AIM-9X (+HMD?) when? :)

[draconus]

You can read in wiki that IDF F-15's are equipped with DASH III, which was also certified for F-5 and Mig-21 2000 :)

Some USAF F-15C have JHMCS.

 

On the balance thing ED likes to suggest something like this sometimes:

Battle the Hornet in head-to-head combat

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/shop/modules/mig-29_dcs_world/

 

Battle the F-15C in head-to-head

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/shop/modules/su-27_dcs_world/

Edited January 29, 2020 by draconus

[D4n]

You can read in wiki that IDF F-15's are equipped with DASH III, which was also certified for F-5 and Mig-21 2000 :)

Some USAF F-15C have JHMCS.

So yes, someday DCS F-15C JHMCS hopefully :D

 

On the balance thing ED likes to suggest something like this sometimes:

 

 

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/shop/modules/mig-29_dcs_world/

 

 

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/shop/modules/su-27_dcs_world/

What do those have to do with "balancing" ?

Hornet vs MiG-29S can be "balanced"... xD

[Kula66]

Later this year when the 'Eagerly' awaited next module comes out ;)

[XPACT]

In a sim which features the KA-50, which was never operationally employed, it doesn't seem like a far fetched request to get a missile.

 

I don't usually quote wikipedia as valid source of information but these are straight up facts.

 

 

 

Second Chechen War

 

 

"Ka-50 took part in the Russian Army's operations against separatists in the Chechen Republic during the Second Chechen War. In December 2000, a pair of production Ka-50s arrived to the area. With the Ka-50s was a Ka-29 to provide reconnaissance and target designation. On 6 January 2001, the Ka-50 used live weapons against a real enemy for the first time. On 9 January, at the entry into a mountain gorge in the area of a settlement named Komsomolskoye, a single Ka-50 accompanied by an Mi-24 used S-8 unguided rockets to destroy a warehouse full of ammunition belonging to Chechen insurgents. On 6 February, in the forest-covered mountain area to the south of the village of Tsentoroj, the strike group composed of two Ka-50s and the sole Ka-29 discovered and, from a range of 3 km, destroyed a fortified camp of insurgents using two "9K121 Vikhr" guided missiles. 14 February, saw a similar strike group carrying out a "hunting" mission in the area of Oak-Yurt and Hatun. In difficult conditions, pilots found and destroyed eight targets. These missions tested the type's airframe, as well as its on-board systems and armament. Its successful performance in difficult, mountainous terrain once again confirmed the usefulness of the many advanced features of the Ka-50's design, including its power and maneuverability."

 

 

Andrey Fomin. "Kamov Warriors". Combat Aircraft, July 2005. Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 64–73.

Edited April 4, 2020 by XPACT
Grammar mistakes as usual

[CarbonFox]

The FC3 Eagle fits in with a late 90s/early 2000s spec F-15C when you count the AIM-120C. Would getting the 9X be nice? Yes, but I can live with just the AIM-9 Mike.

 

 

Pretty sure current year F-15Cs have JHMCS along with the APG-63v3.

[eltorrente]

Is the 9X really THAT much better than the M?

 

 

 

I don't doubt that it's better, but the fact is that I always seem to hit when I fire the M.

[markriley]

So leave the FC3 F-15 alone and introduce a new F-15C Module for DCS 2.5 with the JHMCS and Aim 9X since Boeing provided the system on the F-15, F-16, and F-18 at the same time frame according to this Boeing historical snapshot.

 

https://www.boeing.com/history/products/joint-helmet-mounted-cueing-system.page

 

"On Aug. 29, 2003, the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) awarded Boeing a $24 million contract to produce 100 JHMCS destined for the U.S. Air Force F-15 and F-16 aircraft and the Navy’s F/A-18E/F aircraft.

 

DOD contracts for full production followed in February and June 2004 for U.S. Air Force and Air National Guard F-15 Eagles and Air Force F-16 Fighting Falcons, along with U.S. Navy F/A-18E/F Super Hornets."

 

If the F-16c that is in DCS were to be placed in FC3, would it have the JHMCS and 9X system available?

[markriley]

the 9X also has thrust vectoring and less drag advantages over the the 9M

[Kumabit]

If you are taking about intruducing an upgraded version of the F15C, we should also get an modernized version of the Flanker. If it is the case, I am more excited about the Flanker.

 

Danel you are wrong in EVERY aspect at the beginning of this thread. This is a FLIGHT SIMULATOR, ask yourself, should an aircraft built in 1980's have technology that only exist 20 years later???

 

If you want a game with "balance" in it, go play War Thunder or some other games

Edited April 25, 2020 by Kumabit

[Fri13]

IMHO weapons and aircrafts should be separated.

 

Then if the airframe systems is capable launch newer weapons without software or hardware changes, then they can be equipped. If not, then weapon is not accessible for it.

 

Is our F-15C older than AIM-9X compatibility, requiring updates to airframe? Like software codes that AIM-9x is mounted?

Where in the cockpit you connect the JHMCS and where are its sensors in seat for the tracking?

Where is the switches for JMHCS management to switch it on and off, adjust it's brightness?

What HOTAS controls are to switch between radar, HUD and JMHCS?

 

I don't know so much about that F-15C but it is even without datalink capability. So suddenly getting JHMCS without any changes sounds odd...

 

AIM-9X can be mounted where other previous AIM-9X IIRC but you need to use it as previous AIM-9, so boresighted. Your uncaged seeker just has wider tracking limits after lock etc.

 

But if the system requires coordination between FCS and AIM-9X like mentioned code for allowing weapon to be usable, then no go as that is software update to FCS and not so that missile would tell FCS that what it is and how to use it.

[Fri13]

Danel you are wrong in EVERY aspect at the beginning of this thread. This is a FLIGHT SIMULATOR, ask yourself, should an aircraft built in 1980's have technology that only exist 20 years later???

 

Yes - IF the weapon is backward compatible.

 

Let's say you have aircraft module that models it's configuration from 1987 when it was taken first time in service, like argument sake a "block 12" or "suite 6".

 

1) you can't add weapons from future if they require the aircraft to be upgraded to newer configuration like "block 13" or "suite 8".

 

2) you can fly that aircraft in it's configuration in any mission you want, meaning you can take it even to 1943 and pretend to be a superpilot while shooting down whole enemy airforce alone. Or you can't take it to mission from 1995 and fly it as it was operated, and even to 2003 and fly it in there if realistic, or pretend that your aircraft was pulled from warehouse without updates that other variants had (like "block 21" or "suite 10").

 

3) if there is a weapon in the future that doesn't require any kind modifications to airframe, then you can field it in the mission in the year of taking that weapon in service as it is backward compatible. So weapon from 2005 is possible be used in airframe from 1987 but realistically only in missions from 2005- and not earlier.

 

4) you can create a fantasy mission again (like 1943) where you will get that 2005 weapon in use but in 1987.... But that is again up to you. But it is technically possible.

 

5) if someone loves argument that aircraft is only from the year it was modeled in service, like ie. 1987. Then they must accept as well argument that aircraft will never fly with F/A-18C Lot 20, F-16C Block 50 or so on, because those aircrafts are from the future, and to them the F-15C is only in the 1987. There is no overlapping as the module exist only in the very specific year or even month, without any service period or possibility when it could still be used.

 

Point is, we can walk to museum and make good restored WW2 aircraft fly even today. But we have no means what so ever go back in time with a F-35 and fly it in 1942. As that is time traveling and impossible.

But if we can today mount modern weapon to aircraft from 1968 and launch it just like it would launch any ordinance from 1968, then we can do so today. But we can't go back to 1968 and use that weapon there.

 

There are very few weapons that are backward compatible and doesn't require any changes to launchers, platforms erc to be used in older aircrafts.

 

APKWS II is one of those few. Same is with Ugroza etc. Fully backward compatible to any aircraft that can launch standard 2.75"/80mm rockets.

 

Is AIM-9X such?

Is JHMCS such?

[musolo]

Hi guys! You can fly Eagles armed with Aim9X in multiplayer withought any mods. There is IC compliant and clean server named "Exercise Red Flag" . Once you connect and occupy any Eagle slot you will have Aim9X already on your pylons. No client or any other kinds of  mods are required. Fog of war option is enabled to give SA to Eagle. Thus F10 is your data link there. Speaking of which. Checkout F10 window skin https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3314171/

It turns it into MFD/Radar  like dark green color palette. Combined effect is that Eagles  have eyes now so it`s ollmost impossible to sneak up on them. Plus in close combat they have Aim9X.  And when it`s used with vertical scan it is a mass murderer)

Tomcats have Aim120B on outer pylons like  VX-4 squadron had them. Reds are upgraded too to represent Chinese Flankers armed with chinese missiles and modern Mig-29M.  Red Flag exercize is a crazy thing  as it is irl where Eagles and Vipers pretend to be Flankers and Migs. So stuff that you will find on our server is far less of a stretch than that of it`s real life inspiration.

See you there)

Peace!

Edited January 9, 2021 by musolo

[Vekkinho]

First of all it's silly to expect any F-15C avionics and system updates in future FC versions, I've been playing this game ever since Flanker 2, LOMAC, FC 1, FC2, DCS and so on and the Eagle featured in all of these versions is representing the RL F-15C MSIP dating back from mid '80s and used as such in Desert Storm.

So let's say that FC3 Eagle got stuck in 1985.

So did the Flankers and Fulcrums on the red side...and there is a balance...Desert Storm era balance.

 

If ED upgrades Eagle to a 2007 standard with instalation of  AN/APG-63v3 AESA radar, EPAWSS, datalink, helmet mounted display, Aim-9X, new wheels and braking system they would have to upgrade Flankers to at least SM level in order to maintain that balance.

 

So if You're complaining on being an underdog in a 1985 F-15C vs 1999 F-16C blk50 engagement, embrace the suck, that's the way it is.  

 

If we ever see a F-15E Strike Eagle in DCS it would probably be a 1989 era as the ones used in Desert Storm.

 

On the other had I do believe that F-15C deserves a separate DCS clickable cockpit, advanced avionics module to bring her to 21st century but it's hard to expect as most of it is classified and 60$ guesstimate module would leave a bad taste once swallowed.  

 

This is what a most modern F-15C Eagle looks like:

 

[Xenovia]

ED can just model a 2004 Langley F-15C, they were equipped with AN/APG-63 (V)1's, which were still a mechanical pulse doppler radar. It would come with Link-16, JHMCS, and AIM-9X's, the whole shabang. Question is, how classified is the F-15C from that time period, just because the AN/APG-63 (V)1 isn't an AESA radar, doesn't mean it isn't classified and how many bits and pieces can ED actually model in terms of the HUD modes, as well as the pages/subpages on the F-15C's MFD.

Edited January 14, 2021 by Xenovia

[GGTharos]

13 hours ago, Xenovia said:

ED can just model a 2004 Langley F-15C, they were equipped with AN/APG-63 (V)1's, which were still a mechanical pulse doppler radar. It would come with Link-16, JHMCS, and AIM-9X's, the whole shabang. Question is, how classified is the F-15C from that time period, just because the AN/APG-63 (V)1 isn't an AESA radar, doesn't mean it isn't classified and how many bits and pieces can ED actually model in terms of the HUD modes, as well as the pages/subpages on the F-15C's MFD.

 

The latest -34 I've seen is from '95.  Not the newer might not be circulating, but if so they're in a private circle and no one's talking about it.

[musolo]

Eagles are back in business) This is no mod. You can visit IC protected "Exercise Red Flag" server and try those 9Xs out. You just occupy the Eagle slot and your pylons will have those 

missiles. You will have additional 4 Aim-120C on it too. Everithing is upgraded there within IC compliance limits. There is South Osetia fictional war scenario with Sino-Russian 

new variants of red jets are opposing improoved fighters of NATO air forces over Tskhinvali.  You can spawn on the ground and in the air. there is a battle on the ground 

blue units trying to take back the control over this area. Soviet Flankers are representing their newer Chinese variants armed with Chinese weapons. Fulcrum is representing

Mig-29M that can carry up to 4 R-27ETs. F10 map has Fog of war enabled. So Eagle has situational awareness, 2Aim9X and plus 4 slammers. this mission is EvE,PvE,PvP.

 

[BonerCat]

On 1/20/2021 at 1:27 AM, musolo said:

Eagles are back in business) This is no mod. You can visit IC protected "Exercise Red Flag" server and try those 9Xs out. You just occupy the Eagle slot and your pylons will have those 

missiles. You will have additional 4 Aim-120C on it too. Everithing is upgraded there within IC compliance limits. There is South Osetia fictional war scenario with Sino-Russian 

new variants of red jets are opposing improoved fighters of NATO air forces over Tskhinvali.  You can spawn on the ground and in the air. there is a battle on the ground 

blue units trying to take back the control over this area. Soviet Flankers are representing their newer Chinese variants armed with Chinese weapons. Fulcrum is representing

Mig-29M that can carry up to 4 R-27ETs. F10 map has Fog of war enabled. So Eagle has situational awareness, 2Aim9X and plus 4 slammers. this mission is EvE,PvE,PvP.

 

This hurts my eyes

[musolo]

2 hours ago, BonerCat said:

This hurts my eyes

Does this hurts them too?

[BonerCat]

Well, the problem i have with the DCS screenshots, is the airframes we have in game, never carried those payloads in combat
The Tomcat ended up getting the LANTIRN instead of the AMRAAM, so the 120 was never fielded on the 14. Some tests were made, but ended up going nowhere

The F-16 and F-15...
I guess if you want to pretend you're flying a later variant, that's ok, but i just don't like it
Not that my opinion should stop you from enjoying yourself, but those screenshots do hurt my eyes

[musolo]

8 minutes ago, BonerCat said:

Well, the problem i have with the DCS screenshots, is the airframes we have in game, never carried those payloads in combat
The Tomcat ended up getting the LANTIRN instead of the AMRAAM, so the 120 was never fielded on the 14. Some tests were made, but ended up going nowhere

The F-16 and F-15...
I guess if you want to pretend you're flying a later variant, that's ok, but i just don't like it
Not that my opinion should stop you from enjoying yourself, but those screenshots do hurt my eyes

You see we as a virtual pilots can enjoy all those buffs withought all the burocracy and billions of tax payers money at stake. So why limit ourselves to what upgrades  5 star generals decided to procure or not procure for those jets back then.  Why deprive ourselves just coz some old farts didn`t have enough pocket money to equip those jets with cool toys)

Your strict approach is 100% legit for recreating real battles that happened before. Rest of the cases are  good to go in that sence.

[BonerCat]

Let's just agree to disagree, and enjoy the game the way we want to
It's a sim, and i take it as such
You do have a point tho, it is a game, and you can change it to your hearts content

Those screenshots still hurt my eyes

[musolo]

13 minutes ago, BonerCat said:

Let's just agree to disagree, and enjoy the game the way we want to
It's a sim, and i take it as such
You do have a point tho, it is a game, and you can change it to your hearts content

Those screenshots still hurt my eyes

Hence "EXERCISE RED FLAG" my friend. Simulations they have at Nellis (both real ones and computer simulated) are way more far fetched that anything you`ll ever see in DCS both for Blue and Red.  If they do that with all seriousness, than why we have to cringe ? When the ones we can have is way  less of a stretch. That`s why server you can fly those buffed jets is named after it`s real life inspiration.  

Edited February 26, 2021 by musolo

[GGTharos]

No they aren't far-fetched.   What a silly statement.  Those simulations and exercises are based on current and/or future threats, with actual expected armaments that also are bound to logistics - not fantasy payloads that don't consider those facts.

As well, what they do at Nellis when they run RED FLAG is practice cooperation, they do not try to test new technology there.  There are other exercises for that, but they're still not far fetched.

As for simulations, I could see them tweaking numbers to determine what they might NEED to do in order to force a particular outcome.

Edited February 26, 2021 by GGTharos

[musolo]

3 hours ago, GGTharos said:

No they aren't far-fetched.   What a silly statement.  Those simulations and exercises are based on current and/or future threats, with actual expected armaments that also are bound to logistics - not fantasy payloads that don't consider those facts.

As well, what they do at Nellis when they run RED FLAG is practice cooperation, they do not try to test new technology there.  There are other exercises for that, but they're still not far fetched.

As for simulations, I could see them tweaking numbers to determine what they might NEED to do in order to force a particular outcome.

 

If using F-15 and F-16 as mockups for all kinds of Flankers and Fulcrums isn`t far fetched for you than nothing in DCS  ever will be i guess. So we`re cool) Don`t get triggered like that man, - chill) Take it easy`,)

Edited February 26, 2021 by musolo

[GGTharos]

No, it isn't.  The RWR software and other devices are programmed to show different symbols for them, they simulate specific enemy tactics etc.   So no, it's not far fetched when you actually know what's going on