not realistic for blk 50 Terrain following radar?

[Ikaros]

I was reading about the Block 40 due to seeing a picture of the wide angle HUD and being intrigued about it and I saw that the Block 40 has terrain following radar.

 

Does the F-16 Block 50 have terrain following radar though?

 

 

[Eaglewings]

Not sure if other real life variants of the block 50 has terrain following radar but I am sure the one we are getting in DCS will not be coming with terrain following radar. Mr. Wags has stated that many times

11 minutes ago, Ikaros said:

I was reading about the Block 40 due to seeing a picture of the wide angle HUD and being intrigued about it and I saw that the Block 40 has terrain following radar.

 

Does the F-16 Block 50 have terrain following radar though?

 

 

.

[Ikaros]

Okay, thanks. 

 

[Northstar98]

11 hours ago, Ikaros said:

I was reading about the Block 40 due to seeing a picture of the wide angle HUD and being intrigued about it and I saw that the Block 40 has terrain following radar.

 

Does the F-16 Block 50 have terrain following radar though?

 

 

 

The Block 40 can equip the LANTIRN system, which includes a TGP (AAQ-14, basically identical to the one on the Tomcat) and a navigation pod; the navigation pod (AAQ-13) has the terrain-following RADAR (as well as navigation FLIR), AFAIK these were out of service for our Block 50 (if they were used at all on it).

[Sacarino111]

Hi.

That is a real pitty! The TFR (Terrain Following Radar) is a great feature, a joy to set up and use. Really a pitty it wont be implemented. I understand the reasons (model and realism, plus difficulties on development, bugs and so on...) but ED should really rethink it and consider adding it, as it is really another level. It would raise the image of them as a brand  !

Saludos.

Saca111

[Northstar98]

51 minutes ago, Sacarino111 said:

Hi.

That is a real pitty! The TFR (Terrain Following Radar) is a great feature, a joy to set up and use. Really a pitty it wont be implemented. I understand the reasons (model and realism, plus difficulties on development, bugs and so on...) but ED should really rethink it and consider adding it, as it is really another level. It would raise the image of them as a brand  !

Saludos.

Saca111

 

Meh, as much as I'd love the system (low-level penetration strike/interdiction is my main joy right now), it would be better to do the Block 40 of an appropriate timeframe, instead of fudging multiple variants together into one - something ED has no intention of doing (they've been pretty clear about this).

 

And also, the image they want to go by is to offer as much realism as possible (sure we can debate for ages how well they do that, and I have lots of gripes myself), adding unrealistic features would degrade their image for many, not raise it. 

 

[Sacarino111]

Just now, Northstar98 said:

 

Meh, as much as I'd love the system (low-level penetration strike/interdiction is my main joy right now), it would be better to do the Block 40 of an appropriate timeframe, instead of fudging multiple variants together into one - something ED has no intention of doing (they've been pretty clear about this).

 

And also, the image they want to go by is to offer as much realism as possible (sure we can debate for ages how well they do that, and I have lots of gripes myself), adding unrealistic features would degrade their image for many, not raise it. 

 

So...you don t think they will bite the worm! Damm it!

 

[Northstar98]

1 minute ago, Sacarino111 said:

So...you don t think they will bite the worm! Damm it!

 

 

No, they've been pretty clear about it, especially so with the F-16.

Edited January 24, 2021 by Northstar98

[Sacarino111]

Just now, Northstar98 said:

 

No, they've been pretty clear about it, especially so with the F-16.

 

Again, a pitty. I was drooliing about the idea of low level flights, but...

Saludos, 

Saca111

[QuiGon]

57 minutes ago, Sacarino111 said:

Again, a pitty. I was drooliing about the idea of low level flights, but...

Saludos, 

Saca111

 

You should take a look at the Viggen then, as this aircraft is a true dedicated low level striker, the only one of its kind we have in DCS so far. Maybe in the future we might get others like the Tornado or F-111.

[Northstar98]

Yeah right now the Viggen is the premier low-level strike-fighter, though is less advanced than the F-16, and while it has an A/G RADAR with a rudimentary TA mode, it's not a coupled TFR as seen with the LANTIRN equipped block 40s.

[Geraki]

The TFR ability is included in CCIP 2007 F-16 module BUT it's need Lantirn or Litening navigation pod 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Litening

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Ffas.org%2Fman%2Fdod-101%2Fsys%2Fsmart%2Flantirn.htm&psig=AOvVaw3PigFTLMJ-0vsOQl9dcmpa&ust=1611576584728000&source=images&cd=vfe&ved=0CAIQjRxqFwoTCIiCxOzEtO4CFQAAAAAdAAAAABAJ

 

Edited January 24, 2021 by Geraki

[Northstar98]

2 minutes ago, Geraki said:

The TFR ability is included in CCIP 2007 F-16 module BUT it's need Lantirn or Lightning navigation pod 

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Ffas.org%2Fman%2Fdod-101%2Fsys%2Fsmart%2Flantirn.htm&psig=AOvVaw3PigFTLMJ-0vsOQl9dcmpa&ust=1611576584728000&source=images&cd=vfe&ved=0CAIQjRxqFwoTCIiCxOzEtO4CFQAAAAAdAAAAABAJ

 

 

Yeah and AFAIK (at least for the US) Block 40s are the only ones that fly with AAQ-13 navigation pod, there isn't a LITENING nav pod AFAIK.

[OperatorDerp]

On 1/24/2021 at 6:15 AM, Northstar98 said:

Yeah and AFAIK (at least for the US) Block 40s are the only ones that fly with AAQ-13 navigation pod, there isn't a LITENING nav pod AFAIK

While there isnt a litening, the Lantern is still used on the 15E, and The Israelis use the pod all the time, and Greece Has in the past as well I believe. The Block 50 Theoretically should be able to carry it, But not surprisingly its one of the Many things we wont get.

 

Article quote is pulled from

Quote

September 1997 aboard an advanced version of the U.S. Air Force F-16D. A Block 50 F-16, with a cockpit display virtually identical to that of the Dutch MLU aircraft, carried a LANTIRN targeting pod with electro-optical and television sensors and a LANTIRN Pathfinder navigation pod with a Laser Spot Locator. Flights included day and night imaging operations.

 

[Northstar98]

While F-16.net is a great resource, it doesn't tell us when LANTIRN was out of US service on the F-16, or whether any US CCIP F-16CM was using it in 2007.

[bies]

17 minutes ago, OperatorDerp said:

While there isnt a litening, the Lantern is still used on the 15E, and The Israelis use the pod all the time, and Greece Has in the past as well I believe. The Block 50 Theoretically should be able to carry it, But not surprisingly its one of the Many things we wont get.

 

Why such negative attitude, it's a different variant. To use LANTIRN to it's full potential you need completely different HUD. With our classic HUD any LANTIRN IR image couldn't be displayed directly on HUD.

Quote

The GEC-Marconi holographic Head-Up Display (HUD) was the answer to the USAF's request for a HUD capable of displaying the WVOW FliR-imagery of the LANTIRN Pod. The design of the new HUD was particularly challenging; conventional optics do not allow implementation of such a large combiner glass. New holographic technologies (diffraction gratings; simply put, they reflect light of a particular wavelength or color with high efficiency while transmitting all other wavelengths with little absorption) were applied, in the mean time ensuring that the HUD installation would not interfere with the ejection line (i.e. allow enough space for the legs and feet of the pilot during ejection). Designers want to place the HUD as close to the ejection line as possible to maximize the FOV.

 

 

It looks like that:

 

Edited February 4, 2021 by bies

[OperatorDerp]

2 minutes ago, bies said:

to it's full potential you need completely different HUD. With our classic HUD any LANTIRN IR image couldn't be displayed directly on HUD.

I know this, Its still something that'd be pretty cool to have, Yes the Block 40 Could display it, But its not Essential for operation of it. They've said no, So im not going to waste my time fighting a useless war, Maybe somebody will mod it in so we can get it someday, but my statement was simply to say that yes, the Block 50 Can, has and Does carry it

[bies]

I would love to have Cold War F-16 Block 40 with LANTIRN, high FOV HUD and terrain following radar. Maybe ED will add this variant in the future. In late 1980s it was cutting edge technology.

But i wouldn't like some unrealistic frankenstein variant having different features from different planes combined in one.

[OperatorDerp]

9 minutes ago, bies said:

I would love to have Cold War F-16 Block 40 with LANTIRN, high FOV HUD and terrain following radar. Maybe ED will add this variant in the future. In late 1980s it was cutting edge technology.

But i wouldn't like some unrealistic frankenstein variant having different features from different planes combined in one.

Im in the same Boat, There are just a few things im shaking my head at. The big ones being the integration of some things, So we're getting about a Tape 5.1 Aircraft, As seen by Jsow's:

Quote

M5.1 tape

Integration of capability for stand-off weapons (AGM-154)
Introduction of more advanced A/G weapons (EGBU-12)
Introduction of advanced Stores Management System and Joint Mission Planning System
Introduction of an improved GPS/INS system (more accurate and jamming proof)
Introduction of new Link-16 message standards to improve interoperability between different aircraft types
Installation of AN/ARC-210 VHF radios to enable radio contact with FAC’s on the ground

But weve got no word on the Arc-210, But ive got little to no hope on this seeing how long its taken for the A10-2 to get it, and we also still dont have a working half datalink how many years after release

Another thing i Found leads me to believe that the lantern nav was on our version, or atleast still had all the ability to. Id love to see that if and when we get a working lantern from Razbam on the Mudhen we could slap it on the viper, Sniper being the same way

Quote

M6.5 tape

From this tape onwards there will be a difference between the European numbering sequence and the US. Funding for the M-tapes was extended through the years up untill number M6. The normal succession would mean an M7 would be next. This will be the case for the US (with their F-16s lasting untill well into the 2030s). Since the European F-16s are much older and reaching the end of their lifespan (2020-2030) it was difficult to convince them to extend funding for more updates to the F-16s. Specifically the Netherlands and Norway weren't eager since they already opted to replace the F-16 with the F-35 with fleet introduction starting in 2019 and F-16 phase out around 2024). Much of the updates found in tape M6.5 will be the same as tape M7.

• • Rectification of some earlier weapon integration shortcomings
  • Integration of new weapons (JASSM, JDAM, EGBU-12, SDB, AIM-120D and AIM-9X)
  • Integration of advanced racks (BRU-69), pylons, adapters and the UAI (ensuring nuclear surety and compatibility)
  • Update of the Link-16 protocol
  • Upgrade of the AN/AAQ-14 interface software
  • Update of the AN/ALR-56M system
  • Update of the GPS system

 

Edited February 4, 2021 by OperatorDerp

[Northstar98]

The aircraft is supposed to be a 2007 variant, which corresponds to M4.3, the JSOWS however are from M5.1 if F-16.net is accurate.

 

1 hour ago, bies said:

Why such negative attitude, it's a different variant. To use LANTIRN to it's full potential you need completely different HUD. With our classic HUD any LANTIRN IR image couldn't be displayed directly on HUD.

 

I'm fairly sure our HUD can do it, the FLIR controls have been present since the Block 25 (the F-16 seems to have been designed with future equipment in mind).

 

Here's a video on an F-16C, not sure what block but definitely not a 40 (I'm tempted towards 25/30)

 

 

[Slug72]

55 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

Here's a video on an F-16C, not sure what block but definitely not a 40 (I'm tempted towards 25/30)

 

 

I'm going for a -30, as iirc that was the first block introduced with the common engine bay (for either PW or GE motors) which is specifically mentioned in the video. The inlet also looks to be a "big mouth" and the tail feathers look GE, so that's my logic.  

[OperatorDerp]

Some Block 30's at B Course using it, Note the box in the hud tape, So we can, Just dont know if we will get it, its pretty complicated beast to make, but the f15 will eventually need it so heres hoping

 

Edited February 6, 2021 by OperatorDerp

[Tholozor]

Those look like Block 30s, note the lack of bird slicer antennas in front of the canopy.

[=Panther=]

On 2/4/2021 at 4:25 PM, OperatorDerp said:

Some Block 50's at B Course using it, Note the box in the hud tape, So we can, Just dont know if we will get it, its pretty complicated beast to make, but the f15 will eventually need it so heres hoping

 

 

Probably a typo, but those are block 30s not 50s.

[Geraki]

E.G THK F-16 block 50 CCIP have TFR and FLIR capabilities , it is up to ED.