I get thaf but all the F-4Es ive seen using it have been DMAS phantoms with the datalink pod on the belly of the jet as well
Note the black bulge on the spine noting this is a DMAS upgraded F-4E
Note the black bulge on the spine noting this is a DMAS upgraded F-4E
1 Like
in the 1990 updated manual it prety much confirms that the same airframes were updated with DMAS and GBU 15 controls (also should be able to use pave tack)
and if im reading it right should all have TISEO
2 Likes
Yes TIESO was standard in the production line just like Agile Eagle slats and the modifications to the gun section of the nose which fixed gun exhause stalling the engines.
Idk if gaijin already knows all of this and just wont change it even though they change russian jets all the time but as it stands the F-4E (if it were a true 1972 year model would have everything it has rn except ALR-46, flare and chaff dispensers, GBU-15 and Mavericks)
Like originally they gave it Flares and chaff because the mig-21Bis had them in game not knowing that it would completely change the year number they were trying to put in game and somehow didnt know it would open up so many inconsistencies on what they were trying to implement.
@Gunjob is there any way to clarify the issue or does it need to go though to the Dev’s.
Especially considering Smin’s statements, and the conflicting response from multiple rejected bug reports.
“Developers answer is that the in-game F-4E is a 1972 model without the DMAS upgrade.”
“Developers answer is that the in-game F-4E is a 1972 model without the DMAS upgrade, AN/AAQ-8 were added after 1972, so this is not a bug.”
As, If it’s a non-DMAS airframe, circa 1972; earlier airframes have yet to be refit with AGM-65 capability by that point (Note: No serials are listed in the Effectivity; Retrofit column for entry ECP 708R2 (add, AGM-65), only production effectivity on DMAS Block Aircraft (Block(s) 45+), on a manual dated to 1973), let alone the addition of the GBU-15.
There are no non-DMAS equipt(DVST or DSCG) aircraft produced in 1972 (production of Block -44 ends in '69), so it can’t be inversely interpreted for the intended configuration to be a '72 production aircraft.
I’d personally suggest at least that if the intent was to retain the F-4E’s '72 configuration and access to PGMs; the Pave Spike(AN/ASQ-23A/A, the -23A/A revision added automatic Laser / LORAN / Radar based, updated INS sight stabilization), and assorted SALH LGBs; Such as:
- GBU-1/B (BOLT-117), 750lb M117E1 + SALH kit
- GBU-10/B (Paveway I), 2000lb Mk.84 + SALH kit
- GBU-11/B, 3000lb M118E1 + SALH kit
- GBU-12/B (Paveway I), 500lb Mk.82 + SALH kit
Be replaced in kind in order to permit the F-4E to retain some level of PGM capability, and avoid needing to lower the BR (though this would conflict with the role of any potential addition of the F-4D, but as apparently it’s not planned its not an issue).
Alternately adjust the intended configuration to either a later date, or a DMAS equipt F-4E.
1 Like
I don’t see you getting anywhere with this one via the CBR, I’d suggest making a new suggestion for another F-4E variant with all the toys you want.
Also moved this thread to the correct area, I have a tip jar my forum mod friends ;).
A report for the removal of the AGM-65 from the US F-4E would be reasonable based on these documents?
You could try for sure. But typically we don’t often see weapons removed. Normally its edge cases.
there is this one for a later block McDonnell-Douglas F-4E/L Phantom II - Late Serving Air Force Phantom
and I can see them taking away weapons from the current one if they add that
It pains me somewhat, but report has been written;
Somewhat hopeful that this resolves, an with an actual configuration specified so it can be corrected, and an additional USAF F-4 can be added (be that an F-4D, F-4E or F-4G doesn’t really matter, to me).
1 Like
To be fair, iirc it is theoretically possible to have a 1972 produced airframe that was updated with maverick capability but not DMAS
and maverick capability was added before DMAS so it could be a depiction from within that time period
however GBU15 was nevver added to non DMAS airframes so that is a major discrepancy with our F4E
still doesnt excuse a lot of there denied reports though, because they are not even trying to keep it as a consist-ant block or time period
1 Like
As referenced above, DMAS equipt airframes began production in '69, F-4E Blocks 50~56 were produced in '72, and by '73 AGM-65 capability was not yet being refit, and was only implemented on production aircraft beginning '71.
Yes, but not by the arbitrarily specified '72 cutoff that Gaijin are using which is a contributing factor to configuration issues.
Non-DMAS aircraft refit with AGM-65 functionality comprise select airframes beginning with Block 36 ~ 44, as such would be ineligible for both the AGM-62 (all of 5x Block 30 F-4Es) as well.
Additionally the entire program falls well beyond the '72 cutoff as well, having only been conceptualized as a PIP of the GBU-8 in '74, and an IOC date of Mid '83.
Its more so that with an outstanding report, awaiting response that relates to a potential change in intended configuration, using it to deny reports in the intervening time instead, may well lead to more work in future. Depending on the outcome of the internal report. (however old it is).
And unless the denied reports are also being tabulated there is a chance that they would never be reopened should a permissive configuration be adopted.
I thought DMAS was an 80s electronics refit?
It is, but USAF F-4E deliveries ceased in '74 with block 62 airframes and not all airframes that were still in service were refit with DMAS, Which is partially why there is a sperate delineation being made between specified Block, and the configuration being Circa '72 for example.
It matters partially because the actual configuration of production aircraft changed, with each block and not all changes were refit to all aircraft, and so By specifying a Non-DMAS aircraft it indicates for example. That as of Block -48, TISEO was included for specific airframes, and refit to others later.
And as specified a non DMAS aircraft as of '72 has some particular configuration, which is separate to what would go on to become DMAS equipt airframes.
1 Like
What does KS stand for in that F-4E info sheet?
Korea?
I would think SK would be the designation for south korea. Not KS (i may be wrong).
SK is not on that aircraft delivery schedule list though, KS is.