F-105d

Game Discussion Realistic Battle
1

In real life, the F-105D had flares pods, can you put it to the F-105

2

If you want to suggest it, you’d have to make a real suggestion in the suggestion part of the forum or at the very least a bug report or something

2 Likes
4

Ok so yeah you won’t get them then, your post will probably be removed soon lol

2 Likes
5

From my short research it appears they used illumination flares only. Would still love to see those added since they can’t act as makeshift flares…
Possibly later variants and specific ones used actual countermeasures but genuinely unsure…

1 Like
6

iirc the 105G used actual flares, but not D.

1 Like
7

oh cool so do you know when Gaijin will add the F-105G ?

8

Maybe when we get Anti-Radiation missiles so we can get these “wild weasel” aircraft variants.

9

but “Wild weasel” will be useless, no ?

10

If I recall, they were variants specifically used for anti radiation weaponry purposes. The F-105G and F-4G and some others were wild weasels.

Edit:
Three variants to note;
1: F-105F , a two seat trainer variant of the F-105D
2: EF-105F , a Wild weasel initial designation, some were originally F-105F two seaters, some were single seater (it appears, unclear however).
3: F-105G , a two seater, and improved, wild weasel variant.

11

Being able to beam a SPAA like the Pantsir-S1 from miles away is quite the advantage. If you’re more interested in the wild weasels capabilities I highly suggest you read into it and anti-radiation missile capabilities and other features the wild weasels were equipped with, very interesting.

12

Anti-radiation missiles aren’t going to be added unless something large changes. They aren’t designed for small, low power radars as seen on SPAA in the game. They are designed for large, emplaced air defense systems with high power radar systems.

13

Complex as they are, specifically referring to the way they operate using specific radar band selection and detection, I would love to see it regardless. Even if they aren’t too effective against or meant for these kinds of Spaa, I would love to be able to use them that way regardless of the limitations they would have due o its intended roles and targets.
(Would be hilarious to use against enemy planes too if they locking in head-ons and somehow getting a direct hit, with later and higher end ones ofc, a few goofy thundershowers moments would be so fun)

14

It would be nice if they would add those high powered SAM emplacements to ARB. Like SA-2 and Hawk sites that would be more of an annoyance and a threat to slower aircraft. Maybe some Gainful sites, too.

15

This is not true and wasn’t when they made that excuse before either. Every ARM except the AGM-78s eventually received wideband seekers that would hit top tier SPAA search radars.

1 Like
16

Early ARMs could certainly target SPAA radars, they rarely did due to their operation and performance limitations rather than lacking the capacity altogether.

  • fixed band receivers had to be set before the mission so targets of opportunity may be unlockable even if detected by the planes systems.

  • target discrimination was relatively poor. Even with larger warhead sizes a SPAA would be a small aim point.

  • Slower missiles gave radars time to switch off and the missile would veer off target as they had no memory guidance function.

  • Most early SEAD missions in Vietnam, were flown in support of bombers where the targets were SAM sites and search radars, both invariably fixed locations. A few years late in the Yom Kippur conflict Egyptian Tu-16s launched missiles again designed to blind the enemy at a strategic level rather than as battlefield support.

Modern ARMs have better missile performance, multi-frequency receivers with in flight band selection, terminal phase homing withiut target emissions, off boresight capabilities equalling AIMs, greater accuracy, and can be snap fired at targets of opportunity and even moving targets with intermittent emissions. Added up it makes SPAA a much more viable target than for previous generations of ARMs but I does not mean their predecessors couldn’t if conditions were in their favour.

In game early ARM would be of dubious value, new types less so although still not the ubee weapon some hope for against players who know to switch radars on/off and move location. The F-105G would be likely used more as an attacker like the D than SEAD. Newer planes with missiles like HARM, ALARM etc might have more luck.

17

Not one of the things mentioned in this post is correct.

1 Like