Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
ironroad

XI Part 6: The Gun Range

Recommended Posts

Part 6 of my video series, XI (Eleven), has just been uploaded.

[video:youtube]

Edited by ironroad
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Similar Content

    • By KJakker
      An interesting What-If. Would be fun to be able to fly it in a sim. Too bad Fairchild disposed of most of Republics records as wind tunnel test would be nice to have.
       
    • By MigBuster
      26 March 2021
        Dear Fighter Pilots, Partners and Friends,
      We are delighted to announce that arguably the most iconic helicopter gunship in the world is now available for pre-order with a 30% discount. DCS: Mi-24 Hind takes helicopter gameplay to a new level and sets a new standard for DCS in cockpit look and feel. We hope you will enjoy it. Check out our Hind pre-order video here.
      Derived from the Mi-8, the Hind airframe is fitted with a streamlined retractable undercarriage and stub-wings that provide lift at high speeds as well as a structure for attaching guided and unguided munitions. This massive machine combines firepower and troop-carrying capabilities, making it a force to be reckoned with.
      Our new Volumetric Cloud System requires a significant rewrite of our radar, sensor and weapon system code. To integrate the clouds smoothly, the process will be split into stages. The Clouds will initially be released as a purely visual feature, with the possibility to select a wide variety of weather presets from the Mission Editor. After the initial release, we will finalise the work on radar and weapon systems as well as how AI behaves in the new weather conditions. This is particularly relevant for close air combat line-of-sight behaviour.
      Please note, DCS: F/A-18C Hornet and DCS: The Channel will be released within a short time frame of Open Beta 2.7.0. which we have pushed out to the 7th of April 2021 due to the heavy testing and 3rd party integration requirements.
      Thank you for your passion and support.
        Yours sincerely,
      Eagle Dynamics Team
        Mi-24 HIND
      Pre-order now
      Known for its great exploits by the airborne units of the Soviet Army during the 1980 Soviet–Afghan War, the Hind is tough, durable and packs a heavy punch.
      DCS: Mi-24P Hind is a simulation of the legendary Mi-24 attack helicopter developed in the USSR and first introduced operationally in 1972. It has seen extensive action over the past 40 years as an effective combat air support helicopter. Fast, reliable and loved by pilots, this incredible machine still serves in more than 50 countries!
      DCS: Mi-24P is an opportunity to touch history and try yourself as a pilot of the legendary helicopter!
      Work is progressing steadily and we are excited to announce the list of features planned for Early Access release. Check out the In Development Screenshots.
      Key Features of DCS: Mi-24P Hind
      On pre-order/early access:
      Professional flight dynamics and engine modelling with high precision characteristics of the real aircraft in all ranges of altitude, temperature and speeds for different weights and flight configurations. Two 6DOF highly detailed cockpits (RU and EN versions available). Fully clickable cockpits with interactive control of all onboard systems with mouse. Multi-crew. Second crew member can be another player or “Petrovich” AI (basic AI level during early access phase). Detailed modeling of the entire electrical, fuel, hydraulic, anti-icing, fire protection, SAS, autopilot and radio systems. Full modeling of armament and weapons systems with ability to use 30mm cannon, unguided rockets (S-8, S-13, S-24B) and bombs from both cockpits in addition to the guided ATGM 9M114 operated by forward seated pilot-operator. Standard Russian new and weathered liveries in addition to Iraqi and Syrian schemes. Early Access manual Russian and English versions. Training missions. On release:
      Cargohold gunner with KORD machine gun. Advanced “Petrovich” AI features for pilot or pilot-operator seats. Addition of ATGM 9M120 (HEAT and HE versions) and R-60M air to air missiles. Sling cargo operations. Advanced damage modeling. Additional liveries and livery template. Manual in Russian and English (full list of languages is TBD). Campaign by Eagle Dynamics. Pre-order DCS: Mi-24 Hind now and save 30%. Click here.
      The Mi-24P Early Access is planned for release in the 2nd quarter of 2021.
      We are currently working on new reflections using extended pre-calculated light technology.
      The Mi-24P cockpit is roomy, pressurized and chemically and biologically filtered, making it a comfortable place to fight and operate in.
      The multi crew mode will be available from Early Access and will unveil our initial “Petrovich” AI.
      We look forward to sharing more information closer to the Early Access release in late Q2 2021. One of our top priorities will be the interaction and infrastructure for Commander and Operator AI.
      DCS: Mi-24 Hind
      Available for a limited time at only $48.95
      Thank you for all your trust, support and enthusiasm.
      Yours Sincerely,
        Eagle Dynamics Team
    • By MigBuster

       
      18 December 2020
        Dear Fighter Pilots, partners and friends,
      Our Winter Sale 2020 has started and will run until the 11th of January. On Steam, the sale will start on the 22nd of December and end on the 5th of January. We are pleased to announce an additional ‘Free to Play’ period starting on the 22nd of December, giving you access to all aircraft and terrains from our e-Shop and Steam for two weeks.
      We have made improvements to the wear and tear of piston engines as well as the damage model by considering various loads and fractures to the main bearings that occur during flight, combat, and abusive engine management.
      We are now running Open Beta 2.5.6.59398, which is a really big update. Check out the full changelog; we hope you will be impressed.
      As this will be our last newsletter before Christmas, let us take this opportunity to thank you for everything you have done for us this year. Without your trust in our team, none of this would have been possible. We are so grateful. Please check out our 2021 and Beyond, you may notice a few cool things that we have in the pipe for you.
      Merry Christmas to you, your friends, and your families.
      Thank you for your passion and support.
        Yours sincerely,
      Eagle Dynamics Team
        Free 2 Play
      Winter Sale
      We are excited to announce that the DCS World Winter Sale 2020 has started, and that it will run until 15:00 GMT on the 11th of January. Most modules have a 50% discount. For DCS World Steam Edition, the sale will start on the 22nd and end on the 5th of January at 10:00 PST.
      Modules with a 50% discount:
      AJS-37 Viggen AV-8B Night Attack C-101 Aviojet M-2000C I-16 Spitfire LF Mk.IX BF 109 K-4 Kurfurst Fw 190 D-9 Dora Fw 190 A-8 Anton Yak-52 Christen Eagle II A-10A Warthog F-5E Tiger II F-15C Eagle F-86F Sabre L-39C & L-39ZA Albatros MiG-15bis MiG-21bis Fishbed MiG-19 Farmer MiG-29 Fulcrum A & MiG-29S Fulcrum C P-51D Mustang Su-25A Frogfoot Su-27 Flanker B Su-33 Flanker D SA-342 Gazelle UH-1H Huey Mi-8MTV2 Magnificent Eight Ka-50 Black Shark Persian Gulf Nevada Test and Training Range Modules with a 30% discount:
      P-47D Thunderbolt The Channel F/A-18C Hornet F-16C Viper A-10C II Tank Killer Supercarrier Exceptions:
      F-14A/B Tomcat will have a 25% discount JF-17 Thunder will be only $59.99 Not in the Winter Sale 2020:
      Syria NS 430 Navigation System for SA-342 Gazelle Mi-8MTV2 Crew Part 1 Campaign F/A-18C Raven One Сampaign The Free to Play period will run for two weeks (22.12.20 10:00 PST - 05.01.20 10:00 PST), and it will allow you to access all DCS World modules for free with no time limitation within the two week period. Note that an internet connection is required for the Free to Play event and that Free to Play modules will not work in DCS World in OFFLINE mode.
      We hope that you will enjoy some well earned free flight time, and who knows, maybe also to fall in love with your next aircraft or terrain.
        Warbird Warriors
      Development Report
      Fighter engines, and in particular radial engines, are susceptible to master bearing overloads that require fine management skills and attention during operation. To prolong the service life, compliance with manifold pressure levels and RPM recommendations and limitations are mandatory. If not respected, you run the risk of serious engine malfunction, and you will probably be looking for a suitable emergency landing site in short order. If the engine is damaged due to poor management, or excess combat abuse, lowering the manifold pressure (or boost) and engine RPM will help keep the oil temperature within limits. With sufficient oil pressure, it should allow you to execute a controlled emergency landing.
      The DCS: Fw 190A-8 Anton and DCS: P-47D Thunderbolt now include these new algorithms for calculating and simulating the above, as well as the subsequent damages / failures to the engine. These aircraft represent our latest advancement in modeling, heating, cooling, aging, and damage to power plants and systems. This work will be extended to our older DCS World aircraft, and this will set the standard for all new warbirds coming to DCS World.
        Open Beta 2.5.6
      Multicrew
      At last, and after a long gestation period, we have added multi-crew capabilities to UH-1H, with playable roles for all four crew members, to the next Open Beta. You can now have dedicated roles to fly and fight with two pilots and two gunners and interchange roles in flight. If the UH-1H does not have M-60 and M-134 minigun installed, you can fly as passengers. This offers a new level of gameplay that we plan to roll out to other platforms in the near future.
      The Hornet now includes the GBU-24A/B Paveway III laser-guided bomb. Auto IFF/CIT from the AZ/EL A/A page and AZ/EL FlIR Sublevel. Watch DCS: F/A-18C Hornet | Automatic IFF. A redesigned threat search algorithm for HARM for TOO mode has also been added. Read and watch the details DCS: F/A-18C Hornet | GBU-24 Paveway III.
      We have fixed the logic of the System Point of Interest (SPI) concept. Multiple other bugs have been fixed and new A/A Training Missions have been added to help you hit the ground running. The manual has also been updated. Watch DCS: F-16C Viper | Targeting Pod and Maverick Tips.
      This update to Open Beta 2.5.6 is our largest to date and includes the MBT T-72B3, SPAAG ZSU-57-2, and APC BTR-82A AI vehicles mentioned in recent news. For a more comprehensive list of updates and bug fixes, please check out the full list of changes.
      Once again, Merry Christmas to you and your loved ones. Thank you for all for your passion and support,
        Kind regards,
      Eagle Dynamics Team
    • By MigBuster

      The F-16XL was a design named after………..a golf ball………..that being the Top Flite XL for any who ever played Golf. Harry Hillaker was also a golfer….one with a problem in that the USAF wanted to use his A-A fighter (F-16A) in an A-G role, hanging lots of pods and bombs off it, which was just not on! 
       
      So, what did he do and why?
      He and his design team at General Dynamics redesigned the F-16 to be more suitable to an A-G role using such concepts as high internal fuel loads and conformal carriage of weapons to get that nasty drag and radar cross section right down. In fact when he first started going to the Air Force with plans for the XL they were so enthusiastic about it they apparently accused him of holding the design back so that they (General Dynamics) could sell the F-16 twice.
      Goals to improve operational effectiveness included:
      •    Improve the A-G role without degrading A-A capability.
      •    Increased survivability, though increased speed, manoeuvrability and low radar cross section.
      The idea was to replace the F-16 and remain a lower cost fighter to the high cost F-15.
       
      So, some concept demonstrators were knocked together for testing?
      Yes, two of the Full Scale Development (Block Zero) F-16s were converted by doing such things as stretching their fuselages, removing the ventral strakes and gluing on some new cranked delta wings or double deltas. F-16XL-1 was 75-749 and had the F100-PW-200 engine, and F-16XL-2 was 75-747 which started life as single seater but was converted to the XL as a duel seater with the higher thrust F110-GE-100 engine.
       

        
       
      Were the goals met?
      Most of them, the low drag weapons carriage and lots of internal fuel meant vastly improved range over the F-16A (that already had comparative long legs), carried more A-G weapons, with ability to lug along 6 x A-A missiles on top. High AoA handling and instantaneous turn was improved. Cruise speed was also improved. 
      This is a part of a 1989 write up by General Dynamics test pilot Joe Bill Dryden:
      Pitch rate in all configurations was as good as to slightly better than a Block 10 A model (No slouch in itself) and the roll response was better. On several occasions, during demonstrations with VIPs, I had to remind them that we had 12 MK82s on the airplane! They would frequently forget because of the ease with which the airplane would attain high airspeed…….How high an airspeed? Mull this over for a while, you put 6 MK82s on your little airplane, plus tanks and try to get close to my radius. ill put 12 x MK82s on board with no tanks, still go further than you can and for the same fuel flow by going 60 to 80 knots faster than you. I risk going in to the classified arena, but with the right fuses on the bombs you could get well on the plus side of the Mach, all the while enjoying a much better ride. 
       
      Is there a but here?
      Yes using the F100-PW-200 engine from the F-16A, it was a tad underpowered, more F-14A than F-16A………..so take off requirements were nowhere near and some of it’s A-A capability was a bit degraded you could say.
      Perhaps an example from one of the Red Eagles pilots who flew some BFM against it in a MiG-21F-13:
      [Red Eagle Matheny flying the MiG] “We briefed each other about our airplanes and they [Edwards F-16XL pilots] turned to me and said they would be all over me – they had a roll rate of 800 degrees per second, which was the fastest in the inventory. – I got to thinking about that and it turned out the roll rate meant nothing. The problem with that airplane[F-16XL] was that it was a big bleeder: it just bled speed like nothing else when forced to turn hard – I ate them alive in the MiG-21. The F-15E on the other hand was a pretty good performer – they resisted the urge to get slow and jump in a phone booth with a MiG. They flew around the ranges at low level trying to burn off all this gas and he still needed to burn off more when we joined up on each other”.
       
      Could they not have improved that somewhere?
      Potentially, the second F-16XL had higher thrust F110-GE-100 engine but unfortunately the majority of the evaluation data and the Dual Role Fighter evaluation was done with the lesser thrusted F-100-PW-200. In fact Harry Hillaker stated they were not allowed to use the GE engine in the evaluation (see below) for whatever reason. NASA later got it supercruising with a F-100-GE-129 (29,500 lbs class), and by the late 1990s both General Electric and Pratt & Whitney offered suitable engines with a potential max thrust class to 36,000lbs and 37,000 lbs respectively.
       

       
      Was there some competition against the F-15 at some point?
      There was a USAF competitive evaluation originally called the Enhanced Tactical Fighter (ETF) competition, which in 1981 was renamed to became the Dual Role Fighter (DRF) competition. Technically not really a competition because both were evaluated and flight tested to totally different sets of conditions and to different flight test plans it seems.
       
      Why did the USAF run this evaluation?
      It was felt by some in the USAF the F-111F was becoming a bit outdated and instead of just an upgrade they wanted something that had A-A capability and a good precision night strike role against the Soviet masses.
       
      So, they chose two short assed fighters to replace the F-111?
      Pretty much – they would both get LANTIRN eventually and have a good A-A capability but still lacking in range.
       
      Surely the F-16 was cheaper was it not?
      On unit cost and cost per flight hour yes – but the USAF considered the F-16XL a radical new airframe compared to the F-15E, which was considered just a modification, so the USAF estimated research and development cost would be higher for the F-16XL.
       
      Okay but in the end the F-15 was chosen as the winner and that was that.
      No – following the DRF decision that the F-15E was going into production in February 1984, the USAF announced its intention to put the Single seat F-16XL into production anyway with the designation F-16F. So, work began on the F-16F design concept and Full Scale development into 1985.
       
      So where is it then?
      The program was terminated in late 1985 by the USAF it later appears there was no budget for every program out there such as the ATF (F-22) and black projects such as F-117 that were unknowns to most who ran the DRF so sadly the F-16F had to take the chop - basically lack of funding finally killed it off.
       

       
       
      End of the F-16XL – not quite
      The two F-16XLs were given to NASA in the late 1980s for various types of flight testing and we can thank them for taking some time to research into the history of the F-16XL and providing useful information on it. 

       
      But there’s more
      An interesting rebuttal, ten years after the DRF, written by Harry Hillaker in response to an article in Aerotech News and Review which perhaps gives a passionate and better insight into how farcical some of these things can be:
       
      As the recognized “Father of the F-16,” and Chief Project Engineer during the concept formulation and preliminary design phases of the F-16XL and Vice President and Deputy Program Director during the prototype phase, the article was of considerable interest to me. The disappointment was that only one side of the issue was presented, a highly biased, self-interest input that does not adequately, nor accurately, present the real story of the selection of the F-15E.

      First, it should be understood that we (General Dynamics) did not initiate the F-16XL as a competitor to the F-15E, then identified as the F-15 Strike Eagle. We stated as unequivocally as possible to the Air Force, that the Dual-Role mission should be given to the F-15: that the F-15 should complement the F-16 in ground strike missions in the same manner that the F-16 complements the F-15 in air-air missions. A fundamental tenet of the F-16, from its inception, has been as an air-air complement to the F-15—no radar missile capability, no M=2.0+ capability, no standoff capability: a multi-mission fighter whose primary mission was air-surface with backup air-air capability.

      We proposed the F-16XL as a logical enhancement of its air-to-surface capabilities. The F-16C represented a progressive systems enhancement and the XL would be an airframe enhancement optimized more to its air-surface mission—lower weapons carriage drag and minimum dependence on external fuel tanks. 
      The statement that “a prototype version of the F-15E decisively beat an F-16 variant called the F-16XL,” is misinformation. I don’t know what was meant by “beat,” it is patently true that McDonnell-Douglas clearly won what was called a “competition.” However, by the Air Force’s own definition, it was, in reality, an evaluation to determine which airplane would be better suited to the dual-role mission. In a formal competition, each party is evaluated against a common set of requirements and conditions. Such was not the case for the dual-role fighter. The F-15 Strike Eagle and the F-16XL were evaluated and flight tested to different sets of conditions and to different test plans—no common basis for evaluation existed.
      The F-15 had only one clear advantage in the evaluation—a “paper” advantage. The weapon loading for one of the missions used in the evaluation precluded the use of external fuel tanks on the F-16XL; the F-15 could carry that particular weapon loading and still carry external fuel tanks, the F-16XL could not. That one mission was the only place the F-15 had a clear advantage. (It should be noted that a fundamental design feature of the XL was the elimination of external fuel tanks with their attendant restrictions on flight limits and their weight and drag penalty.)
      Further, the Air Force would not allow us to use the GE F110 engine in our proposal even though the No. 2 XL, the 2-place version, was powered by a F110 engine and provided better performance than the P&W F100 engine. And although you would expect the F-16’s clear advantage to be cost, the Air Force treated the F-15E as a simple modification to a planned production buy and the F-16XL as a totally new buy. Neither airplane used in the flight test evaluation was a “prototype” of a dual-role fighter. The F-15 was closer systems and cockpit-wise than the F-16XL and the F-16XL was closer, much closer, airframe-wise. 
      The F-16XLs were designed to, and flew, at their maximum design gross weight of 48,000 pounds, whereas the F-15, more than once, blew its tires while taxiing at 73,000 pounds, well below its maximum design gross weight [which was 81,000 pounds], a condition not demonstrated in the flight test program.
      In a meeting that I attended with General Creech, then TAC CINC [Commander-in-Chief], the general stated that either air¬plane was fully satisfactory. When asked why he and his staff only mentioned the F-15 (never the F-16XL) in any dual-role fighter statement or discussion, he gave a reply that was impossible to refute, “We have to do that because the F-16 has a heart and soul of its own and we have to sell the F-15.” I’ll have to admit that I sat mute upon hearing that statement because there was no possible retort.
      We had no allusions as to what the outcome of the Dual-role fighter “competition” would be and debated whether to even respond to the request for information. We did submit, knowing full well that it was a lost cause and that to not submit would be an affront to the Air Force who badly needed the appearance of a competition to justify continued procurement of the F-15—they had patently been unable to sell the F-15 Strike Eagle for five years. As is the case with too much in our culture today, the Air Force was more interested in style, in appearances, than in substance.

      Even today, I feel that giving the F-15 a precision air-surface capability was proper and badly needed. What continues to disturb me is that the F-16XL had to be a pawn in that decision and had to be so badly denigrated to justify the decision—a selection that could have been made on its own merits.
       
      And finally 
      The concept of retaining performance with a usable Air to Ground loadout lives on today in the form of the F-35 Lightning II.......which comes with a 43,000 lbs thrust class engine to start with.
       
       
      General Dynamics F-16XL  (F2275)
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
        ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Sources
      Page 267 Red Eagles (Davies.S), Osprey publishing 2008 - Matheny flew the MiG-21F-13 against the F-16XL and F-15E concept demonstrators. 
      Elegance in Flight (Piccirillo.AC), 2014 National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) – Chapter 7: The Dual Role Fighter competition. 
      Code One Magazine, July 1989 (General Dynamics) Vol 4 No 2 -The F-16XL flies again 
      Code One Magazine, July 1991 (General Dynamics) Vol 6 No 2 – Interview with Harry Hillaker
      1999 Aviationweek online: http://aviationweek.com/awin/pws-229a-edging-close-500-hours
      Pratt&Whitney's self-funded F100-PW-229A - a re-fanned F100 fighter engine that can produce as much as 37,150 lbst. - is edging close to 500 total hours of run time

      1998 General Electric online: http://www.geaviation.com/press/military/military_19980907.html
      Designated the F110-GE-129 EFE (Enhanced Fighter Engine), the engine will be qualified at 34,000 pounds of thrust and offered initially at a thrust rating of 32,000 pounds, with demonstrated growth capability to 36,000 pounds.

       
    • By JosefK
      From Key.Aero:
       
       
      Full story: https://www.key.aero/article/boeing-partner-mhi-japanese-f-15j-upgrades?fbclid=IwAR2WYXBznWogLAxlxZihPYOr0PoZZNRePqTg2KTQVcr4CjTTlZiu4GIrV5w
×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..