thats assuming they would add them, because pave spike was only from mid 70s, they could add pave knife and really early laser guided stuff, but thats still assuming they actually add it, given theyve refused all laser guided stuff for the f4e so far
Likely because it had access to the GBU-15 & AGM-65 if it doesn’t anymore it will need replacements.
1 Like
maybe? I dont remember their reasoning for all of that, but I wouldnt be too surprised if they still refuse it
They even denied my bug report on the ALR-46 being able to detect C/D band radars from a 1978 upgrade even though The F-4E in game has ALE-40 countermeasure dispensers which were retrofitted in 1978 as well. Its like they dont care about the F-4E anymore because its not relevent as well as its not a premimum thats making them money.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/gaR9FJbYn14M
3 Likes
Anymore that you can find that have similar responses? It will help build the case that a 1972 configuration is in fact intended therefor both GBU-15 and AGM-65 capability are erroneous.
1 Like
Ill try my best but im going to bed cuz its 2am.
All I know is that having the GBU-15 on the F-4E in game is compleately wrong because the GBU-15 requires datalink which was added with the DMAS upgrade. And theres not a Single DMAS upgraded F-4E without TISEO. Also you probably already know this but F-4Es with TIESO were selected for the DMAS upgrade because TIESO was standard (meaning built from factory) after a ceartin date (not quite sure when) and they were selected because they had low flight hours and were the most “state of the art” (modern ig).
1 Like
State of the Art: For an F-4E i mean because the F-16 and the APG-66 was already being developed and produced at that time.
Only for post release guidance corrections (AN/AXQ-14 or later AN/ZSW-1 Improved Secure Datalink for USAF, Navy use AN/AWW-9 & -13 pods), LOBL was fine.
Block chart above mentions TISEO for F-4E production between 71~72 so Block 48 and up.
1 Like
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
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