-
Content count
72 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Calendar
Gallery
Downloads
Store
Everything posted by GalmOne
-
Adding weapons: HELP
GalmOne posted a topic in Thirdwire: Strike Fighters 1 Series - Mods/Skinning Discussion
Hello, I've successfully installed my Su-27 into my Operation Desert Storm game. However, it has no missiles when I fly it. I read the stickied tutorial but that only explains what to do with an F-16... not an Su-27. Also, my weapons editor won't open. When I double click on it, absolutely nothing happens. Please help! -
Downloading particular aircraft for WoE
GalmOne posted a topic in Thirdwire: Strike Fighters 1 Series - Mods/Skinning Discussion
Hello, Is there a way to download or just install particular aircraft for WoE? I have a separate install for Desert Storm and another for NATO Fighters V, but my friends only have Desert Storm. I don't know if they all want to install a separate mod for NATO fighters, so would it possible to just port over/install/download certain planes into Desert Storm? Particularly, I would like to put the Su-27 into my Desert Storm-modded WoE. -
Ladies and gentlemen, it's about time I ask for help from this community. I'm a canuck who is very proud of the aerospace history of Canada. A local park in Toronto has been home to the lone, volunteer-fueled Canadian Air and Space Museum since the 90's. The place used to be a factory for De Havilland Canada. This was where over 1100 Mosquitos were built - from the Mk.VI onward. In September, the museum were sent an eviction notice by the park and now the community is fighting to keep it there. For the time being, they've been locked out and all their planes - including a Lancaster (FM104) is locked behind closed doors. A local veteran, Philip Gray who flew Lancs from 1943 - 45 has spoken to the media about the travesty and has even called to the Queen for help. Now, since this is in Canada, I don't know if any of you Yanks or Brits and other non-Canadian people are able to sign the petition, but take a look at the link below and hopefully you can sign it and help the museum! Sign the Canadian Air and Space Museum petition here Thanks for reading!
-
Help save my air and space museum!
GalmOne replied to GalmOne's topic in Military and General Aviation
Thanks for the help gents! It's greatly appreciated. -
Question: Cold War fighters: Internal Jammers
GalmOne posted a topic in Military and General Aviation
So I've read that planes like the F-14, F-15, Su-27 and MiG-29C/S all had internal jamming systems. But just how effective are these jammers? Of course, one would have to look at which radar system vs which jamming system, but say the most powerful radar here (AWG-9 of the Tomcat or APG-63 of the Eagle) was to burn through the best internal jamming system of any fighter of the period lasting until 1991. Would an F-14/15 have to fly WVR just to burn through? Also, did the F-16 ever have an internal jammer with any country at this time? I mean, it was a good plane, why did the USAF not invest for an internal jammer? A book I have called "Jet Fighters: Inside Out" by Jim Winchester shows a schematic of an F-16C (probably a blk 50/52) with a "rear ECM antenna fairing" located in the very aft end of the fin pedestal. Normally, foreign users of the F-16 have extended pedestals for ECM or chutes, though the schematic in the book as the short pedestal. Below I have a picture of that page (look at the part labeled 140). Wiki also states that the MSIP for the F-16A blk 15 had "internal ECM" but of course, Wiki is not reliable. -
Question: Cold War fighters: Internal Jammers
GalmOne replied to GalmOne's topic in Military and General Aviation
Why apologize? It's a great learning experience, which gave me the initiative to go look up many different things. These stories are awesome and adding your acronyms gives each one a unique taste. -
Question: Cold War fighters: Internal Jammers
GalmOne replied to GalmOne's topic in Military and General Aviation
That sounds like one epic fight (yet disappointing for the Vipers)! Sounds like a classic boom and zoom WWII dogfight going on there. Of all the truly awesome experiences you've told us, busdriver, I think the most I've learned are the plethora of acronyms you use! I must have looked up at least 24 since this thread started. -
Question: Cold War fighters: Internal Jammers
GalmOne replied to GalmOne's topic in Military and General Aviation
Aircraft always seem to get heavier as they are improved, but I think the advantage the C has in the vertical plus the better radar made it a more potent aircraft than the A. The same reasons why F-15 drivers like their Eagles so much. Oh thanks! I know what to read now when the textbooks get boring. -
Question: Cold War fighters: Internal Jammers
GalmOne replied to GalmOne's topic in Military and General Aviation
Thanks again so much, gents for the plethora of info you've dug up for me! I'm going to look up these books at the store near campus right away. School starts next week - Aerospace Engineering.... funnn. Well Busdriver, I suppose that's why Eagles have such extensive ECM in their TEWS as well as a huge radar. They're big airplanes! It's too bad you couldn't review your own stuff. -
Question: Cold War fighters: Internal Jammers
GalmOne replied to GalmOne's topic in Military and General Aviation
Oh so I guess this is a manual you were reading? Wow, okay that helps. Well I did more research and sources state that when the -220 came into service with the F-15C, it was rated at a mx. afterburning thrust of 23,840 lb. Then the same sources state (some of which are from the USAF's official public database) that the first 134 F-15E's had -220s which were rated at 25,000 lbs and later (maybe post-1991) got the -229 rated at 29,000 lb. I suppose the engines were simply tuned up for more performance, though that translates to less engine life. But I have another thought on jamming devices. Of course there are jamming techniques like spot, barrage, noise and sweep jamming; all of which have their own advantages and disadvantages. Like everyone already discussed, which jamming techniques are used on which jammers and the quantitative effectiveness of these jammers are all classified. However, does anyone have any qualitative idea as to how well these jammers might be susceptible to burn-through? Back to the Eagle and Viper example: they each carry their own jammers. The F-15C, an internal ALQ-135 and for the F-16, an external ALQ-131/184. Would these fighters have to engage WVR to burn through and get a lock? I mean of course it depends on the classified technique, but I'm trying to get an idea here. I assume that BVR combat is still possible even through jamming since missiles and radar have a HOJ capability. Plus, the US is still - to this day - very focused on BVR 'first look first kill' scenarios. -
Question: Cold War fighters: Internal Jammers
GalmOne replied to GalmOne's topic in Military and General Aviation
It's a good thing we've got guys like you to show us this stuff. You must be like a celebrity around here! Most of the internet is just quoted or broken-telephone-ized. Here, we get raw experience and then we can judge for ourselves. Just the other day, I was reading up on F-15/16 powerplants. Some sources state the F100-PW-220 has less thrust than the F100-PW-100 (23,450 vs 24,890 lbs), others state more (25,000 lbs). It gets so confusing. -
Very nice. Too bad there's no Flanker episode.
-
Question: Cold War fighters: Internal Jammers
GalmOne replied to GalmOne's topic in Military and General Aviation
Yea, MigBuster, it seems as if the F-16's full capabilities weren't put to use by the USAF until recently. Lucky for us the Su-27 didn't have a fully-functioning radar set until 1991. Those things are beasts and probably would have given an F-16 trouble WVR. Busdriver, did that Viper driver intercept the Bear? Wow he must've been in awe flying beside that thing. -
Question: Cold War fighters: Internal Jammers
GalmOne replied to GalmOne's topic in Military and General Aviation
Hah, well I really like numbers. I'm studying in Aerospace engineering so you can see why. But yeah, I think you're right. The references I've seen that state the F-16's capability to carry the AIM-7 do not specifically state that those Vipers are frontline USAF birds. I guess the only USAF BVR capable F-16's were those that got the AMRAAM after the end of the Cold War. I suppose this means that, before the AMRAAM, WVR fighting was still very much expected. Otherwise the USAF would have utilized the AIM-7-carrying capabilities of the Sparrow. -
Question: Cold War fighters: Internal Jammers
GalmOne replied to GalmOne's topic in Military and General Aviation
Sorry gents, I'm not trying to start anything. I was just asking for a basic idea - i.e. whether the F-16s passed (survived into the merge) or failed (were wiped out). After all, until the Block 25, Vipers had no choice at all but to find a way to merge. From what I've read about missiles of the time, I'm under the impression that you'd have to get pretty close to WVR to get a P_k higher than 70% if using something like an Aim-7F. Anyway, I going to see if I can find myself a copy of Sierra Hotel for myself. Clever title there -
Question: Cold War fighters: Internal Jammers
GalmOne replied to GalmOne's topic in Military and General Aviation
Well that's what I'm assuming. It's WAY smaller, lighter and slender than a DT, so I guess that makes sense. Also, where did you get that excerpt on AAMD from? I want to see the RCS reductions/merge-finding results for the Vipers. It looks to be a good read. -
Question: Cold War fighters: Internal Jammers
GalmOne replied to GalmOne's topic in Military and General Aviation
Thanks, busdriver, I remember reading that LOMAC thread as well as that second article. During the Cold War, I'm sure the F-15C's clutter notch would have still been exploitable. Perhaps this has been minimized by the APG-63(V)1, but that's all post-1991. I suppose if you use a jammer pod like the APQ-184 or something, you can significantly reduce the chances of getting locked-onto. The only problem then is the added weight and drag as mentioned earlier. The question now is, if you carry a jammer like that (on the F-16C since every other fighter has its own internal jammer), how badly will it impact your maneuverability when the fight gets WVR? Yes, MigBuster, the F-15C's in the mentioned exercise were equipped with APG-63 or APG-70 Doppler shift mechanically-scanned array radar sets. At his time VERY few F-15C's had the APG-63(V)2 AESA set which was just installed on a single F-15C one year earlier. There's no way you could trick an AESA-equipped fighter with this kind of maneuver. -
Question: Cold War fighters: Internal Jammers
GalmOne replied to GalmOne's topic in Military and General Aviation
Oh man, I didn't mean to offend. That was just what I've come to think. I hope I can get an answer when I ask: what is this special "feature" that you exploited? Is there anything unique about the Viper that makes this "move" easier for the F-16 than other planes (like the Phantom II you mentioned)? -
Question: Cold War fighters: Internal Jammers
GalmOne replied to GalmOne's topic in Military and General Aviation
Thanks for the answers everyone. I was snooping around tonnes of Jane's books on electronic warfare but to no avail. No figures or numbers are really available and I'm not surprised. Hey, Lexx, does your campaign include the Avro Arrow interceptor? Hah, I'm kidding. I wish it had been fielded though. But back on topic. For one thing, the F-16 was never the main staple fighter of the USAF. The F-15 was, so focusing on making it better or building more of it made sense. Also, ECM pods seem to cover more aspects of the aircraft than an internal jammer, particularly in the downward aspect where SAMs could get you. Since the F-15 was the primary air-to-air fighter, it made sense that the cheaper, smaller and mostly "secondary" fighter - the F-16 - be made into the multirole fighter/fighter-bomber. Additionally, there are dedicated jamming aircraft like the EA-6 or EF-111; both of which can be deployed in numbers with F-15's to secure air superiority while the F-16's can sweep in later and do mud-moving or WVR fighting with what's left of the enemy. At least, that's what I would assume. Remember, by this time, Air Command changed into something totally different and more organized than what it was in Vietnam. They worked more as a team than as fighters and bombers being on separate ones. By the way Faust, what you said about the F-16C's having that internal space for a jammer but never actually getting one is pretty lame. I mean, might as well have just put in a similar internal jammer that the F-15 used, but I guess it's not that easy. In terms of BVR combat (pre-AMRAAM), how would something like an F-16C sneak up on something like, say, an F-15? I'm quite sure the only way for the little fighter to win in such an exercise is to fight WVR. But with no internal jammer of its own, could it win? I ask this because if an F-16 can somehow beat an F-15, it should have no problem fighting something like an Su-27 (also equipped with an internal - albeit rear-facing - jammer). Also, I remembered reading one time that an F-16 managed to lock up and "shoot down" an F-22 in a simulated combat exercise, but was "shot down" itself. -
Operation Desert Storm
GalmOne replied to Phasers's topic in Site Support / Bug Reports / Suggestions
Everything seems to be working fine for me except the fact that none of my Soviet birds (or Iraqi, if you will) have no weapons/ordinance/drop tanks at all. Also, the F-16C won't carry any drop tanks. Everything else works fine though. Is this a glitch or are they supposed to be missing weapons?