Jump to content

Franken Sabre


Kev2go

Recommended Posts

We have a F86F block 35 , clearly a post Korean modification given the Aim9B sidewinder missiles and associated addition of the Missile avionics panel which indicated to me with was at least 1956-1957 sabre at earliest given when the AIm9B was introduced. BUt accrding to the USAF series manual, thes Aim9b's and related avionics were not applied to Air forces sabres until 1962.

 

Yet this still has the 6/3 wing with Wing fencing. By end of 1956 all remaining USAF/ANG F86F series of sabres would have been retrofitted post production with F40 slatted wing, the modification of which began as early as 1954.

 

 

czLjmAe.png

 

 

p8fuuX4.png

 

 

7RrWRrn.png

 

 

XttfVI3.png

 

 

 

 

 

Therefore it is Anachronistic feature to have 1962 Sidewinder modified F86F35 sabre when by 1956 these sabres would have already have had the 6/3 wing swapped out for the F40 slatted wing types, however they do not.

 

So what we have is a franken sabre due to unrealistic features for its time frame (not to mention block 35 never saw use in Korea), although in its 6/3 wing configuration is basically like a Korean F-86F30 in terms of

flight model performance.

 

 

 

For historical Authenticity, either

 

A) Remove the gar8 /aim9b Missile panel and ability to arm them, to have a 1954 (or earlier) era F86F35 Sabre.

 

B) Change the wing to the F40 Slatted wing as F86F35 should have for a 1956+ era.

 

 

C) add 2 variations of the F86F block 35. IE one without sidewinders capability, and representative of korean war era style 6/3 wing, along with the circa 1962 F86F 35 that has F40 type wing and Aim9's for correct uuthenticity for the version(s) being simulated.

 

 

 

List of Constructed sabres and thier production #'s.

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

manuals as well as standard aircraft characteristics sheets from 1956 and later no longer show performance charts for 6/3 wing, but for the Wing slatted version.

 

 

http://www.avialogs.com/index.php/item/56117.html


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

example former USAF F-86F35 sold to Portugal in 1960. sold second hand aka surplus, as you can see no with 6/3 wings with fencing.

 

 

 

 

 

https://1000aircraftphotos.com/Contributions/GuerraJorge/6320.htm

 

 

 

6320L.jpg


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

I would prefer an accurate Korean War variant above all else. If a checkbox could be used to toggle between historically accurate and Franken Sabre, that would be a good solution to make more people happy.

 

but if your going to fix to a Historically accurate , you may as well have 2 checkboxes.

 

1 For 6/3 winged model ( no sidewinders) which would be closest to Korean era version, and another for one armed with sidewinders and Slatted wing.

 

 

The franken sabre ( or rather sabre with anachronistic features) can be changed to historically accurate saber if only it had the F40 slatted wings.

 

this is the easiest fix, as if you were to actually add a 6/3 winged version that actualyl saw use in korea it would be more remodelling effort. the F86F block 30 also has different cockpit to the F86 block 35


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

just in case it isnt clear how the wings differ

 

 

 

p1070520.jpg

 

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

f35 is the same as f-30 with added labs bombing and gar8. So just not using gar8 is close enough representation of late korea war. I believe there were engagements late in the war between the mig15bis which we have and f86 f30 which has the same characteristics as what we have.

 

Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

f35 is the same as f-30 with added labs bombing and gar8. So just not using gar8 is close enough representation of late korea war. I believe there were engagements late in the war between the mig15bis which we have and f86 f30 which has the same characteristics as what we have.

 

 

 

 

Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk

 

 

 

It wasnt just the ability to carry a missile on a pylon, but change in avionics suite. See missile control panel ( top left corner) , and the aded switch between Guns to Missiles option ( near stick)

 

By the time the gar8 got added all F86F block 25- Block 35 sabres had undergone wing modification by 1956. Aim9B didnt go into US navy service until mid 1956 at the earliest ( first platforms to utilize were the F9F8 cougar and Fj4) , and USAF followed suit later year with gar8 designation, along with modification to some sabres.

 

Therfore You cant have a Gar 8 modded sabre, but using Korean era 6-3 wing modification. so its anarchistic feature, and therefore unrealistic.

 

 

It would be like ED decided created a 1980s F/A18A but decided to throw features from F/A18C various lots and post production features in GPS Link 16 , JHMCS, aim9x, creating a franken plane in the process.

 

 

BST ( now part of ED) should have simply created an actual F86F30 , or if for whatever reasons didnt have access to one to properly model its pit, as i have explained made a compromise for a Pre 1954 F86F35 which would be accurate for the time period for a 6-3 wing configuration and no missiles or their related avionics.

 

 

Again Ideally, There should 2 variations. IF not for the incorrect Wing type, the F86F35 Missile sabre would be closer representative of sort of configuration Sabres were in post 1956 era like the ones used in Taiwan straights ( which fought Mig17F's) or like the ones used by Pakistan in the indo pakistan wars ( pakistan ace mahmoud alam himself flew a F86F block 35 sabre specifically)


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

Well, I know it's probably a rarity, but how do you explain this one? Probably F-86F-25 (or -30) with hard edge 6-3 wing, dispatched to Spain from 1956 onwards, of course used aircraft. Only a handful of them as the rest were F-40, but they existed at least as late as 1956. Being a probable F-25 cockpit may not match DCS one (though I know no pics), but external features does, I think.

 

I forgot, no sidewinders mounted ever on them AFAIK.

 

 

400a8b71cdc136ff2d66e3b552436584.jpg

 

 

S!


Edited by Ala13_ManOWar

"I went into the British Army believing that if you want peace you must prepare for war. I believe now that if you prepare for war, you get war."

-- Major-General Frederick B. Maurice

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Therefore it is Anachronistic feature to have Sidewinder modified F86F35 sabre when by 1956 these sabres would have already have had the 6/3 wing swapped out for the F40 slatted wing types, however they do not.
Here, another one, dispatched to Spain by mid 1957, 6-3 wing,

 

avc_00283551.jpg

 

Still no Sidewinder, of course, but neither F-40 had them in Spain.

 

 

I think the Sidewinder thing is a problem with DCS users, we're always asking for and demanding new things and better features. If they model a F-25 we want the F-40, if they model the F-40 we want the Sidewinder armed one. So BST just went ahead of that by modelling the F-30 they probably had data for and added the Sidewinder beforehand people started asking for it because we know how we all are, people would have asked for it should it be not featured.

 

 

Personally I don't care about Sidewinder, I don't use it if I fly a Korean time Sabre and that's all of it.

 

 

S!


Edited by Ala13_ManOWar

"I went into the British Army believing that if you want peace you must prepare for war. I believe now that if you prepare for war, you get war."

-- Major-General Frederick B. Maurice

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am all for slats! LOL, Argentina operated surplus F-30s with F-40 wings, reconditioned by North American in late 59. But

 

My guess is that it´s not only not going to happen, but i Doubt we will get any other Sabre Variant in the foreseeable future

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
Well, I know it's probably a rarity, but how do you explain this one? Probably F-86F-25 (or -30) with hard edge 6-3 wing, dispatched to Spain from 1956 onwards, of course used aircraft. Only a handful of them as the rest were F-40, but they existed at least as late as 1956. Being a probable F-25 cockpit may not match DCS one (though I know no pics), but external features does, I think.

 

I forgot, no sidewinders mounted ever on them AFAIK.

 

 

400a8b71cdc136ff2d66e3b552436584.jpg

 

 

S!

 

A) its a surplus plane sold off to Spain, not a sabre operated in USAF inventory.

 

 

B) Like you speculated either F86F block 25- 30 . not a F86F block 35 ( the block we have modeled in DCS) and it doesn't have sidewinders.

 

To note The Block 35 has a different cockpit panel than the block 25 and block 30.

 

PVxDUWr.png

 

 

T0fwUmc.png

 

 

 

Centerline panel for a missile modded sabre is also different.

 

 

p8fuuX4.png

 

 

C) Its very possible it might not actually be a F86F block 25- 30 in those images, People forget earlier F86F blocks were being upgraded to 6/3 wing standards with kit packages during korean war, thus for such an upgraded block you cant tell them apart from visuals alone. These older productipn sabres or in general ones with higher flight time would have first to removed from serivice vs newer production F86F airframes or with less flight hours kept passed on to continued post war AF or ANG service at the time.

 

IN fact these changes in the manual for the missile are noted to have been implemented as late as 1962 pertaining to the Missile avionics. The new 6/3 wing with leading edge wing slats ( type 40 wing) was already reffited in USAF flown sabres by then if not earlier.


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

And another one, dated 1961, so…

 

 

 

 

 

 

S!

 

 

you can spam pictures all you want. difference is with my posts i traced down the model # to determine which exact block it was to prove a point.


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

A) its a surplus plane sold off to Spain, not a sabre operated in USAF inventory.

 

Well, there you have it. They may have chosen this configuration to accomodate more users.

Or, we have this version simply because the devs got hold of a surviving airframe that they could document. And survivors and museum aircraft often are franken ships because many are put toghether from multiple airframes.

 

to prove a point.

 

My point would be that DCS is a simulator.

And with the current F-86 config we can simulate a larger timeframe and more operators...

Sure, more variants would be fun. It would also mean more work for the devs, that they probably would like to be compensated for. That would be absolutely fine with me. But I don’t know how well multiple F-86 variant modules would sell, considering the cost-benefit of such an effort.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, there you have it. They may have chosen this configuration to accomodate more users.

Or, we have this version simply because the devs got hold of a surviving airframe that they could document. And survivors and museum aircraft often are franken ships because many are put toghether from multiple airframes.

 

 

 

My point would be that DCS is a simulator.

And with the current F-86 config we can simulate a larger timeframe and more operators...

Sure, more variants would be fun. It would also mean more work for the devs, that they probably would like to be compensated for. That would be absolutely fine with me. But I don’t know how well multiple F-86 variant modules would sell, considering the cost-benefit of such an effort.

 

 

IF they wanted that configuration thne they should have simualted the F86F block 30 which actually was used in Korea, or the sort of planes that foreign users Spain would have had if they wanted to accommodate more users

 

We have the F86F block 35 which has a different cockpit plus is modified with sidewinder avionics anyways, so for this variant given the timeframe ( as demonstrated in OP), its supposed to have the F40 wing configuration.

The Block 35's were specifically meant for USAF service as they have the LABS instruments installed . that was the prime reason why block 35 was produced, and its major change, for toss bombing tactical nuclear weapons. Eventually F86F35's were exported ( but not before earlier blocks) but LABS was removed.

 

AS i further pointed out those might not even be F86F block 25- 30 in the images.


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

Relax, Kev2go.

I’m not saying you are wrong. This is evidently very important to you.

Just saying that it’s a sim, so features may have been added to cater to a wider audience.

You may not agree with this, but you’re not the developer, who needs to earn a buck from this module.

That’s all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Relax, Kev2go.

I’m not saying you are wrong. This is evidently very important to you.

Just saying that it’s a sim, so features may have been added to cater to a wider audience.

You may not agree with this, but you’re not the developer, who needs to earn a buck from this module.

That’s all.

 

Exactly its a sim.... it should not be done at the cost of historical authenticity or realism. This is DCS, not War Blunder.

 

 

You can rationalize all you want, but I have already presented why this the wrong aircraft version to be apealing to a wider audience. and besides we already have mutliple versions of a given aircraft or expansions for aircraft.

 

IE ED with 2 L39 versions, which was followed with NS430 navigation payware expansion, or how Heatblur is making 2 F14 tomcat versions ( different engines and different avionics) all for the price of 1 module

 

ED has also revisted Ww2 birds and updated thier cockpits with new 3d textures and also split P51D into two versions ; P51 D25 and P51D30. the D30 has additional avionics ( new iff system) , and this was the original block simulated. but the D25 was added on behest of the community as being the historically appropriate variant for European Theatre for 1944 timeframe, whilst the D30 was only in the pacific.

 

To create 2 versions of a Airframe ( in this case same block) would not be something other developers wouldn't have done. In this case to reiterate, from OP, the sensical solution would be a missile less 6/3 winged version of F86F35 of 1953-54 time period , and 1956+ version with Aim9 missiles and its avionics, with F40 wing refits.

 

EDit:

 

also to add in case you didnt know Belsimtek doesn't exist anymore, they merged directly with ED. So, ED is now responsible F86F, and if they have shown they can revist older modules for texture update and make changes to address historical authenticity in the form of additional A/C versions for appropriate time frame and theater i dont see why the same cant be done for the sabre as a module.


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... Again, I’m not saying you are wrong. Relax, ok?

For all I know they will revisit the Sabre module. Would be great if they did.

Juuuust trying to give you some perspective.

 

Btw, and please don’t blow a fuse as I’m just making this as a friendly remark.

Your sig needs a spellcheck. It’s Noctua, hard drives and Samsung.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it should not be done at the cost of historical authenticity or realism. This is DCS, not War Blunder.

 

In that case you probably should not be flying F-86F over Caucasus at all... I do understand that you want more variants, but It is kind of pointless unless you have a historical map complete with AI and objects. Why Belsimtek choose this "Franken Sabre", we don't know. But they did and simulated that version to thier fullest ability. Aircrafts around the world are modified. I say it will still fall under plausible, even if it is a rare version.

 

The "make believe" of putting that module into an interesting context either fictional or simulated is up to us.

 

Look at it this way. DCS is our sandbox and we have different toys. Right now they are a F-86F and a MiG-15bis. If we want to play a 1950/60/70 scenario we have to use those assets and mix and match payload and liveries to make something that we feel are close enough. Same with every module released, as there are always some asset missing for a correct historical representation of a given scenario or conflict.

 

Id' love another version (like the CAC one), but Im quite sure it won't happen. At least not soon anyways.


Edited by Schmidtfire
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In that case you probably should not be flying F-86F over Caucasus at all... I do understand that you want more variants, but It is kind of pointless unless you have a historical map complete with AI and objects. Why Belsimtek choose this "Franken Sabre", we don't know. But they did and simulated that version to thier fullest ability. Aircrafts around the world are modified. I say it will still fall under plausible, even if it is a rare version.

 

The "make believe" of putting that module into an interesting context either fictional or simulated is up to us.

 

Look at it this way. DCS is our sandbox and we have different toys. Right now they are a F-86F and a MiG-15bis. If we want to play a 1950/60/70 scenario we have to use those assets and mix and match payload and liveries to make something that we feel are close enough. Same with every module released, as there are always some asset missing for a correct historical representation of a given scenario or conflict.

 

Id' love another version (like the CAC one), but Im quite sure it won't happen. At least not soon anyways.

 

 

using moral equivalency fallacy nice...

 

 

Yeah flying A/C over Caucasus than never flew over there is not equivalent of authentic airplane modelling. If a developer created a USAF F15C with A/G munitions ( not a pound for air to ground) and Aim54 Phoenix youd have a ****storm on the forums, except for the vocal minority who like to rationalize fictional or what if features

 

I Dont really want more sabre variants. ( the CAC is totally different beast) I want a proper F86F35 to what it should be. I simply proposed that spiting in two variants of the Same F86F35 block as the best solution to avoid introducing totally different Blocks and to satisfy those who want a Korean era scenario or the version of it for post korea. OFC given its matchup is the Mig15bis, then the configuration that is closest representative what was in Korea should take precedence ( in that case it would be a F86F35 without sidewinders or the new associated control panels).

 

Look at the Mig15BIs, Its not using fictional or Rare configuration. It doesn't have the ISH attack options, nor do soviet pilots have G suits ( g suits came post korea) Its fully representative of Korean era Mig15bis


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

All I was trying to convey is no matter how seriously we take this "sim". There will always be compromises. Sometimes it is accuracy of the module itself, sometimes it's the map, objects, AI...

 

 

I'm with you brother. Glad to have the current F-86, then none at all. ;) Understood, try to keep it as close as possible, (where possible), to history.

MSI MAG Z790 Carbon, i9-13900k, NH-D15 cooler, 64 GB CL40 6000mhz RAM, MSI RTX4090, Yamaha 5.1 A/V Receiver, 4x 2TB Samsung 980 Pro NVMe, 1x 2TB Samsung 870 EVO SSD, Win 11 Pro, TM Warthog, Virpil WarBRD, MFG Crosswinds, 43" Samsung 4K TV, 21.5 Acer VT touchscreen, TrackIR, Varjo Aero, Wheel Stand Pro Super Warthog, Phanteks Enthoo Pro2 Full Tower Case, Seasonic GX-1200 ATX3 PSU, PointCTRL, Buttkicker 2, K-51 Helicopter Collective Control

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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