Guess AN/ALR-69A(V) also can do to some extent.
(Raytheon: Raytheon demonstrates first ever geolocation capability for radar warning receiver - Feb 27, 2017)
(Raytheon unveils geolocation radar warning receiver)
(Forecast International)
But HTS R7 does it better?
You can report it in-game if any aircraft have it.
It probably has much longer range in the forward quarter, and well predates the -69A, with R7 entering service in the early 2000’s. Also as missionized equipment was probably much easier to integrate since it’s only a modification to an existing pod, and wouldn’t require changes to be made to the airframe since the GPS antenna is self-contained in the pod.
1 Like
Only the PoBIT has the -69A, the -C Block 50 (and other OP tape 4.2 and later FMS F-16’s, on technical grounds), could probably be argued to have the HTS pod.
But as seen above the F/A-18E/F should also probably receive it.
1 Like
Any clue on what R7+ refers to?
software improvements?
I’ve also read that HTS actually has a 180 forward coverage. But not for R7 specifically, probably R5
Btw, was it the F-16CM that only had the latest HARM pods with GPS?
Likely similar to the PoBiT program, it brings all pods in inventory to a comon standard.
IRL it depends specifically on the year as the HTS IOC’s in '93 (REV 7 configuration enter service in '05-'07) postdates initial Block 5x deliveries in '91, so it’s not technically correct, but it does overlap with their service life, and so really up to gaijin as to what they are modeling, though it does have the GBU-39 so is roughly circa '06 or so, based on the ordnance.
Don’t think so operationally, any post Block-4x airframe (the -15AM, is a “Block 50+” equivalent ) would be able to use it since they are GPS enabled
1 Like
Is there anything for pre EPAWSS USAF F-15’s
First R7 was delivered in 2006, worked together with
M-tape4.
In terms of technical capability, F-16 with M4 and onward patches, chin hard points (HTS requires
MIL STD 1553) can eqquip HTS
Probably not, they don’t really need it since they aren’t responsible for SEAD as a mission set, they would at least have the ability to slew-to-cue, which could be used to generate coordinates, but not hands off in the same way the HTS does.
1 Like
Eh.
[DEV] AN/ASQ-213 HARM Targeting System Field of Regard too low
And rejected, looks like volunteers don’t know what their sourcing requirements are, and are just making stuff up as they go.
Authored works (secondary source): Reference books on collections of vehicles/aircraft/ships (‘coffee table books’), biographies, specialist books, “expert” opinion publications, industry magazines etc.
At least two unrelated sources required.
This report meets these requirements, as (1), is an opinion publication, and (2) is an article from an industry magazine.
2 Likes
Even such random aircrafts like kfir c10 block 60 have a strong esm
Well I can see both sides here.
https://ausairpower.net/API-AGM-88-HARM.html
This is citing;
Spoiler
Carlo Kopp
First published Air Power International Vol.4 No.1
December 1998
© 1998, 2002, 2005 Carlo Kopp
But this is now second hand and isn’t the original work, however if you had a copy of Air Power International Vol.4 No.1 that would meet the criteria.
1 Like
It’s the same author, this is a reproduction. It’s just not in PDF form.
You can find the archive
You can see the duplicated archive
https://web.archive.org/web/20020614183641/http://www.f-111.net/CarloKopp/AGM-88.htm
2 Likes
In other game modes do as you please, it would be a good feature too , but grb no
Mate you don’t make it easy haha, I’ll see what I can do.
1 Like
What that mean? The azimuth thing
1 Like
That I have no clue of.