RE: Database Request

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Database Request

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> RE: Database Request

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Database Request - 5/4/2016 1:10:12 AM

mikmykWS

Posts: 11524
Joined: 3/22/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DWReese

it has since also been fitted to, amongst others, the Super Phantom, the F-16C/D and the F-16I

Delilah looks very similar to the ADM-141C, i wouldnt be surprised if they have pretty much the same internal layout anyway

Thank so much for your valuable input. I just have two questions remaining:

1. In terms of playing CMANO, what would be the difference (if any) in the performance of a Delilah DECOY and the ITALD, or the ATALD? Would it be noticeable at all?

2. Finally, you indicated that the Delilah could be carried by the F-16I. How many could they carry, and what would be the normal loadout for a SEAD mission?

Thanks again.

I think I've given this enough time. If you do find something in the future please do let us know. I'll keep an eye out and if I find something will add or ask Rag too.

Thanks!

Mike

_____________________________

(in reply to DWReese)

Post #: 31

RE: Database Request - 5/4/2016 5:20:27 AM

Nightwatch

Posts: 127
Joined: 9/6/2015
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DWReese

it has since also been fitted to, amongst others, the Super Phantom, the F-16C/D and the F-16I

Delilah looks very similar to the ADM-141C, i wouldnt be surprised if they have pretty much the same internal layout anyway

Thank so much for your valuable input. I just have two questions remaining:

1. In terms of playing CMANO, what would be the difference (if any) in the performance of a Delilah DECOY and the ITALD, or the ATALD? Would it be noticeable at all?

2. Finally, you indicated that the Delilah could be carried by the F-16I. How many could they carry, and what would be the normal loadout for a SEAD mission?

Thanks again.

1) Who knows. I think IMI just provides the IAF with tailored solutions against specific threats when the need arises.
Check out this article on the cooperation between the defense industry and the military in Israel.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/defense-industry-the-business-of-war-in-israel-a-988245.html

2) Five Delilahs should be the theoretical maximum, two each on the inner wing pylons, one under the belly. But the IAF uses external fuel tanks most of the time, so custom loadout is two Delilahs.
Alternatively one Deliah on one wing, some bomb (JDAM, SPICE) on the other.

< Message edited by Nightwatch -- 5/4/2016 5:35:26 AM >

(in reply to DWReese)

Post #: 32

RE: Database Request - 5/4/2016 1:20:07 PM

DWReese

Posts: 1824
Joined: 3/21/2014
From: Miami, Florida
Status: offline

Thank you so much for the valuable information.

(in reply to Nightwatch)

Post #: 33

RE: Database Request - 5/4/2016 4:21:43 PM

jimcarravall

Posts: 642
Joined: 1/4/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DWReese

it has since also been fitted to, amongst others, the Super Phantom, the F-16C/D and the F-16I

Delilah looks very similar to the ADM-141C, i wouldnt be surprised if they have pretty much the same internal layout anyway

Thank so much for your valuable input. I just have two questions remaining:

1. In terms of playing CMANO, what would be the difference (if any) in the performance of a Delilah DECOY and the ITALD, or the ATALD? Would it be noticeable at all?

The key is the linkages between the design for production and whatever licensing is used to produce the equipment. Brunswick, a US company, was the originator of the design in behalf of the US Air Force back in the 70s, but the Air Force did not put resulting design into production. The Israelis decided the design was viable for its operations, and entered into an agreement with Brunswick to first produce the Samson, and later to migrated it into the Delilah. Samson caught the eye of the Navy, which contracted with Brunswick for the ADM 141 series which covers both a Samson and Delilah capability.

IMI-Brunswick is a licensing agreement between the Israeli Military Industries and Brunswick to produce the Brunswick-designed decoys for Israeli use, meaning Brunswick does the design and IMI licenses with the prime to support design development, perform integration and do the production of that design.

Each military has its own tactical requirements governing how it deploys and operates the decoys in combat, but the outer shell and flight performance characteristics should be the same for those designs used as an unpowered drone or as a powered drone.

quote:

2. Finally, you indicated that the Delilah could be carried by the F-16I. How many could they carry, and what would be the normal loadout for a SEAD mission?

Thanks again.

The issue is the pylon design, and it appears that one drone can occupy one pylon in flight based on what was mounted for testing on the original pictures you provided. The key for evaluating this regardless is the attaching end of the pylon and not the aircraft to which the pylon is attached. A Navy Sidewinders shouldn't attach any differently to a pylon than an Air Force Sidewinder regardless of whether that pylon is beneath the wing of an F/A 18 or an F-16. The same would apply to the interface for drones carried by F/A 18s or F-16s.

_____________________________

Take care,

jim

(in reply to DWReese)

Post #: 34

RE: Database Request - 5/8/2016 9:16:18 AM

ComDev

Posts: 5735
Joined: 5/12/2006
Status: offline

So what's the conclusion on this?

What decoys are used, on what plaforms, from which years? And stats on the various versions of the decoys?

Thanks

_____________________________

Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

(in reply to DWReese)

Post #: 35

RE: Database Request - 5/8/2016 5:59:57 PM

ComDev

Posts: 5735
Joined: 5/12/2006
Status: offline

Never mind, made some mods.

Added Delilah, and fitted it to F-4E from 1995, and the Phantom 2000. Also added it to F-16D Blk 30/40 from 1995 onwards. And also F-16I. The Delilah-AL is already in the database and is now fitted to F-16Ds and -16Is from 2006 onwards.

The system supposedly has man-in-the-loop guidance which explains why (supposedly) only two-seaters have the system.

Still no real details on the system through. So guessimation is our friend

Any ideas on what datalink pod is used? Same as for Popeye?

_____________________________

Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

(in reply to ComDev)

Post #: 36

RE: Database Request - 5/8/2016 6:20:54 PM

DWReese

Posts: 1824
Joined: 3/21/2014
From: Miami, Florida
Status: offline

Ragnar,

Thanks so much for the addition. It's perfect.

Doug

(in reply to ComDev)

Post #: 37

RE: Database Request - 5/8/2016 8:42:42 PM

Nightwatch

Posts: 127
Joined: 9/6/2015
Status: offline

quote:

Any ideas on what datalink pod is used? Same as for Popeye?

Oddly enough, it looks like they control it with Rafaels SKYSHIELD Pod. Check out the attached picture. Its from Raanan Weiss, 'F-16I Sufa in IAF service'. According to him the Delilah is controlled via a 'Rafael produced data-link transceiver pod positioned under the fuselage centerline pylon'.
If you look up the pod online its not just a datalink transceiver but a full blown EW jamming pod.
http://www.rafael.co.il/marketing/SIP_STORAGE/FILES/8/958.pdf

Another example:
http://www.gettyimages.de/detail/foto/an-f-16i-sufa-of-the-israeli-air-force-taking-off-lizenzfreies-bild/181828535

However, i dont think they need the pod the employ Delilah, just to fire it in full control mode or something. There are many pictures of F-16s with Delilahs but without the pod afterall.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/33/Delilah_missile_side.jpg)

The last time i checked no Israeli fighter aircraft had a Popeye loadout in CMANO. I think its a no brainer that they have this capability but i have no picture to prove it (only US F-16s with Have Naps...)

Attachment (1)

(in reply to DWReese)

Post #: 38

RE: Database Request - 5/9/2016 3:29:15 PM

ComDev

Posts: 5735
Joined: 5/12/2006
Status: offline

Interesting

Are you sure the pod is dual-role, and that the a/c just isn't carrying the Skyshield pod for EW? What about the other two pods? LANTIRN nav and Litening? Is it 100% certain the Litening-like pod is in fact Litening?

_____________________________

Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

(in reply to Nightwatch)

Post #: 39

RE: Database Request - 5/9/2016 4:38:19 PM

Nightwatch

Posts: 127
Joined: 9/6/2015
Status: offline

All i can say is that Raanan Weiss refers to the Skyshield Pod as the 'Rafael produced data-link transceiver pod' used to control Delilah.
I dont know if he is he is correct, but i see no reason not to trust him. The book has very detailed photos, he obviously had access to active squadrons.

I dont think the two pods are anything other than Lantrin and Litening (see attached comparison). They look exactly like they are supposed to look, nothing special about it

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Nightwatch -- 5/9/2016 4:41:25 PM >

(in reply to ComDev)

Post #: 40

RE: Database Request - 5/9/2016 4:48:38 PM

Nightwatch

Posts: 127
Joined: 9/6/2015
Status: offline

quote:

The last time i checked no Israeli fighter aircraft had a Popeye loadout in CMANO. I think its a no brainer that they have this capability but i have no picture to prove it (only US F-16s with Have Naps...)

I went back to my books... attached is a picture of a F-15I with the Popeye missile and a Skyshield targeting pod. I think this confirms that the pod is used to control missiles.
Or the pod just happens to look exactly like the jamming pod...

Totally forgot about that one.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Nightwatch)

Post #: 41

RE: Database Request - 5/9/2016 7:49:12 PM

ComDev

Posts: 5735
Joined: 5/12/2006
Status: offline

Hm yeah Australian F-111s used an identically looking pod...

http://www.ausairpower.net/pig.html

Is it dual role, or is the hardware and/or software different? Hmm....

_____________________________

Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

(in reply to Nightwatch)

Post #: 42

RE: Database Request - 5/10/2016 6:12:52 AM

Nightwatch

Posts: 127
Joined: 9/6/2015
Status: offline

Loooks like its indeed dual role.

The Israeli name for the transmitter configuration should be DL-2000, according to an old thread on f-16.net at least:
http://www.rafael.co.il/Marketing/332-924-en/Marketing.aspx

How about adding two Deliliah loadout options in Command.
A loadout with the pod gives you the ability to change the course of the missile in flight (i belive you added this capability while back?).
Without the pod (and a centerline fuel tank instead) the Delilah is just your a basic fire and forget AtG weapon.

And while we are talking about pods - please consider adding jamming pods loadouts for the IAF. My first link on skyshield includes a real life picture of an F-16 carrying the system (according to Rafael at least).

A very similiar system from IAI, the ELL-8251 might be in use as well. This link includes a picture on what looks like an israeli F-16:
http://www.iai.co.il/2013/36657-38684-en/EW_and_Self_Protection.aspx

Also if you look further, the included pdf file mentiones the system can be carried internally. I personally believe this system to be a good bet for the dorsal spine of the Sufas, but no concrete info on that of course.
In any case, you generally don�t fly business jets into defended airspace.

< Message edited by Nightwatch -- 5/10/2016 6:15:33 AM >

(in reply to ComDev)

Post #: 43

RE: Database Request - 5/22/2016 12:29:34 PM

ComDev

Posts: 5735
Joined: 5/12/2006
Status: offline

Thanks

Have made various database updates in v445.

_____________________________

Developer "Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations" project!

(in reply to Nightwatch)

Post #: 44