Why does the F-4C II not have flares? Lets try to fix!

[Dementedbag1230 4]

amplifying info: Flares could be equipped in the underwing pod; The SUU-25 flare dispenser carries decoy flares which are rigged to ignite instantaneously upon ejection from the dispenser to decoy missiles fired at aircraft.

 

The SUU-25 flare dispensers can also carry either 8 LUU-1 target marking flares or 8 LUU-2 pyrotechnic illuminating flares. The flare dispenser, which remains attached to the aircraft, is a tubular metal body consisting of four tubes clustered and enclosed by an outer skin with a bulkhead at each end. Two flares are loaded in each tube, with four in the forward section and four in the aft end of the dispenser. The flares are ejected from the rear of the dispenser.

 

this means the flares would be equipped in the custom loadout menu with each under-wing pod (much like the A-6) while holding 8 x large flares per pod

 

these could be equipped for battles at the operators discretion

[Bonrath 220]

9 hours ago, Dementedbag1230 said:

After many hours of research, I would like to add something positive and  provide documentation in order to fix this error in the game. the USAF/USN F-4C & F-4D where in fact capable of equipping flares- please see attached tech order (-34, weapons delivery manual) and pictures.

 

sidebar- the F-4D could be equipped with a ballistic computer

 

anyone want to help get this fixed? I've done the majority of the hard work.

HECK YES, that's what we've been waiting for!

[MiG17_Is_My_Life 1,402]

20 hours ago, Dementedbag1230 said:

amplifying info: Flares could be equipped in the underwing pod; The SUU-25 flare dispenser carries decoy flares which are rigged to ignite instantaneously upon ejection from the dispenser to decoy missiles fired at aircraft.

 

The SUU-25 flare dispensers can also carry either 8 LUU-1 target marking flares or 8 LUU-2 pyrotechnic illuminating flares. The flare dispenser, which remains attached to the aircraft, is a tubular metal body consisting of four tubes clustered and enclosed by an outer skin with a bulkhead at each end. Two flares are loaded in each tube, with four in the forward section and four in the aft end of the dispenser. The flares are ejected from the rear of the dispenser.

 

this means the flares would be equipped in the custom loadout menu with each under-wing pod (much like the A-6) while holding 8 x large flares per pod

 

these could be equipped for battles at the operators discretion

Isn't that a so-called "parachute flare"?

[daMatchstick 71]

1 hour ago, WheelchairGamer said:

Isn't that a so-called "parachute flare"?

not the decoy ones i imagine

[Dementedbag1230 4]

the SUU-25 could both- carry parachute flares or large decoy flares (think: SU22M3), it just depended how it was configured prior to flight. The general usage was  with illumination flares for bombing but, it could also be loaded with flares that had a 0.10 sec activation time as decoys, 8 in each pod. 

 

Another item for consideration here: the F-4B (USN version) was actually equipped with chaff/flares early on with the AN/ALE-29, which we see later on the F-4J

 

 

The F-4B/C/D all saw many changes/upgrades, countermeasures was one that the USN/USMC/USAF adopted and equipped very early on. 

 

[Dementedbag1230 4]

2 hours ago, WheelchairGamer said:

Isn't that a so-called "parachute flare"?

your post from Jan 24, 2022 "[2.13.0.76]F-4C Phantom II missing AN/ALE-40 Chaff/Flare dispenser" is actually what motivated me to address the issue again. I made a post right before custom loadouts were added to the game outlining flares on the F-4C/D. That post was removed 48 hours after being posted.

 

Here's the actual rundown of what the different variations carried:

 

F-4B (USN/USMC) = AN/ALE-29 (chaff + flare, already used on the F-4J/S in game)

F-4C (USAF) =  SUU-25 (flares only) & AN/ALE-38 (chaff only, already used on the F-105D in game, should be available for F-4C)

F-4D (USAF) = not modeled in game

F-4E (USAF) = AN/ALE-40 (chaff & flares, modeled accurately on F-4E in game)

F-4G (USAF) = not modeled in game

F-4J (USN) = AN/ALE-29 (chaff + flare)

F-4N (USN) = not modeled in game

F-4S (USN) = AN/ALE-29 (chaff + flare)

 

 

I wont discuss the use of the ALQ-87 electronic countermeasures (ECM) pod by the F-4C since those are not modeled in game and ECM deserves its own post.

 

I'm personally inclined to believe that we should have a tech-tree only USAF F-4G (Wild Weasel/SEAD variant) in game, as it was the top dog USAF version due to its extremely diverse payload capabilities. If it was added to the game right now, it could carry every munition currently available in the US air tech-tree. I grinded for a very long time to get the F-4E so having the F-4S added to the game as a premium was a very discouraging moment for me as a player. I would like to see the F-4 Phantom II variants modeled a bit more accurately, considering there are so many of them. for today's purposes, I've only discussed the US versions.

 

[tripod2008 593]

42 minutes ago, Dementedbag1230 said:

F-4B (USN/USMC) = AN/ALE-29 (chaff + flare, already used on the F-4J/S in game)

F-4C (USAF) =  SUU-25 (flares only) & AN/ALE-38 (chaff only, already used on the F-105D in game, should be available for F-4C)

F-4D (USAF) = not modeled in game

F-4E (USAF) = AN/ALE-40 (chaff & flares, modeled accurately on F-4E in game)

F-4G (USAF) = not modeled in game

F-4J (USN) = AN/ALE-29 (chaff + flare)

F-4N (USN) = not modeled in game

F-4S (USN) = AN/ALE-29 (chaff + flare)

Its questionable as to if some of the variants are modeled correctly, as there are a few potential issues regarding the specifics of the dispensers;

The AN/ALE-29, -29A, -39 ( a modernized -29A which can also load active noise Jammers in addition to chaff and Flares on some aircraft) & -40 is they comprise 30 units of space, per dispenser (often mounted in sets of two or 4x) which are each subdivided into a 10 and a 20 unit zone, where each zone must be uniformly loaded. So the division of units between the two types must be; 60:0, 10:50, 20:40 or 30:30, either way.

 

Additionally there is the issue of which flares are contemporary to which aircraft as there is a further issue of the MJU-7 series of Flare taking up 2 units (2"x1") worth of space, where the later M206 type taking up one(1"x1"), which would cut the number of flares in half (this was the entire reason for the aforementioned zones).

 

and of course as we get to later airframes(probably mid Teen series and contemporary airframes) there is also the potential for the MJU-47

A kinematic flare, which produces thrust[via nozzles that direct the produced gases] and retains more of the aircraft's momentum, which helps bypass some IRCCM techniques

 

and MJU-50 & -51

Which are various form factors[the -51 for MJU-7 form factor, and the -50 being M206 sized] of covert flares, which do not produce smoke or light in the visible spectrum, making them hard to detect  and useful at night and self-defense via pre-emptively dispensing to prevent short range systems from acquiring a lock as they do not provide a signature unless observed via NVGs / Thermals, which many light / man-portable systems are not provided with.

 

 

42 minutes ago, Dementedbag1230 said:

I wont discuss the use of the ALQ-87 electronic countermeasures (ECM) pod by the F-4C since those are not modeled in game and ECM deserves its own post.

 

Judging by how IRCM has been implemented on the new set of SU-25's, its going to be interesting to see how things play out.

 

42 minutes ago, Dementedbag1230 said:

I'm personally inclined to believe that we should have a tech-tree only USAF F-4G (Wild Weasel/SEAD variant) in game, as it was the top dog USAF version due to its extremely diverse payload capabilities. If it was added to the game right now, it could carry every munition currently available in the US air tech-tree. I grinded for a very long time to get the F-4E so having the F-4S added to the game as a premium was a very discouraging moment for me as a player. I would like to see the F-4 Phantom II variants modeled a bit more accurately, considering there are so many of them. for today's purposes, I've only discussed the US versions

 

If a Squadron F-4 for the US had to be selected, it should either be the F-4D, or F-110A (USAF F-4B), as they would provide a good mix of potential for their respective modes GRB / ARB, with obvious deficits that would need to be overcome (F-4D has no LD/SD capability. the F-4B has the AN/AAA-4 IRST blister, similar to the F-14's IRSTS / TCS & F-4E's TISEO among others. and the F-110A would lack guided A2G ordnance).

Edited May 26, 2023 by tripod2008

[Dementedbag1230 4]

Is there a better way to highlight all of this to all the developers? I know they are dealing with a lot right now but, if we have the data we should be able to highlight how significant this is. 

 

22 minutes ago, tripod2008 said:

If a Squadron F-4 for the US had to be selected, it should either be the F-4D, or F-110A (USAF F-4B), as they would provide a good mix of potential for their respective modes GRB / ARB, with obvious deficits that would need to be overcome (F-4D has no LD/SD capability. the F-4B has the AN/AAA-4 IRST blister, similar to the F-14's IRSTS / TCS & F-4E's TISEO among others. and the F-110A would lack guided A2G ordnance).

 That's a great point. the F-4D would make an excellent GRB asset, it could use the GBU-8 but lose the ability to use AIM-9's

 

the USMC F-4B could also be a great option, it has great all around capability

[Bonrath 220]

5 hours ago, Dementedbag1230 said:

could use the GBU-8 but lose the ability to use AIM-9's

Depends, if they decide to model the early F-4D then it would have neither the AIM-9 nor the GBUs.

Most USAF F-4Ds were rewired for Sidewinders after the horrendous performance of the Falcon missiles.

[Dementedbag1230 4]

13 minutes ago, Bonrath said:

Depends, if they decide to model the early F-4D then it would have neither the AIM-9 nor the GBUs.

Most USAF F-4Ds were rewired for Sidewinders after the horrendous performance of the Falcon missiles.

would be nice to see a late model F-4D with the sidewinder and targeting pod capability, or at least some sort of targeting pod on the F-4E 

[tripod2008 593]

3 hours ago, Bonrath said:

the horrendous performance of the Falcon missiles.

Which wouldn't really materialize in game as much of the automated systems carried by the Falcon armed interceptors was stripped out to fit into the existing F-4 airframe and save on weight. The actual performance of the AIM-4D sits somewhere between the AIM-9B/E & -9J, and due to the better characteristics of the motor will do far better at higher altitude as the higher thrust, and lower drag leads to much more energy entering the terminal stage in comparison to a sidewinder. The biggest issue it will face is if Gaijin's PID implementation will allow for it to overcome the lack of a proximity fuse, especially against smaller aircraft without to many issues.

 

3 hours ago, Dementedbag1230 said:

some sort of targeting pod on the F-4E 

After all this, we may as well straight up ask for the Pave Tack (AN/AVQ-26) since they aren't going to lower the BR anytime soon, and would be needed anyway for the late F-111's, and the thermal channel at the expense of the left hand inter-wing station would likely be well worth the trade, especially if A2G radar modes turn up.

[Shin_Kazama_ 193]

On 26/05/2023 at 19:26, tripod2008 said:

 

-deleted

Edited June 12, 2023 by Shin_Kazama_