Posted October 28, 2021 Summary of arguments and rebuttals Picture of the JDAM on the F-4EJ Kai? it is just for display. Is the ADTW's F-4EJ's new antenna is GPS antenna? It's been installed since 1988, so that is not a GPS antenna. A picture of the F-4EJ Kai with the XGCS-2? Just performing aerodynamics and separation tests with dummy bomb, not real bomb. F-4EJ Kai's GCS-1? No ground attack ability due to seeker's performance F-4EJ Kai's AGM-62 or AGM-65? When producing the F-4EJ, all equipment was removed, and no functions were added even in EJ Kai. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... Technical Moderator Optical_Ilyushin 5,554 Report post Posted October 23, 2021 10 minutes ago, AnimeThighs said: Just going to point out as well that SN 17-8301 has a new antenna as well that magically just appeared around 2004 Reveal hidden contents Here without Reveal hidden contents The only other airframe with this modification I could find was 07-8431 which was another ADTW testbed Reveal hidden contents However I'm sure you will tell me about how 2 ADTW testbeds receiving new antenna right around when the ADTW were testing GPS bombs on said testbeds is entirely coincidental... Great, now please find published literature describing how this would provide GPS/INS functionality and/or a list of weapons which would be compatible, as that would be necessary to send to developers. 2 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... コタリ 2,732 Report post Posted October 23, 2021 3 minutes ago, Optical_Ilyushin said: Great, now please find How about Gaijin does some research for a change instead of shoveling all of the difficult work onto the players. Of course I will still look in my free time, but isn't this kind of your job to do this kind of thing as a tech mod? Gaijin has a lot more resources than the average player and I'm sure there a few contacts you have at DMM to talk about this stuff. You seem like you are doing everything in your power to try and deny non-stop after the initial "screw-up" with JDAMs. Maybe you could actually pull your weight and use your position to support the player. TheElite96 (Posted October 27, 2021) Do Not: 1.1.1. Insult any forum members, Gaijin employee or forum staff. 1.1.2. Start or participate in flame wars, intentionally derail a topic, or post useless spam messages in moderated areas. 1 2 10 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... a201200128 52 Report post Posted October 23, 2021 17-8301 is a normal F-4EJ while 07-8431 is a F-4EJ kai. And current source only proven that 301 had tested it. So should be added to the normal EJ not Kai unless we can prove 431 also test it. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... Technical Moderator _David_Bowie_ 1,554 Report post Posted October 23, 2021 (edited) It's really a comedy, @AnimeThighs It's clear you didn't read the content. One of the F-4EJ 17-8301 pictures you brought is from a magazine, And that magazine had important information about the F-4EJ's XGCS-2. Before using an armament on an aircraft, it must be tested for its flight characteristics and drop. and for these tests, most of them are tested using dummy ammunition on old aircraft. And in this situation the aircraft does not need to be modified to actually use the ammunition, why? That's because all you need to do is equip the dummy ammunition and throw it. This is the truth of the F-4EJ's XGCS-2 picture. evidence? of course here is. Spoiler Form : 「JASDF TODAY 航空自衛隊 半世紀」 It is difficult to read due to the low quality of the picture, but you can read the important information 飛行実験団ではこの新型普通爆弾を航空機に搭載して、飛行特性および分離安全性などに関するデータを収集することを目的とした性能確認試験を担当する。 ADTW will be in charge of performance confirmation tests aimed at collecting data on flight characteristics and separation safety this new bomb on an aircraft. They haven't tested real ammunition with the F-4EJ. Furthermore, South Korean Air Force also tested the separation of cruise missiles using the F-4E. But no one is saying that the South Korean Air Force's F-4 can actually use cruise missiles. Therefore, we can conclude that the F-4EJ 17-8301 was not equipped XGCS-2 for real use. Now we've another piece of evidence that the F-4EJ Kai can't actually use the XGCS-2, To be honest, the antenna claim was a bit fresh. and now I'm curious what the argument come will be. Edited October 23, 2021 by _David_Bowie_ 4 1 1 5 2 4 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... Technical Moderator _David_Bowie_ 1,554 Report post Posted October 23, 2021 (edited) 8 hours ago, Nacho5944 said: Can we stop with all of the passive aggressive back and forth childish crap, trying to bait a response out of people? Okay, clearly now we realize that the XGCS-2 can't be properly dropped from the EJ Kai, thanks David, now how about we focus on finding more detailed information about the seeker head on the GCS-1? I've searched as much as I can, but the results are disappointing. They publish very little seeker information, and the most detailed of all sources i can find explains that they have no ground attack capability. Spoiler 世界の傑作機 No.117 三菱 F-1, Page 44 GCS-1が諸外国の誘導爆弾で採用されているレーザー誘導方式やTV誘導方式を採用しなかったのは、搭載母機に特別な改 修が必要ないことと、周辺諸国へ脅威を与えないため地上攻撃能力をあえて求めず、対艦攻撃専用型に特化するためであると思われる The reason why the GCS-1 did not adopt the laser guidance system or TV guidance system used in guided bombs in other countries is that the onboard mother machine does not require special repairs and does not pose a threat to neighboring countries. It seems that this is because it does not to seek ground attack capability, but specializes in anti-ship attack type. Edited October 24, 2021 by _David_Bowie_ 2 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... BadOpinionHaver 2,092 Report post Posted October 24, 2021 16 hours ago, AnimeThighs said: Just going to point out as well that SN 17-8301 has a new antenna as well that magically just appeared around 2004 Reveal hidden contents Here without Reveal hidden contents The only other airframe with this modification I could find was 07-8431 which was another ADTW testbed Reveal hidden contents However I'm sure you will tell me about how 2 ADTW testbeds receiving new antenna right around when the ADTW were testing GPS bombs on said testbeds is entirely coincidental... So literally just 2 airframes, in a test capacity. I'm sorry but that's not particularly compelling. 1 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... Target1331 3,054 Report post Posted October 24, 2021 What is that antenna supposed to do? If that extra antenna on top was to capture GPS signals fine, but if it was to send signals to the bomb/ground, it would be in the wrong place, because the fuselage would pretty much block or affect the signal to the bomb/ground. Best regards, Phil Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... Technical Moderator _David_Bowie_ 1,554 Report post Posted October 24, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, Target1331 said: What is that antenna supposed to do? If that extra antenna on top was to capture GPS signals fine, but if it was to send signals to the bomb/ground, it would be in the wrong place, because the fuselage would pretty much block or affect the signal to the bomb/ground. No one knows, I'm guessing that antenna is a measuring device. Because ADTW is tests a new equipment and weapons. Edited October 24, 2021 by _David_Bowie_ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... コタリ 2,732 Report post Posted October 27, 2021 F-18 Hornet GPS system: Spoiler http://www.clubhyper.com/reference/raafhornetpg_1.htm F-4EJ Kai 17-8301 Spoiler Unmodified EJ Kai Spoiler 2 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... Lolman345 588 Report post Posted October 27, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, AnimeThighs said: F-18 Hornet GPS system: Hide contents http://www.clubhyper.com/reference/raafhornetpg_1.htm F-4EJ Kai 17-8301 Reveal hidden contents Unmodified EJ Kai Reveal hidden contents Should note that these these reference two distinctly different F/A-18 models, the left is a RAAF AF/A-18B without JDAM capabilities while the right is a late Block USN F/A-18C from 2015 which should have JDAM capabilities. In both cases these GPS bumps are for the onboard navigation GPS and INS, they can receive data linked GPS information, however, as far as I know, said information cannot be used for ordinance guidance alone. This is the aircraft set that the US currently operates JDAMS from Spoiler It should be noted as well that Japan did purchase 27 JDAM kits all the way back in 2005, however, it is not specified if a aircraft was ever equipped with such systems for tests or use. Spoiler This document does cite certain aircraft getting integration for other countries as well https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/FOID/Reading Room/Selected_Acquisition_Reports/FY_2018_SARS/19-F-1098_DOC_46_JDAM_SAR_Dec_2018.pdf Taken from this, worry not its Unclassified Edited October 27, 2021 by Lolman345 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... コタリ 2,732 Report post Posted October 27, 2021 11 minutes ago, Lolman345 said: the left is a RAAF AF/A-18B without JDAM capabilities https://www.airforce.gov.au/technology/aircraft/strike/fa-18ab-hornet The Australian government labels them as JDAM capable. 9 minutes ago, Lolman345 said: however, as far as I know, said information cannot be used for ordinance guidance. Then through what method would they receive GPS info to guide JDAMs other than than the GPS receiver? Just looking at cutaway diagrams of various US fighters with JDAM capabilities there is only ever 1 GPS receiver and it's always on the spine (or right wing root in the case of F-15Es), so if JDAMs don't receive GPS guidance from the only GPS receiver then how else would they receive that info? 2 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... Wiggly_Armed_Man 2,383 Report post Posted October 27, 2021 41 minutes ago, Lolman345 said: It should be noted as well that Japan did purchase 27 JDAM kits all the way back in 2005, however, it is not specified if a aircraft was ever equipped with such systems for tests or use. Twenty-three F-2s were produced between 2004 to 2007 with JDAM capability. A further forty-seven would be remodeled between 2011 to 2015 to also have JDAM capability for a total of seventy out of ninety-four aircraft produced. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... Lolman345 588 Report post Posted October 27, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, AnimeThighs said: https://www.airforce.gov.au/technology/aircraft/strike/fa-18ab-hornet The Australian government labels them as JDAM capable. Then through what method would they receive GPS info to guide JDAMs other than than the GPS receiver? Just looking at cutaway diagrams of various US fighters with JDAM capabilities there is only ever 1 GPS receiver and it's always on the spine (or right wing root in the case of F-15Es), so if JDAMs don't receive GPS guidance from the only GPS receiver then how else would they receive that info? The AF/A-18A after the HUGs upgrades was brought up to the A+ standard (with some tweaks) which included overhauling the entire radar, installing F/A-18C systems and symbology and numerous other changes to allow the aircraft to deploy JDAMs, AIM-120s and other weapons, the B to my knowledge never received a majority of the HUGs upgrades as it was a training aircraft yet still retains the exact same exterior GPS bump and fin that the AF/A-18A has, which is JDAM capable. To a similar degree even the initial models of the F/A-18A which were not JDAM capable still retained the same ventral GPS fin, the bump alone is not what allowed the F/A-18A+ and onward to deploy JDAMs, as its not a actual GPS aerial, rather a anti jamming system for the GPS navigation system installed in the aircraft. Said antenna bump you reference is the GAS-1N made by Raytheon and augments the capabilities of the existing GPS aerial against GPS jamming, it does not expand the weapons profile of the aircraft. Spoiler You can find this bump on numerous, US, UK and Aussie aircraft today, including but not limited to, helicopters, transport aircraft, fighter craft, and bombers, it is a very standardized system. https://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/products/gps_anti-jam Edited October 27, 2021 by Lolman345 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... コタリ 2,732 Report post Posted October 27, 2021 6 minutes ago, Lolman345 said: -snip- However we do know that this is a GPS/INS system on an EJ Kai and not something else. We know that it appeared on the airframe right around the time Japan was testing XGCS-2 and right before F-2As received their GPS JDAM capability. 17-8301 was modified as a test bed either in preparation to test GPS XGCS-2s or to test the GPS system that would appear on the F-2. Either one would qualify it to use GPS bombs, but the problem is I don't think Gaijin would accept such circumstantial evidence. 2 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... Smin1080p 60,444 Report post Posted October 27, 2021 On 23/10/2021 at 10:43, AnimeThighs said: How about Gaijin does some research for a change instead of shoveling all of the difficult work onto the players. Of course I will still look in my free time, but isn't this kind of your job to do this kind of thing as a tech mod? Gaijin has a lot more resources than the average player and I'm sure there a few contacts you have at DMM to talk about this stuff. You seem like you are doing everything in your power to try and deny non-stop after the initial "screw-up" with JDAMs. Maybe you could actually pull your weight and use your position to support the player. Tech Mods are volunteer users who contribute a lot to the game and forum by giving up their free time to process player bug reports and forward them onto the developers. They have all given up huge amounts of their free time to test, replicate and forward matters onto the developers as well as contributing a lot to improving the game for each and every single player. - It is not their "job", it is a voluntary position. - They do not have contact with DMM. - It is not any part of their role to be doing the research of a proposal from someone else. It is not the job of a Technical Moderator to research further into something you are trying to propose, challenge, suggest or claim is incorrect. They are here to help assist with the process by answering what questions they can and forwarding your report on. Nothing is being "shovelled" onto players here. The EJ Kai is modelled to the best information we were able to obtain, as were DMM. What was initially believed to be correct, turned out to be not possible thanks to additional sources we were not able to locate. If you believe you have / can find additional information to improve the aircraft, that's excellent and we can certainly help pass that onto the developers. We cannot however research your proposal for you without sufficient information to really prove anything to actually pass to the developers and will not tolerate condescending or insulative attitudes towards those who are giving up their free time to handle player reports and doing their upmost best to get them all to the developers. 1 2 7 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... コタリ 2,732 Report post Posted October 27, 2021 TheElite96 gave コタリ a warning for this post Reason: Rule Breaking Warning · Points: 1 · 22 minutes ago, Smin1080p said: Nothing is being "shovelled" onto players here. The EJ Kai is modelled to the best information we were able to obtain, as were DMM. I mean it really is. Are bug reporters not volunteers as well? The addition of JDAMs to the the EJ Kai was driven by user input and the subsequent removal was driven by user input as well. All because Gaijin didn't do their own research and relied on bug reporters. Now it comes out that an EJ Kai was modified with GPS systems in some capacity while also in the process of testing GPS weapons, so shouldn't that be something Gaijin looks into as well? Even if it isn't a tech mod I find it hard to believe that Gaijin doesn't have a single researcher on staff that can look into this. Someone who actually does have contacts at DMM for them to look into since we know for sure they have researchers. As far as the Japanese tree goes I don't think I've seen a single issue fixed with the ground or air tree that wasn't forwarded through player input, so to me it really does seem like that work is being shoveled onto the player base. And on top of all of that, the developers can't even give the time of day or respect to read the reports properly. Just look at the Type 87 optics that was reported on the dev server. The initial optic values were wrong, the bug was reported, and the devs changed the optics to an equally wrong value because they didn't properly read the report. 33 minutes ago, Smin1080p said: will not tolerate condescending or insulative attitudes towards those who are giving up their free time Funny because I can recall a few times where you were plenty condescending towards VOLUNTEER bug reporters. TheElite96 (Posted October 27, 2021) Do Not: 1.1.2. Start or participate in flame wars, intentionally derail a topic, or post useless spam messages in moderated areas. 1.1.5. Deliberately challenge moderation or administration, if you have issues or concerns with any actions taken please send a Private Message to Moderators, Senior Moderators or Community Managers/Administrators. 1 3 6 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... Smin1080p 60,444 Report post Posted October 27, 2021 22 minutes ago, AnimeThighs said: I mean it really is. Are bug reporters not volunteers as well? Bug reporters are much apricated members of the community who contribute towards improving the game by providing the necessary evidence we need to forward a matter on. All of their efforts are greatly apricated and that was never in question. However this is not a bug report, and the necessary evidence was not provided at all. 22 minutes ago, AnimeThighs said: The addition of JDAMs to the the EJ Kai was driven by user input and the subsequent removal was driven by user input as well. Initially it was our research that concluded it was possible, aided both by DMM and players. Until most recently, were a well researched and evidenced report concluded that it was not the case. 22 minutes ago, AnimeThighs said: Now it comes out that an EJ Kai was modified with GPS systems in some capacity while also in the process of testing GPS weapons, so shouldn't that be something Gaijin looks into as well? Even if it isn't a tech mod I find it hard to believe that Gaijin doesn't have a single researcher on staff that can look into this. Someone who actually does have contacts at DMM for them to look into since we know for sure they have researchers. We will indeed, when there is the required evidence to warrant investigation. That was already requested previously. So far it has not been provided, so the matter cannot be taken further. Attacking moderators who are here trying to work with and improve the situation or breaching forum rules is not going to help at all. 22 minutes ago, AnimeThighs said: As far as the Japanese tree goes I don't think I've seen a single issue fixed with the ground or air tree that wasn't forwarded through player input, so to me it really does seem like that work is being shoveled onto the player base. Plenty are evidenced throughout the changelogs of both major and minor updates. 2 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... Technical Moderator _David_Bowie_ 1,554 Report post Posted October 28, 2021 (edited) @AnimeThighs Antenna you claim to be a GPS antenna has been installed since 1988. It's more realistic to think of it as another antenna that looks similar to a GPS antenna, especially considering that the device you claiming to be a GPS bump can be seen in the 1996 photo. That antenna was mounted before the EJ Kai modification, so we can find out that ADTW's EJ, EJ Kai do not have GPS capabilities Mitsubishi F-4EJ Phantom II (07-8431) Spoiler 1988/07/31 Gifu Air Base McDonnell Douglas F-4EJ Phantom II (17-8301) Spoiler 1989/04/06 Gifu Air Base 1991/09/10 Komatsu Air Base 1996/11/16 Gifu Air Base Edited October 28, 2021 by _David_Bowie_ 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... Technical Moderator _David_Bowie_ 1,554 Report post Posted October 28, 2021 Summary of arguments and rebuttals Picture of the JDAM on the F-4EJ Kai? it is just for display. Is the ADTW's F-4EJ's new antenna is GPS antenna? It's been installed since 1988, so that is not a GPS antenna. A picture of the F-4EJ Kai with the XGCS-2? Just performing aerodynamics and separation tests with dummy bomb, not real bomb. F-4EJ Kai's GCS-1? No ground attack ability due to seeker's performance F-4EJ Kai's AGM-62 or AGM-65? When producing the F-4EJ, all equipment was removed, and no functions were added even in EJ Kai. 4 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... warhead_beast 352 Report post Posted October 28, 2021 Have you noticed that the resolution of the model and more noticably the cockpit has dropped significantly? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... Wiggly_Armed_Man 2,383 Report post Posted October 28, 2021 Localization for both the GCS-1 type I and type II bombs has been added in "Ground Breaking": 2 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... 1 month later... Nacho5944 181 Report post Posted November 30, 2021 (edited) So, this panel is in the backseat of the F-4EJ Kai. It mentions having something to do with a camera and several modes, including ASM, which I assume to be anti ship or something. Anybody got any ideas?  Edited November 30, 2021 by Nacho5944 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... CotorShas 427 Report post Posted December 1, 2021 (edited) ASM 1 and 2 anti shipping missiles Edited December 1, 2021 by CotorShas Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... Nacho5944 181 Report post Posted December 1, 2021 (edited) Well yeah, I know about those, I'm just interested that there's a camera mode relating to them on the EJ Kai, and there are also camera modes for bombing too, so it really makes you wonder what they mean by it, since the only camera I can think that the EJ Kai carries is the HUD camera, and I'm not 100% certain this is talking about that camera. Just noticed in the bottom right corner as well there appears to be a panel that says "Video select". Thoughts? Edited December 1, 2021 by Nacho5944 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... CotorShas 427 Report post Posted December 1, 2021 Has the EJ kai even been equipped with a targeting pod? Could be for that. I know they have them on the F2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options... Prev 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next Page 17 of 30 Share More sharing options... Followers 19
Technical Moderator Optical_Ilyushin 5,554 Report post Posted October 23, 2021 10 minutes ago, AnimeThighs said: Just going to point out as well that SN 17-8301 has a new antenna as well that magically just appeared around 2004 Reveal hidden contents Here without Reveal hidden contents The only other airframe with this modification I could find was 07-8431 which was another ADTW testbed Reveal hidden contents However I'm sure you will tell me about how 2 ADTW testbeds receiving new antenna right around when the ADTW were testing GPS bombs on said testbeds is entirely coincidental... Great, now please find published literature describing how this would provide GPS/INS functionality and/or a list of weapons which would be compatible, as that would be necessary to send to developers. 2 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
コタリ 2,732 Report post Posted October 23, 2021 3 minutes ago, Optical_Ilyushin said: Great, now please find How about Gaijin does some research for a change instead of shoveling all of the difficult work onto the players. Of course I will still look in my free time, but isn't this kind of your job to do this kind of thing as a tech mod? Gaijin has a lot more resources than the average player and I'm sure there a few contacts you have at DMM to talk about this stuff. You seem like you are doing everything in your power to try and deny non-stop after the initial "screw-up" with JDAMs. Maybe you could actually pull your weight and use your position to support the player. TheElite96 (Posted October 27, 2021) Do Not: 1.1.1. Insult any forum members, Gaijin employee or forum staff. 1.1.2. Start or participate in flame wars, intentionally derail a topic, or post useless spam messages in moderated areas. 1 2 10 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
a201200128 52 Report post Posted October 23, 2021 17-8301 is a normal F-4EJ while 07-8431 is a F-4EJ kai. And current source only proven that 301 had tested it. So should be added to the normal EJ not Kai unless we can prove 431 also test it. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Technical Moderator _David_Bowie_ 1,554 Report post Posted October 23, 2021 (edited) It's really a comedy, @AnimeThighs It's clear you didn't read the content. One of the F-4EJ 17-8301 pictures you brought is from a magazine, And that magazine had important information about the F-4EJ's XGCS-2. Before using an armament on an aircraft, it must be tested for its flight characteristics and drop. and for these tests, most of them are tested using dummy ammunition on old aircraft. And in this situation the aircraft does not need to be modified to actually use the ammunition, why? That's because all you need to do is equip the dummy ammunition and throw it. This is the truth of the F-4EJ's XGCS-2 picture. evidence? of course here is. Spoiler Form : 「JASDF TODAY 航空自衛隊 半世紀」 It is difficult to read due to the low quality of the picture, but you can read the important information 飛行実験団ではこの新型普通爆弾を航空機に搭載して、飛行特性および分離安全性などに関するデータを収集することを目的とした性能確認試験を担当する。 ADTW will be in charge of performance confirmation tests aimed at collecting data on flight characteristics and separation safety this new bomb on an aircraft. They haven't tested real ammunition with the F-4EJ. Furthermore, South Korean Air Force also tested the separation of cruise missiles using the F-4E. But no one is saying that the South Korean Air Force's F-4 can actually use cruise missiles. Therefore, we can conclude that the F-4EJ 17-8301 was not equipped XGCS-2 for real use. Now we've another piece of evidence that the F-4EJ Kai can't actually use the XGCS-2, To be honest, the antenna claim was a bit fresh. and now I'm curious what the argument come will be. Edited October 23, 2021 by _David_Bowie_ 4 1 1 5 2 4 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Technical Moderator _David_Bowie_ 1,554 Report post Posted October 23, 2021 (edited) 8 hours ago, Nacho5944 said: Can we stop with all of the passive aggressive back and forth childish crap, trying to bait a response out of people? Okay, clearly now we realize that the XGCS-2 can't be properly dropped from the EJ Kai, thanks David, now how about we focus on finding more detailed information about the seeker head on the GCS-1? I've searched as much as I can, but the results are disappointing. They publish very little seeker information, and the most detailed of all sources i can find explains that they have no ground attack capability. Spoiler 世界の傑作機 No.117 三菱 F-1, Page 44 GCS-1が諸外国の誘導爆弾で採用されているレーザー誘導方式やTV誘導方式を採用しなかったのは、搭載母機に特別な改 修が必要ないことと、周辺諸国へ脅威を与えないため地上攻撃能力をあえて求めず、対艦攻撃専用型に特化するためであると思われる The reason why the GCS-1 did not adopt the laser guidance system or TV guidance system used in guided bombs in other countries is that the onboard mother machine does not require special repairs and does not pose a threat to neighboring countries. It seems that this is because it does not to seek ground attack capability, but specializes in anti-ship attack type. Edited October 24, 2021 by _David_Bowie_ 2 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadOpinionHaver 2,092 Report post Posted October 24, 2021 16 hours ago, AnimeThighs said: Just going to point out as well that SN 17-8301 has a new antenna as well that magically just appeared around 2004 Reveal hidden contents Here without Reveal hidden contents The only other airframe with this modification I could find was 07-8431 which was another ADTW testbed Reveal hidden contents However I'm sure you will tell me about how 2 ADTW testbeds receiving new antenna right around when the ADTW were testing GPS bombs on said testbeds is entirely coincidental... So literally just 2 airframes, in a test capacity. I'm sorry but that's not particularly compelling. 1 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Target1331 3,054 Report post Posted October 24, 2021 What is that antenna supposed to do? If that extra antenna on top was to capture GPS signals fine, but if it was to send signals to the bomb/ground, it would be in the wrong place, because the fuselage would pretty much block or affect the signal to the bomb/ground. Best regards, Phil Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Technical Moderator _David_Bowie_ 1,554 Report post Posted October 24, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, Target1331 said: What is that antenna supposed to do? If that extra antenna on top was to capture GPS signals fine, but if it was to send signals to the bomb/ground, it would be in the wrong place, because the fuselage would pretty much block or affect the signal to the bomb/ground. No one knows, I'm guessing that antenna is a measuring device. Because ADTW is tests a new equipment and weapons. Edited October 24, 2021 by _David_Bowie_ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
コタリ 2,732 Report post Posted October 27, 2021 F-18 Hornet GPS system: Spoiler http://www.clubhyper.com/reference/raafhornetpg_1.htm F-4EJ Kai 17-8301 Spoiler Unmodified EJ Kai Spoiler 2 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lolman345 588 Report post Posted October 27, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, AnimeThighs said: F-18 Hornet GPS system: Hide contents http://www.clubhyper.com/reference/raafhornetpg_1.htm F-4EJ Kai 17-8301 Reveal hidden contents Unmodified EJ Kai Reveal hidden contents Should note that these these reference two distinctly different F/A-18 models, the left is a RAAF AF/A-18B without JDAM capabilities while the right is a late Block USN F/A-18C from 2015 which should have JDAM capabilities. In both cases these GPS bumps are for the onboard navigation GPS and INS, they can receive data linked GPS information, however, as far as I know, said information cannot be used for ordinance guidance alone. This is the aircraft set that the US currently operates JDAMS from Spoiler It should be noted as well that Japan did purchase 27 JDAM kits all the way back in 2005, however, it is not specified if a aircraft was ever equipped with such systems for tests or use. Spoiler This document does cite certain aircraft getting integration for other countries as well https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/FOID/Reading Room/Selected_Acquisition_Reports/FY_2018_SARS/19-F-1098_DOC_46_JDAM_SAR_Dec_2018.pdf Taken from this, worry not its Unclassified Edited October 27, 2021 by Lolman345 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
コタリ 2,732 Report post Posted October 27, 2021 11 minutes ago, Lolman345 said: the left is a RAAF AF/A-18B without JDAM capabilities https://www.airforce.gov.au/technology/aircraft/strike/fa-18ab-hornet The Australian government labels them as JDAM capable. 9 minutes ago, Lolman345 said: however, as far as I know, said information cannot be used for ordinance guidance. Then through what method would they receive GPS info to guide JDAMs other than than the GPS receiver? Just looking at cutaway diagrams of various US fighters with JDAM capabilities there is only ever 1 GPS receiver and it's always on the spine (or right wing root in the case of F-15Es), so if JDAMs don't receive GPS guidance from the only GPS receiver then how else would they receive that info? 2 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiggly_Armed_Man 2,383 Report post Posted October 27, 2021 41 minutes ago, Lolman345 said: It should be noted as well that Japan did purchase 27 JDAM kits all the way back in 2005, however, it is not specified if a aircraft was ever equipped with such systems for tests or use. Twenty-three F-2s were produced between 2004 to 2007 with JDAM capability. A further forty-seven would be remodeled between 2011 to 2015 to also have JDAM capability for a total of seventy out of ninety-four aircraft produced. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lolman345 588 Report post Posted October 27, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, AnimeThighs said: https://www.airforce.gov.au/technology/aircraft/strike/fa-18ab-hornet The Australian government labels them as JDAM capable. Then through what method would they receive GPS info to guide JDAMs other than than the GPS receiver? Just looking at cutaway diagrams of various US fighters with JDAM capabilities there is only ever 1 GPS receiver and it's always on the spine (or right wing root in the case of F-15Es), so if JDAMs don't receive GPS guidance from the only GPS receiver then how else would they receive that info? The AF/A-18A after the HUGs upgrades was brought up to the A+ standard (with some tweaks) which included overhauling the entire radar, installing F/A-18C systems and symbology and numerous other changes to allow the aircraft to deploy JDAMs, AIM-120s and other weapons, the B to my knowledge never received a majority of the HUGs upgrades as it was a training aircraft yet still retains the exact same exterior GPS bump and fin that the AF/A-18A has, which is JDAM capable. To a similar degree even the initial models of the F/A-18A which were not JDAM capable still retained the same ventral GPS fin, the bump alone is not what allowed the F/A-18A+ and onward to deploy JDAMs, as its not a actual GPS aerial, rather a anti jamming system for the GPS navigation system installed in the aircraft. Said antenna bump you reference is the GAS-1N made by Raytheon and augments the capabilities of the existing GPS aerial against GPS jamming, it does not expand the weapons profile of the aircraft. Spoiler You can find this bump on numerous, US, UK and Aussie aircraft today, including but not limited to, helicopters, transport aircraft, fighter craft, and bombers, it is a very standardized system. https://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/products/gps_anti-jam Edited October 27, 2021 by Lolman345 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
コタリ 2,732 Report post Posted October 27, 2021 6 minutes ago, Lolman345 said: -snip- However we do know that this is a GPS/INS system on an EJ Kai and not something else. We know that it appeared on the airframe right around the time Japan was testing XGCS-2 and right before F-2As received their GPS JDAM capability. 17-8301 was modified as a test bed either in preparation to test GPS XGCS-2s or to test the GPS system that would appear on the F-2. Either one would qualify it to use GPS bombs, but the problem is I don't think Gaijin would accept such circumstantial evidence. 2 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smin1080p 60,444 Report post Posted October 27, 2021 On 23/10/2021 at 10:43, AnimeThighs said: How about Gaijin does some research for a change instead of shoveling all of the difficult work onto the players. Of course I will still look in my free time, but isn't this kind of your job to do this kind of thing as a tech mod? Gaijin has a lot more resources than the average player and I'm sure there a few contacts you have at DMM to talk about this stuff. You seem like you are doing everything in your power to try and deny non-stop after the initial "screw-up" with JDAMs. Maybe you could actually pull your weight and use your position to support the player. Tech Mods are volunteer users who contribute a lot to the game and forum by giving up their free time to process player bug reports and forward them onto the developers. They have all given up huge amounts of their free time to test, replicate and forward matters onto the developers as well as contributing a lot to improving the game for each and every single player. - It is not their "job", it is a voluntary position. - They do not have contact with DMM. - It is not any part of their role to be doing the research of a proposal from someone else. It is not the job of a Technical Moderator to research further into something you are trying to propose, challenge, suggest or claim is incorrect. They are here to help assist with the process by answering what questions they can and forwarding your report on. Nothing is being "shovelled" onto players here. The EJ Kai is modelled to the best information we were able to obtain, as were DMM. What was initially believed to be correct, turned out to be not possible thanks to additional sources we were not able to locate. If you believe you have / can find additional information to improve the aircraft, that's excellent and we can certainly help pass that onto the developers. We cannot however research your proposal for you without sufficient information to really prove anything to actually pass to the developers and will not tolerate condescending or insulative attitudes towards those who are giving up their free time to handle player reports and doing their upmost best to get them all to the developers. 1 2 7 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
コタリ 2,732 Report post Posted October 27, 2021 TheElite96 gave コタリ a warning for this post Reason: Rule Breaking Warning · Points: 1 · 22 minutes ago, Smin1080p said: Nothing is being "shovelled" onto players here. The EJ Kai is modelled to the best information we were able to obtain, as were DMM. I mean it really is. Are bug reporters not volunteers as well? The addition of JDAMs to the the EJ Kai was driven by user input and the subsequent removal was driven by user input as well. All because Gaijin didn't do their own research and relied on bug reporters. Now it comes out that an EJ Kai was modified with GPS systems in some capacity while also in the process of testing GPS weapons, so shouldn't that be something Gaijin looks into as well? Even if it isn't a tech mod I find it hard to believe that Gaijin doesn't have a single researcher on staff that can look into this. Someone who actually does have contacts at DMM for them to look into since we know for sure they have researchers. As far as the Japanese tree goes I don't think I've seen a single issue fixed with the ground or air tree that wasn't forwarded through player input, so to me it really does seem like that work is being shoveled onto the player base. And on top of all of that, the developers can't even give the time of day or respect to read the reports properly. Just look at the Type 87 optics that was reported on the dev server. The initial optic values were wrong, the bug was reported, and the devs changed the optics to an equally wrong value because they didn't properly read the report. 33 minutes ago, Smin1080p said: will not tolerate condescending or insulative attitudes towards those who are giving up their free time Funny because I can recall a few times where you were plenty condescending towards VOLUNTEER bug reporters. TheElite96 (Posted October 27, 2021) Do Not: 1.1.2. Start or participate in flame wars, intentionally derail a topic, or post useless spam messages in moderated areas. 1.1.5. Deliberately challenge moderation or administration, if you have issues or concerns with any actions taken please send a Private Message to Moderators, Senior Moderators or Community Managers/Administrators. 1 3 6 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smin1080p 60,444 Report post Posted October 27, 2021 22 minutes ago, AnimeThighs said: I mean it really is. Are bug reporters not volunteers as well? Bug reporters are much apricated members of the community who contribute towards improving the game by providing the necessary evidence we need to forward a matter on. All of their efforts are greatly apricated and that was never in question. However this is not a bug report, and the necessary evidence was not provided at all. 22 minutes ago, AnimeThighs said: The addition of JDAMs to the the EJ Kai was driven by user input and the subsequent removal was driven by user input as well. Initially it was our research that concluded it was possible, aided both by DMM and players. Until most recently, were a well researched and evidenced report concluded that it was not the case. 22 minutes ago, AnimeThighs said: Now it comes out that an EJ Kai was modified with GPS systems in some capacity while also in the process of testing GPS weapons, so shouldn't that be something Gaijin looks into as well? Even if it isn't a tech mod I find it hard to believe that Gaijin doesn't have a single researcher on staff that can look into this. Someone who actually does have contacts at DMM for them to look into since we know for sure they have researchers. We will indeed, when there is the required evidence to warrant investigation. That was already requested previously. So far it has not been provided, so the matter cannot be taken further. Attacking moderators who are here trying to work with and improve the situation or breaching forum rules is not going to help at all. 22 minutes ago, AnimeThighs said: As far as the Japanese tree goes I don't think I've seen a single issue fixed with the ground or air tree that wasn't forwarded through player input, so to me it really does seem like that work is being shoveled onto the player base. Plenty are evidenced throughout the changelogs of both major and minor updates. 2 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Technical Moderator _David_Bowie_ 1,554 Report post Posted October 28, 2021 (edited) @AnimeThighs Antenna you claim to be a GPS antenna has been installed since 1988. It's more realistic to think of it as another antenna that looks similar to a GPS antenna, especially considering that the device you claiming to be a GPS bump can be seen in the 1996 photo. That antenna was mounted before the EJ Kai modification, so we can find out that ADTW's EJ, EJ Kai do not have GPS capabilities Mitsubishi F-4EJ Phantom II (07-8431) Spoiler 1988/07/31 Gifu Air Base McDonnell Douglas F-4EJ Phantom II (17-8301) Spoiler 1989/04/06 Gifu Air Base 1991/09/10 Komatsu Air Base 1996/11/16 Gifu Air Base Edited October 28, 2021 by _David_Bowie_ 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Technical Moderator _David_Bowie_ 1,554 Report post Posted October 28, 2021 Summary of arguments and rebuttals Picture of the JDAM on the F-4EJ Kai? it is just for display. Is the ADTW's F-4EJ's new antenna is GPS antenna? It's been installed since 1988, so that is not a GPS antenna. A picture of the F-4EJ Kai with the XGCS-2? Just performing aerodynamics and separation tests with dummy bomb, not real bomb. F-4EJ Kai's GCS-1? No ground attack ability due to seeker's performance F-4EJ Kai's AGM-62 or AGM-65? When producing the F-4EJ, all equipment was removed, and no functions were added even in EJ Kai. 4 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
warhead_beast 352 Report post Posted October 28, 2021 Have you noticed that the resolution of the model and more noticably the cockpit has dropped significantly? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiggly_Armed_Man 2,383 Report post Posted October 28, 2021 Localization for both the GCS-1 type I and type II bombs has been added in "Ground Breaking": 2 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nacho5944 181 Report post Posted November 30, 2021 (edited) So, this panel is in the backseat of the F-4EJ Kai. It mentions having something to do with a camera and several modes, including ASM, which I assume to be anti ship or something. Anybody got any ideas?  Edited November 30, 2021 by Nacho5944 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CotorShas 427 Report post Posted December 1, 2021 (edited) ASM 1 and 2 anti shipping missiles Edited December 1, 2021 by CotorShas Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nacho5944 181 Report post Posted December 1, 2021 (edited) Well yeah, I know about those, I'm just interested that there's a camera mode relating to them on the EJ Kai, and there are also camera modes for bombing too, so it really makes you wonder what they mean by it, since the only camera I can think that the EJ Kai carries is the HUD camera, and I'm not 100% certain this is talking about that camera. Just noticed in the bottom right corner as well there appears to be a panel that says "Video select". Thoughts? Edited December 1, 2021 by Nacho5944 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CotorShas 427 Report post Posted December 1, 2021 Has the EJ kai even been equipped with a targeting pod? Could be for that. I know they have them on the F2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Best answer
Posted
Summary of arguments and rebuttals
Picture of the JDAM on the F-4EJ Kai?
it is just for display.
Is the ADTW's F-4EJ's new antenna is GPS antenna?
It's been installed since 1988, so that is not a GPS antenna.
A picture of the F-4EJ Kai with the XGCS-2?
Just performing aerodynamics and separation tests with dummy bomb, not real bomb.
F-4EJ Kai's GCS-1?
No ground attack ability due to seeker's performance
F-4EJ Kai's AGM-62 or AGM-65?
When producing the F-4EJ, all equipment was removed, and no functions were added even in EJ Kai.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites
Recently Browsing 0 members
No registered users viewing this page.