well then? Explain how I’m misunderstanding.
You take the brains(computers) of the APG-70, the antenna of the APG-70(scaled up) and the digitization of the APG-70 then pair it to the power supply used by the AWG-9. yes, it’s definitely not a derivative. It definitely shares more in common with an analog radar…
Wdym “q.e.d” like it needed to be demonstrated?
As I just said, it’s the AWG-9, just digitalized.
You can say that about any radar’s antenna with the way you’re using it.
I said it has more commonality with the APG-70. However, it’s not based on the APG-70.
Also isn’t the awg9 X band?
1 Like
You have no idea what you’re talking about
Well where are the sources to prove what you’re talking about? Can’t just say something and not prove at least one source
1 Like
That literally goes the exact same for what he is saying you realize?
The difference is we know the APG-71 uses the components and specifically the computers from the APG-70 which is what a make a radar a radar, genius
Still no source. And no I don’t know everything about radars witch is why I want you give something of a source so I can see weather this facts from wiki or something more solid
1 Like
I don’t much like forecast international, but it’s more than he has provided.
The APG-71 does not exist without the 85% commonality with the APG-70, and those components are what makes a radar a radar.
2 Likes
EFT has a crappy radar, the Rafale is great overall and the SU30 is, both the EFT and Rafale both have the advantage of amazing missiles (which maybe the F14D will get hopefully); while also adding that the SU30 has now great missiles.
The F14 airframe is still also competitive in dogfights as I can speak from experience, managing to outmaneuver small fighters like the F16, to the newly added SU30 and it’s TVC
Let’s see if and when it gets added and we’ll see how it is only then
Ah come on. If Navy used EGBU I’d try for those instead of LJDAM, since those were around when F-14D was in service
TBH main joke - gaijin doesnt even asks for ability to guide it(set GPS)… at least UMPK can got coordinates mid flight(in game, irl cant).
1 Like
it can get both.
I personally don’t understand why they won’t put the effort into modelling the CAPTOR-M, maybe because an EFT is in the British tree and therefore it musn’t be given proper attention
No, because LJDAM wasn’t even in prototype stage when F-14 was retired
1 Like
5 Likes
So… DCS gamer filed a FOIA request a few years ago for the F-14D IRST related documents.
Seems Navy provided documents and compiled information about them… The work was done, but at the last moment a federal law prohibiting the release of unclassified aerospace material went into effect and the request was denied.
The documents are unclassified, but because of this law, the Pentagon does not allow the Navy to release the documents.
Classic ITAR and 22 U.S.C. § 2751 moment.
4 Likes
Funnily enough, I came across that DCS forum post and Reddit thread earlier. It really is a shame we couldn’t get fully declassified manuals yet.
It also happened to the FOIA request for the latest A-6E Intruder manuals that was denied for similar reasons.
I do wonder, though. Do ITAR and export controls have automatic expiration dates? Or will we ask them again in 5-10 years?
I do not know, so only time will tell.
4 Likes
Afaik, ITAR regulations do not expire. Once a defense article or item is listed under the United States Munitions List (USML) and becomes subject to ITAR, it remains under ITAR control indefinitely, unless it is formally reclassified or removed by the Pentagon.
While some export licenses issued under ITAR may include expiration dates, these are specific to the individual license and do not affect the regulation itself.
That said, it is possible to request the disclosure of related documents through the Mandatory Declassification Review (MDR) process.
3 Likes