BMS Other Fighters Mafia (BMSOFM) Journal
-
If it doesn’t carries TGP, how this person could have a issue with the TGP ? What are we supposed to look at ?
Lolo, the problem is the TGP in the Spanish F-18, or EF-18 (in Spanhis, Spain is España, hence the E). As far as I know, in the EF-18G there are no problems in the TGP, since it should not carry TGP.
-
Fresco, the CF-188/CF-18 jets received a major mid life upgrade a couple of years ago. This included major structural updates like barrel sections as well as a major avionics update. Other than a few flight deck updates, the CF-188, postmod is essentially equivalent to the US Navy F/A-18C minus the landing gear. The CF-188 just like the EF-18 has standard runway landing gear. Thus making the jet several hundred pounds lighter than the carrier based versions.
Yes, Chuckles, the repeated modifications of the CF-188 have brought them practically to the level of the F-18C of the USN, with change of the radar, radios, Link-16 and even HMCS, practically like the Australians (obviously they are not exactly equal to the units of the USN, because as Stevie says, both avionics and radios, etc., are indigenous, not the Navy standard).
The modifications in the Spanish have been much slower, without change of radar, or structural reinforcements. without a doubt they are the least evolved.
-
Lolo, the problem is the TGP in the Spanish F-18, or EF-18 (in Spanhis, Spain is España, hence the E). As far as I know, in the EF-18G there are no problems in the TGP, since it should not carry TGP.
…“EA-18G” is the proper designation for a Growler.
-
EF-18G there are no problems in the TGP, since it should not carry TGP.
but, at the same time,
Quoted by drtbkj :
Lolo, although we’re starting out focusing on the F-18C, for reasons previously stated, we did receive a request here to look into the EA-18G
???
That’s what I try to explain : EA-18 G ,Issue or not issue ? That’s the question … sounds like even Bugs pilots are melting both name
For the Spanish variant EF-18 , I would like to have a look but another of my question I asked before is still pendant too : Where can I find it ?
-
In the DB figure as EF-18M Hornet Spaf
-
Thanks,I’ve just seen it too(in FE) .
But there’s no EF-18 Sq at all in the entire KTO (I’ve just checked too) . Or I’m missing something more ?
-EDIT- nevermind, i almost forgot MC …
-
but, at the same time,
Quoted by drtbkj :
???
That’s what I try to explain : EA-18 G ,Issue or not issue ? That’s the question … sounds like even Bugs pilots are melting both name
For the Spanish variant EF-18 , I would like to have a look but another of my question I asked before is still pendant too : Where can I find it ?
…ok - for point of order:
EF-18 = Spanish Hornet; USN A model at point of sale.
EA-18G = USN or RAAF Growler.
CF-18 or CF-188 (depending on which pub you are reading…) = Canadian Hornet; USN A model at point of sale.
USN Growlers do NOT carry FLIR pods; RAAF ones do. ALL Hornet Model jets have similar characteristics when it comes to FLIR masking, and they are nothing like a Viper.
-
I understand you and Fresco since start , Stevie .
What I was wondering is why someone told drtbkj that he need the Mafia to have a look on its EA-18G( I re-quote drtbkj : we did receive a request here to look into the EA-18G ), whereas the plane doesn’t carries TGP .
So far ,2 possible conclusions :
1/ drtbkj made a typo , as he wrote EA-18G
2/the person who sent the request a/ made a typo or b/ modded its EA-18G to carry a TGP . In this latter case , nothing to fix, nothing to look at . -
I have good news :
I tried my tweak on the EF-18M , that was indeed heavily plagued by a big TGP masking issue . It seemed to me that is looked very different of what I saw on the F-18C .
There will be 2 drawback :
1/* slight gain of weight (about 250 lbs more)
2/ slight gain of drag .The good thing is that my EF-18M is now equipped whith a functionnal TGP, no masking anymore .
I’ll send the relevant modified files to drtbkj , with some instructions, and will let him try to see if all is going well .
It’s not a true definitive fix(as it would requires a mastering of LE that I don’t possess yet) , but probably a good stop-gap tweak .
It preserves both the exterior model of the plane , and restore 100% the TGP’s functionnality .
Stay tuned !
-
…ok, so now I have a question for the Spaniards amongst us, only because the “M” confuses me…I seem to remember the Spanish Harriers being called “Matador”, or am I wrong about that? How did they get to be “M” model Hornets?
-
I understand you and Fresco since start , Stevie .
What I was wondering is why someone told drtbkj that he need the Mafia to have a look on its EA-18G( I re-quote drtbkj : we did receive a request here to look into the EA-18G ), whereas the plane doesn’t carries TGP .
So far ,2 possible conclusions :
1/ drtbkj made a typo , as he wrote EA-18G
2/the person who sent the request a/ made a typo or b/ modded its EA-18G to carry a TGP . In this latter case , nothing to fix, nothing to look at .Hi, Lolo.
- Actually, my mistake was thinking the EF-18M was the typo.Sorry.
Meanwhile, I got your pm, and am looking forward to checking out the files. - When I had suggested making the TGP internal, that was based on an experiment of mine where I had tried to “Block 3” the Rhino, with an internal IRST. That was the only time I saw unrealistic masking. My thought was if we could fix something I knew how to repro… That’s what I get for trying to give Tech. advice to someone who clearly knows more about this stuff then I do!
In other news, I submitted the Intro to “The BMS Fighters Manual: Maximizing All the BMS Jets” to the Devs for their approval.
The working Table of Contents is:
I) Repair of deleted cockpit switch “hotspots” in 4.35
A) How to repair the “hotspots” in your BMS jet.
B) Specific fixes for the F/A-18C.
II) Improved 4.35 F/A-18C cockpit functionality
A) How to install updated functionality
B) New cockpit diagrams and notes
III) F/A-18 Main Checklist option
IV) HOTAS set-up option
V) Carrier Departure Procedures(Supplemental to BMS Naval Manual) - Actually, my mistake was thinking the EF-18M was the typo.Sorry.
-
I had tried to “Block 3” the Rhino, with an internal IRST.
So , you will be happy : This fix has been created(-edit-originally)to mount IRST in airplane that carries it .
But it also can be used to fix TGP masking issues , or to add lacking functionnalities in a plane .
-
…there are no plans to put an internal IRST into the Hornet…much to my own disappointment.
Not unless someone starts cutting up airplanes…and OBTW - internally mounting an IRST won’t solve any masking issues for the ATFLIR.
-
…ok, so now I have a question for the Spaniards amongst us, only because the “M” confuses me…I seem to remember the Spanish Harriers being called “Matador”, or am I wrong about that? How did they get to be “M” model Hornets?
M is for modernized
Fresco is true. Initially EF-18 where F/A18A with minor mods. After the modernization they have improved characteristics. Engines have been overhauled to a close to C version ( can be asumed a C). Radar has been improved in detection and azimuth characteristics ( from 120 to 140º). Most avionics have been upgraded, and cockpit is really close to a Superbug one
-
.
there are no plans to put an internal IRST into the Hornet…much to my own disappointment.
internally mounting an IRST won’t solve any masking issues for the ATFLIR.
It does Stevie, it does …
I could send you some pics to prove it, but I prefer let drtbkj try it first … can’t await for his own report !!!
You should wait to try the fix before jumping too soon into early conclusions Have you tried it yet ?And , the Hornet won’t be fitted with an internal IRST … At least, not really , if the Bug driver don’t “cheat” . I’ve applied this solution on 2 of my retrofits and it works very, very well ; I’ve just applied it on the Bug too .
-
M is for modernized
Fresco is true. Initially EF-18 where F/A18A with minor mods. After the modernization they have improved characteristics. Engines have been overhauled to a close to C version ( can be asumed a C). Radar has been improved in detection and azimuth characteristics ( from 120 to 140º). Most avionics have been upgraded, and cockpit is really close to a Superbug one
Cool - thanks! I’ve seen very few if any recent pictures of Spanish Hornets. I knew there had been several upgrades, but AFAIK the Spanish ones are very unique indeed.
-
.
It does Stevie, it does …
I could send you some pics to prove it, but I prefer let drtbkj try it first … can’t await for his own report !!!
You should wait to try the fix before jumping too soon into early conclusions Have you tried it yet ?And , the Hornet won’t be fitted with an internal IRST … At least, not really , if the Bug driver don’t “cheat” . I’ve applied this solution on 2 of my retrofits and it works very, very well ; I’ve just applied it on the Bug too .
…then you are doing something that isn’t true to RL.
-
But, you don’t even actually know what I did ?!?
How could you state this ?Wait for the fix, try, and then you could criticize . But not before without knowing what is my fix, Stevie .
I’m quite surprised by such a strange reaction .
Sounds like you didn’t want someone to find a fix for the Bug .
If yes… well , I don’t understand even more .
1st, you stated it won’t work(without trying it !) . But it does, and you admitted it when you wrote that it won’t be a true to life fix(what does it means btw , I really wonder ….).
edit : _Anyway , it doesn’t really matters , so don’t worry , I’m used to being criticized even by ppl who don’t knows/understand what I’m doing( because of my RL work) .
That’s not a problem : ppl who don’t like my fix will stick with the Hornet as it is . Ppl who like it will buy my idea .
What I know is my own private hangar is crowded with fixed(or at least , partially fixed) planes, and I enjoy them very much . I just shared a possible working fix . What ppl think about it is actually beyond my scope .
And everybody’s free to provide better solutions than mine . It’s just that smg was asked to me, I answered .
So now , let’s go ahead and enjoy what we want ! No need to enter an argument for this .
with best regards, Stevie
Lolo_
-
Because I know VERY well how the ATFLIR works in RL and there is nothing one can do to “fix” the masking envelope without moving it to another mounting location on the jet…the ATFLIR being masked is a strict function of where and how the line of sight is occluded by the structure of the jet, and that is a fixed geometry.
And in RL the IRST is mounted to the front of the Centerline Fuel Tank, and you can’t move that either. The little round nub on the tip of the EFT directly behind the nose gear is the IRST -
http://alert5.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/IRST_F18_1181.jpg
…so, no matter what you have done, if it “works” it’s not realistic.
-
Hi, Lolo,
Stevie is correct that there are no plans to put an internal IRST on a Hornet. There are , however, plans to put them on the “Block III” Rhino.https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/31850/navy-f-a-18-super-hornet-takes-flight-with-new-infrared-search-and-track-pod
Original images had it under the nose, now it looks like they’ll be mounting it to the front of the centerline tank.
Lolo, I also think I understand where Stevie is coming from. Some people, like me, view BMS as a compromise where it comes to the Hornet and other jets, and enjoy it as such. The RL Hornet doesn’t have HTS, for example, mine does. But, on the other hand, in RL the Navy isn’t even flying the Legacy off carriers( though some Marine squadrons are). So again, it’s a compromise. I tried the Rhino, went back to the Bug.
My personal view is that the Legacy could have an internal IRST. It could have the F 414 engines of the Rhino. Mine does , in fact. The fact that the Legacy doesn’t is more about Budget and fleet deployment then physical possibility. To me my “hot rod” Bug is more fun, and I would like to share that with my BMS Brethren. That is the filter I look though in what I’d like to share, and give back to BMS . HOWEVER, and this is a big qualifier, I know there are those that don’t feel that way. I’ve been “Foruming” with Brother Stevie for years. I’ve seen him write he won’t even try the BMS Hornet because it’s not realistic, and I completely respect that.
For that reason, when I present something like this it’s presented as an option, not as a “you have to do this”. Fox and I have discussed this to a degree. Lolo, if you have a different view, absolutely let us know. We are a Team.