As if metric is any less made up.
At least knots and nautical miles directly come from longitude and latitude measurements so they are useful in navigation
We are getting severly off topic but no, as you can even see in this very game - just go into any plane cockpit, nobody had problems with navigation in metric, and thats before global radio networks and satellite.
Its a silly excuse to use antiquated system.
The moment we have enough (non-classified/non-export restricted/Public) information that the Belgian F-16AM uses those, even with the various visual indentifications of the system in-use. Then appropriate bug reports can be made. I will certainly try…
There is a video hosted on Vimeo of a Belgian F-16AM pilot talking about the transition from JHMCS to Scorpion whilst sat in the cockpit and showing off the HMD.
Would that be enough?
Even shows the sensors placed on the canopy.
The video was originally from a Key Aero article about them switching to Scorpion but it seems to be inaccessible now.
3 Likes
Yeah this is the video with the original report i posted for f16am
tho the one in the article is now paywalled
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/rtnS2L8FkXYf
Its sister report has already been submitted as a suggestion:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/Vd3ozmcGx1Be
The radar damage model for all F-16s in-game is the AN/APG-68. This also affects aircraft like the F-16CM PoBIT and F-16V, which utilise the AN/APG-83, as well as aircraft such as the F-16A MLU Block 20, which uses the AN/APG-66(V)3. The cockpit damage model for the F-16A MLU Block 20 is also incorrect and doesn’t align with the visual model.
For people who often submit bug reports, use this information however you will
Edit: ended up making one myself regarding the F-16A MLU
1 Like
Is there any way the PoBIT can carry MAWS + missiles on the same pylon? Like some upgraded PIDS that can carry AIM-120s or AGM-88s.
As far as i know no, there were some designs for that but so far we haven’t seen anything in practice.
I think Gaijin messed up the F-16A MLU Block 20. It has a total of 60 countermeasures, but 30 of them are visually large countermeasures. In-game, however, they aren’t treated as such as all 60 are counted as standard countermeasures.
15×2 on the right (which are visually large countermeasures) and 30×1 on the left (clearly standard countermeasures, Gaijin got that part right)
For comparison, this is the F-16CM PoBIT, which has its countermeasures correctly implemented in-game. 15×2 large countermeasures on the right, and 30×1 standard countermeasures on both the right and left.
4 Likes
Given that Scorpion lacks any A2A symbology, it will feel like a downgrade
much better situational awareness due to IFF and its thankfully got pushed to Belgian f16
1 Like
Does the WAR do everything better than the original WAC?
In FalconBMS you can project image from NAV pod onto WAC(Ive always thought it could only be done on WAR HUDs)
Is that true?
2 Likes
Yes, all F-16 HUDs were capable of showing raster video footage such as FLIR or LLTV. The difference with the Block 40’s HUD is that it uses diffractive, holographic technology, where the conventional HUDs are refractive.
From 1980, F-16C was supposed to use a diffractive HUD and a FLIR from the outset. Originally this was called the WAR HUD for Wide Angle Raster, to differentiate it from the previous narrow angle Raster HUDs for the A-7. But the HUD development was delayed and the FLIR requirement was coalescing in to what would become LANTIRN. So both didn’t appear until Block 40 came about in the late 1980s.
Because of the delays, Marconi produced a conventional raster HUD with enhanced wide angle capability for low-level flight using a FLIR - albeit not as wide as the diffractive HUD was capable of. That’s what ended up in Blocks 25 and 30/32.
Strictly speaking, both the diffractive and conventional HUDs were Wide Angle Raster HUDs, and the Diffractive HUD then tended to be referred to as the LANTIRN HUD or DHUD from the mid-1980s onward.
AFAIK the LANTIRN HUDs on USAF Block 40s were eventually replaced by improved versions of the conventional HUD, made by Elbit. The expanded FOV for low level flying on the LANTIRN HUD probably didn’t prove to be all that necessary. And parallel integration of a DHUD and LANTIRN on A-10 didn’t materialise, perhaps making it costly. At least it seems there was not enough to make the added complexity of manufacturing the Diffractive HUD, worthwhile after Block 40/42.
4 Likes
Pretty much. The symbology is far more spacious from what I’ve seen on a Block 52 idle run.
Its main selling point when it was implemented was that it, similarly to the F-15E’s rasterized HUD, can display TGP images to the HUD itself.
To my knowledge you can’t project images to the WAC HUD since it’s a conventional collimator. All of its symbols are baked into the laser diodes. With the rasterized HUD there’s a full CRT inside the dash that is projected onto the sight glass.
For BMS, are you referring explicitly to mark / steer points handed off by the nav pod? The WAR HUD is the only one that can project an actual image to the HUD, the WAC can’t.
2 Likes
A shame that we can only see WAR on Block40/42 and some FMS variants.
Is it a valid loadout for compatible jets to have one modern TGP, say a LITENING, and the LANTIRN NAV pod nowadays?
I was thinking of actual image from NAV pod, like what 15E is also capable of.
And like you previously said, is there some interface issues with such HUD?
Thanks
Aha! Get smacked with double standard
1 Like