Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

I think some one asked that already and was turned down cause of the software. SDB was introduced with M6.1 tape which came in 2011, we probably have something like M5.1 tape (cause of the VHF radio), but still miss some stuff from that one.

 

I'd love to have those.


Edited by Furiz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am pretty sure this is not even in the scope of being looked at for the F16. It is unfortunate but it is kind of right around the period our f16 is based off from. Were they in service? Yes. Widely used and tested? No. I also think there is a software version difference allowing deployment of the newer JDAM based weapons like the SDB. It would really turn the f16 into a beast on the front line's. However I would think other planes would get the SDB as well if it was put in for the 16. Nothing wrong with that either IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, hawk4me said:

我很确定这甚至不在 F16 的考虑范围内。不幸的是,这与我们的 f16 所基于的时期差不多。他们在服役吗?是的。广泛使用和测试?不。我还认为存在软件版本差异,允许部署基于 JDAM 的新武器,如 SDB。它真的会把 f16 变成前线的野兽。但是,我认为如果将 SDB 放入 16 中,其他飞机也会获得 SDB。IMO 也没有错。

 

14 hours ago, Furiz said:

我想有人已经问过这个问题,但由于该软件而被拒绝了。SDB 与 2011 年推出的 M6.1 磁带一起推出,我们可能有类似 M5.1 磁带的东西(由于 VHF 无线电),但仍然错过了一些东西。

 

我很想拥有那些。

 

So, in 2007, F16 has not been integrated yet, is it?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, CZQS said:

F16C is 2007, SDB is actually combat in October 2006. Does F16 can not send SDB?

F-16-Santa-Hat.jpg

That picture is of a F-16C block 30, it is definitely not in 2007, since the 134FS started to receive F-16 in march 2008 from the 186 FS

  • Like 2

To whom it may concern,

I am an idiot, unfortunately for the world, I have a internet connection and a fondness for beer....apologies for that.

Thank you for you patience.

 

 

Many people don't want the truth, they want constant reassurance that whatever misconception/fallacies they believe in are true..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

here is a link to the original photo, its from 2016

https://www.centcom.mil/MEDIA/IMAGERY/igphoto/2001682736/

  • Like 1

To whom it may concern,

I am an idiot, unfortunately for the world, I have a internet connection and a fondness for beer....apologies for that.

Thank you for you patience.

 

 

Many people don't want the truth, they want constant reassurance that whatever misconception/fallacies they believe in are true..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Furiz said:

 

我希望我对信息有误;D

Oh,thanks.

59 minutes ago, Furiz said:

是的,根据 2007 年的软件版本,SDB 没有集成。

OK,I got it now.

52 minutes ago, mvsgas said:

那张照片是F-16C Block 30,绝对不是 2007 年的,因为 134FS 于 2008 年 3 月从 186 FS 开始接收 F-16

All right...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, CZQS said:

Oh,thanks.

OK,I got it now.

All right...

 

Can you please use english cause I have no idea what you have quoted ;DDD well had to scroll up

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, nighthawk2174 said:

honestly imo its close enough they should just add it.  IIRC on another thread it was determined the first viper tape that was compatible with the SDB came out in 2008.

 

 

According to this it was an M6 that added it, starting circa 2011.

 

Thing is, that tape also adds AIM-120D, AIM-9X Block II and GBU-54. 

 

M6.5 also adds AGM-158 JASSM to.

Modules I own: F-14A/B, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, F-16CM, AJS-37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), UH-1H, Mi-8MTV2, P-47D, P-51D, FC3, MiG-15bis, Yak-52, CA, C-101, Hawk

Terrains I own: Syria, The Channel, SoH

 

System (RIP my old PC): Dell XPS 15 9570 w/ Intel i7-8750H, NVIDIA GTX 1050Ti Max-Q, 16GB DDR4, 500GB Samsung PM871 SSD (upgraded with 1TB Samsung 970 EVO Plus SSD)

 

VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro

 

Dreams: https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/mBG4dD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Furiz said:

Yea, F-16 we are getting can hardly be called multi role fighter, or its pretty close to lose that title:P

 

:huh:

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Modules I own: F-14A/B, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, F-16CM, AJS-37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), UH-1H, Mi-8MTV2, P-47D, P-51D, FC3, MiG-15bis, Yak-52, CA, C-101, Hawk

Terrains I own: Syria, The Channel, SoH

 

System (RIP my old PC): Dell XPS 15 9570 w/ Intel i7-8750H, NVIDIA GTX 1050Ti Max-Q, 16GB DDR4, 500GB Samsung PM871 SSD (upgraded with 1TB Samsung 970 EVO Plus SSD)

 

VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro

 

Dreams: https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/mBG4dD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Furiz said:

Yea, F-16 we are getting can hardly be called multi role fighter, or its pretty close to lose that title:P

 

First, the F16 was never intended to be a multirole fighter 

Second, being multirole has nothing to do with the ability to drop smart weapons

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

F/A18C, F-16C, Mirage 2000C, JF-14, F-14B Tomcat, Flaming Cliffs 3, Black Shark 2, SU27, AJS37 Viggen, Persian Gulf, Syria

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Falconeer said:

First, the F16 was never intended to be a multirole fighter 

Second, being multirole has nothing to do with the ability to drop smart weapons

 

Even so, the fact we can carry HARMs, guided bombs, Mavericks, as well as A/A missiles means we've got an aircraft that is multirole pretty much by definition, it's far away from being "hardly a multirole fighter".

 

And I agree, an aircraft doesn't stop being multi-role just because it (realistically) doesn't have a load of mini-JSOWs.

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1

Modules I own: F-14A/B, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, F-16CM, AJS-37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), UH-1H, Mi-8MTV2, P-47D, P-51D, FC3, MiG-15bis, Yak-52, CA, C-101, Hawk

Terrains I own: Syria, The Channel, SoH

 

System (RIP my old PC): Dell XPS 15 9570 w/ Intel i7-8750H, NVIDIA GTX 1050Ti Max-Q, 16GB DDR4, 500GB Samsung PM871 SSD (upgraded with 1TB Samsung 970 EVO Plus SSD)

 

VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro

 

Dreams: https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/mBG4dD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Falconeer said:

First, the F16 was never intended to be a multirole fighter 

Second, being multirole has nothing to do with the ability to drop smart weapons

The Danish F-16A´s where, from the very start, from the design stage, form the very beginning meant to be multirole, with multirole being defined as being designed for and effective against both air and ground targets.
And i highly doubt that the F-16 would be a success if it wasn meant as a multirole plane from the very beginning.
If the Danish F-16A where not meant to be multirole, then, F-16 was the absolutely worst plane we could help develop, build, and operate.
If the F-16 was not meant to be a multirole plane from the very beginning, then buying the F-16 would take away any and all fixed wing A/G capability for the RDAF, which i doubt, considering our role in a European WW3.
Being multirole from the very beginning, also explains why the YF-16 have dedicated A/G controls in the cockpit.
Look at the platforms the F-16 was supposed to replace and that would be another proof that the F-16 was meant for A/G
May i ask you from what information you have that argues that the F-16 was never meant to be multirole platform?

  • Like 2

Inno3d RTX 2070 Twin X2, ASUS STRIX Z270E Gaming, Intel i7 7700K, 32GB Corsair vengeance, Kingston Hyper X FPS Alloy Cherry MX Red, Logitech G102 Prodigy, Track Ir 5, Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS, Saitek Combat Rudder pedals, Beyer Dynamic DT770, Acer CB280HK 4K monitor, Win 10 Pro 64bit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, bmbpdk said:

The Danish F-16A´s where, from the very start, from the design stage, form the very beginning meant to be multirole, with multirole being defined as being designed for and effective against both air and ground targets.
And i highly doubt that the F-16 would be a success if it wasn meant as a multirole plane from the very beginning.
If the Danish F-16A where not meant to be multirole, then, F-16 was the absolutely worst plane we could help develop, build, and operate.
If the F-16 was not meant to be a multirole plane from the very beginning, then buying the F-16 would take away any and all fixed wing A/G capability for the RDAF, which i doubt, considering our role in a European WW3.
Being multirole from the very beginning, also explains why the YF-16 have dedicated A/G controls in the cockpit.
Look at the platforms the F-16 was supposed to replace and that would be another proof that the F-16 was meant for A/G
May i ask you from what information you have that argues that the F-16 was never meant to be multirole platform?

 

The F-16 was envisioned as a lightweight tactical fighter, but in development it evolved to be multi-role.

 

But to the point - you can't say that because our F-16 (realistically) isn't going to have SDBs, that it's hardly a multirole fighter, when it absolutely is.

 

Even the Tornado IDS is multi-role, even if dedicated to A/G, because A/G encompasses multiple roles (CAS, strike, SEAD, arguably maritime strike, etc). 

  • Like 3

Modules I own: F-14A/B, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, F-16CM, AJS-37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), UH-1H, Mi-8MTV2, P-47D, P-51D, FC3, MiG-15bis, Yak-52, CA, C-101, Hawk

Terrains I own: Syria, The Channel, SoH

 

System (RIP my old PC): Dell XPS 15 9570 w/ Intel i7-8750H, NVIDIA GTX 1050Ti Max-Q, 16GB DDR4, 500GB Samsung PM871 SSD (upgraded with 1TB Samsung 970 EVO Plus SSD)

 

VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro

 

Dreams: https://uk.pcpartpicker.com/list/mBG4dD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bmbpdk said:

The Danish F-16A´s where, from the very start, from the design stage, form the very beginning meant to be multirole, with multirole being defined as being designed for and effective against both air and ground targets.
And i highly doubt that the F-16 would be a success if it wasn meant as a multirole plane from the very beginning.
If the Danish F-16A where not meant to be multirole, then, F-16 was the absolutely worst plane we could help develop, build, and operate.
If the F-16 was not meant to be a multirole plane from the very beginning, then buying the F-16 would take away any and all fixed wing A/G capability for the RDAF, which i doubt, considering our role in a European WW3.
Being multirole from the very beginning, also explains why the YF-16 have dedicated A/G controls in the cockpit.
Look at the platforms the F-16 was supposed to replace and that would be another proof that the F-16 was meant for A/G
May i ask you from what information you have that argues that the F-16 was never meant to be multirole platform?

See Northstar's post. He explains it very well.

 

The original design was a light weight fighter jet. It envolved to a multirole plane, by all the upgrades it received. The Danish F16's were not the first F16's build, they are Block 15's? First production model was the Block 1 with a black radome.

Which meant they already received updates to a new standard. The F16 became "multirole" with the Block 15 upgrade in which they received a new radar and increased capacity for intake hardpoints 

 

So the Danish bought aircraft that had already have some AG capability. This was further enhanced with the Operational Capability Upgrade (OCU) and later the Mid Life Update (MLU), which brought them to the same standard as USAF Block 50/52's.

 

The EPAF (European Participating Air Forces) F16's were in the first place intended to replace the F-104 Starfighter and the Danish F16's were also build by SABCA Belgium


Edited by Falconeer
  • Like 2

F/A18C, F-16C, Mirage 2000C, JF-14, F-14B Tomcat, Flaming Cliffs 3, Black Shark 2, SU27, AJS37 Viggen, Persian Gulf, Syria

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Falconeer said:

See Northstar's post. He explains it very well.

 

The original design was a light weight fighter jet. It envolved to a multirole plane, by all the upgrades it received. The Danish F16's were not the first F16's build, they are Block 15's. First production model was the Block 1 with a black radome.

Which meant they already received updates to a new standard. The F16 became "multirole" with the Block 15 upgrade in which they received a new radar and increased capacity for underwing hardpoints (to use AG weapons for example)

 

So the Danish bought aircraft that had already have some AG capability. This was further enhanced with the Operational Capability Upgrade (OCU) and later the Mid Life Update (MLU), which brought them to the same standard as USAF Block 50/52's.

 

The EPAF (European Participating Air Forces) F16's were in the first place intended to replace the F-104 Starfighter and the Danish F16's were also build by SABCA Belgium 

 

Denmark received Block 1s, as well as 5s, 10s and 15s later. 

 

US F-16s were entered into, and won, the Tactical Bombing Competition, Lossiemouth, in 1981.  The production F-16 Block 1 was not the YF-16, and was always A/G capable (to the lament of those who came up with the original design).  Block 15 added the intake hardpoints (5L/R), not underwing.

 

Back on topic, SDBs would have been great.  But understandable why we won't be getting them.

 

Edit: Also, the Israelis proved the A/G capabilties in combat, also in 1981, with Operation Opera/Babylon


Edited by Majik
  • Like 3

A-10C II | AV-8B | JF-17 | F-16C | F/A-18C | F-14A/B | F-5E | F-86F | C-101 | FC3 | UH-1H | Super Carrier | NTTR | Persian Gulf | Syria

Win10 Pro | i7-9700K @5.0GHz | 2080 Super @2160MHz | 32GB DDR4 3600 | DCS on 1TB M.2 NVME | TM Warthog w/ 100mm ext | MFG Crosswinds V2 | HP Reverb Pro | Huion 640P | Jetpad FSE

DCS Open Beta | Vaicom Pro | SRS | VRK | CTS | SimShaker

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Majik said:

 

 Block 15 added the intake hardpoints (5L/R), not underwing.

Typo, corrected in original post 😀

 

F/A18C, F-16C, Mirage 2000C, JF-14, F-14B Tomcat, Flaming Cliffs 3, Black Shark 2, SU27, AJS37 Viggen, Persian Gulf, Syria

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

 

The F-16 was envisioned as a lightweight tactical fighter, but in development it evolved to be multi-role.

 

But to the point - you can't say that because our F-16 (realistically) isn't going to have SDBs, that it's hardly a multirole fighter, when it absolutely is.

 

 

Yes, F-16 and F-15 was part of the low/high doctrine, but that was more a salespoint for more platforms than what was really needed.
Denmark, Norway, Netherlands and Belgium was only interested because it was multirole.
Look into why it was chosen; it replaced many other platforms requiring multirole from the beginning to be even considered, and in Denmark, it became the only combat aircraft we have, now we have two F-35 that are used at training in the States.
You must confuse my statements with someone else, since i did not participate in the SDB discussion directly.

Inno3d RTX 2070 Twin X2, ASUS STRIX Z270E Gaming, Intel i7 7700K, 32GB Corsair vengeance, Kingston Hyper X FPS Alloy Cherry MX Red, Logitech G102 Prodigy, Track Ir 5, Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS, Saitek Combat Rudder pedals, Beyer Dynamic DT770, Acer CB280HK 4K monitor, Win 10 Pro 64bit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Falconeer said:

See Northstar's post. He explains it very well.

 

The original design was a light weight fighter jet. It envolved to a multirole plane, by all the upgrades it received. The Danish F16's were not the first F16's build, they are Block 15's? First production model was the Block 1 with a black radome.

Which meant they already received updates to a new standard. The F16 became "multirole" with the Block 15 upgrade in which they received a new radar and increased capacity for intake hardpoints 

 

So the Danish bought aircraft that had already have some AG capability. This was further enhanced with the Operational Capability Upgrade (OCU) and later the Mid Life Update (MLU), which brought them to the same standard as USAF Block 50/52's.

 

The EPAF (European Participating Air Forces) F16's were in the first place intended to replace the F-104 Starfighter and the Danish F16's were also build by SABCA Belgium

 

As Majik states, RDAF had the Block 1, first airframe was E-174, also, a natural step since we helped develop and build it.
I asked the RDAF last year which versions we have in stock at the moment, and the answer was that we have Block 10´s and Block 15´s.
The block 10´s can be easily recognised by the black radome.

Inno3d RTX 2070 Twin X2, ASUS STRIX Z270E Gaming, Intel i7 7700K, 32GB Corsair vengeance, Kingston Hyper X FPS Alloy Cherry MX Red, Logitech G102 Prodigy, Track Ir 5, Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS, Saitek Combat Rudder pedals, Beyer Dynamic DT770, Acer CB280HK 4K monitor, Win 10 Pro 64bit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • NineLine locked this topic
  • Wags pinned this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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