miss a computed bombing sight on this module. Did any of the F-5E export variants have those?

i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg.

 

DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?).

 

Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMHO, INS would be nice, but I'm not so sure about the gains of having a more advanced radar without some BVR missiles to accompany it.

 

I'd prefer if they made a variant with Mavericks and more Sidewinders.

 

Now, I really miss a computed bombing sight on this module. Did any of the F-5E export variants have those?

 

Yes, Brazil, Chile, Singapore and maybe some other countries operate F-5E updated to "Tiger III"

 

https://thaimilitaryandasianregion.wordpress.com/2016/06/05/f-5e-tiger-ii-f-5t-tigris-of-the-royal-thai-air-force/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you like something, you want more and better of that. As simple as that. If for you something is just "meh" at best, you don't care. For you, it´s OK as it is. Again, as simple as that. you can use use as much verbiage as you want. I don´t need it because I´m telling a simple truth.

 

 

The mistake you're making is that you're assuming everyone thinks "more capable = better". For many DCS users capability is not as important as a good cockpit, good FM, good content, etc. The simple truth is, you are applying your personal and subjective definition of "better module" to the entire DCS community.

 

 

That is why many people enjoy the Migs, F86, F5, L39 etc for what they are - accurate representations of a real life aircraft. Whether more capable versions of said aircraft exist in real life is irrelevant to what many of us think as a "better" module.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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