Hmm
Spoiler
3 Likes
Let me guess, GJ will not accept this as a proof that there was a weapon aiming computer for CCIP/CCRP, right?
1 Like
For consistency they should at least remove the CCRP. The F-5A (And the F-84F for exaple) have CCRP in game because it had the Low Altitude Bombing System. The F-5A (G) doesn’t even have the LABS control panel in the cockpit and as according to Gaijin the new electronics didn’t have any air to ground modes, then it couldn’t have been used to control the LABS designed in the late 1940’s. In reality the LABS is a toss bombing calculator (for nuclear weapons) anyway, and has nothing to do with CCRP in real life. So CCRP should be removed from any aircraft which only have LABS.
Correct, theyve acknowledged that the F-5 have a HUDWAC. However it is required to prove that the F-5 had the additional equipment required for CCIP/CCRP to function. However, they couldnt say what kind of equipment that would be. Some document rekated to the PAWS upgraded F-5s could also be decisive.
I would argue the HUDWAC, the INS and radar altimeter would be enough for CCIP/CCRP, but havent found any sources proving that.
The CCRP has now been removed. Also the SPI location indicator has been removed from the HUD making SPI unusable in sim. The Skipper is now even more worthless and also you can’t use SPI for locating targets or as a blind landing aid. Thanks Gaijin!
1 Like
Did it have CCRP? I dont remember it having that. It also still says EEGS on the HUD despite not having it lol.
1 Like
I believe it did as I had to cancel SPI target before dropping bombs in a normal mode (Or I’d remember NOT having to do that as with every other aircraft with SPI). I’m about 75 % certain. And I’m 100 % certain that the HUD had a a target point indicator.
2 Likes
Hmmm
https://rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/items/the-f-5-hudwac-tactical-superiority-for-the-tiger
radar altimeter is described as growth option in f-5 e/f gec marconi hudwac in above brochure, for me seems hudwac seems able to do and display calculations as name says… hud wac heads up display weapon aiming computer
seems we need installed hudwac manual and some sierra papers or spmeone visit Norway and ask the museum to testflight plane and document everything…
1 Like
There was the guy on the warthunder subreddit with the Tigerpaws from the game at the school he was at. Hes a technician in training so maybe someone could answer the questions at the building? Im in Copenhagen and already took my holiday to Finland two weeks ago lol, im not gonna try to ask for more days off to go to Norge lol.
I agree. It would be simpler to obtain a flight manual for the PAWS, than to prove this to Gaijin.
I got the impression that the user TilDovreFaller were in contact with the government regarding some papers for the CCIP. But i might be mistaken.
We had a guy that was going to a flight mechanic school in Norway were the original F-5 that is in game is located. He was going to talk to the teachers about obtaining the confirmation of the classification status. We are unsure if he will get it though.
3 Likes
https://www.reddit.com/r/Warthunder/s/X22pM6K0ou
Oppgaard? I talked to him a little bit on the subreddit.
1 Like
Reposting this in hopes it doesn’t continue to get ignored, been a year now unfortunately
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/Zt9NQhOhZcnE
The new updated damage model of the F-5A(G) also doesn’t match the HUD of the actual aircraft, bugs continue to slowly stack…
Swedish(Norwegian) and event vehicle, it’s never getting fixed
I voted on this when you originally posted it, damn it’s been a while
1 Like
If your bug report hasn’t been handled in that long then send a message to one of the Technical Moderators to ask about it. You can find all the teams and the areas they handle listed here: (Who is who and Reporting Procedure). If you don’t get an answer within a few days you can add more moderators from the list to the original message instead of sending a new message (that way you preserve the date of the message and it doesn’t look like a new request), adding one of the moderators to the message every 2-3 days or so until you get an answer.
Please do not to add the seniors until you have tried all other regular moderators, the Seniors likely won’t answer unless they are added and pinged by the regular moderators but if you’ve added all the regular moderators with no answer then you can add the seniors.
1 Like
Well good news, it’s been acknowledged and forwarded for review. Hopefully we can see this get fixed alongside the countermeasure count and in-game designation. Having 15 large caliber and 30 standard probably will be more helpful at 11.0 anyways, even if it’s generally still a countermeasure count reduction.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/Zt9NQhOhZcnE
mickey mouse issue
If every minor bug in the game was sidelined as a ‘mickey mouse issue’ (minor/silly), the game wouldn’t be nearly as complete feeling as it is today. These bugs can and will accumulate over time and when this does, the game can begin to feel cheap and/or unfinished. I don’t personally expect to see the textures or countermeasure count to be fixed in the foreseeable future, but knowing it’s acknowledged is enough for me.
Whether that is the Harrier FRS.1 HUD being inaccurate, the bombs on the Tornado GR.1 dropping away from its respective pylons, or the F-5T SCU having a slightly incorrect damage model is classed as a ‘mickey mouse issue’, I’d prefer to get these fixed in due time nonetheless.
1 Like
I’d like it to get it’s Viking CM pod before that if possible but I don’t care either way
1 Like