F-111 Style Tactical Bombing/Interdiction Aircraft

[fiery osprey]

Not that that's a bad idea, but it's another option

[gleaming hare]

give the F-111 SDIs

instead of those intakes

[fiery osprey]

Cuz a drone mothership would be hella interesting

[fiery osprey]

SDIs?

[gleaming hare]

right!!

[gleaming hare]

supersonic divertless intakes, like the F-35

or B-2/21

its stealthier

[fiery osprey]

It... does have those tho

[gleaming hare]

and more efficient

oh, right

what did i see then

i thought i saw the normal ones

[fiery osprey]

oh yeah the cranked-delta one doesn't have those

[gleaming hare]

nope, its just alraedy there

what

[fiery osprey]

Cuz I split this off into two different versions before I added them

[gleaming hare]

its hard to see cause the shadows

i think a stealthy conversion of an F-111 would be awesome

much better than not making it stealthy

[fiery osprey]

Oh yeah, also has an internal 25mm GAU-22A because a standard 20mm cannon wouldn't be enough IMO

[gleaming hare]

yeah so it can tear through factories like paper

[fiery osprey]

Factories, tanks, pretty much anything that isn't a bunker or silo door

With the wings swept it's stealthier from the front than an F-35 rn

[gleaming hare]

wrong thread

[fiery osprey]

All good man

[fiery osprey]

Visualization of concept for those who don't wanna scroll:

[whole knoll]

Mb I mix up my seating words😭

[fiery osprey]

Happens to the best of us

[sleek shore]

I keep hearing a bunch of talk about players wanting a dedicated bomber role in game, most people i've played with so far would like to play with a friend next to them and i guess have "more visual cooperation" along with some other things i forgot from some people in game but i just saw this and it reminded me of that👍

[high island]

It’s a lot funnier when you can see your buddy instead of just maybe seeing their helmet

[whole knoll]

I am desperate for a side by side plane tbh

Like idk any aircraft even in dcs that are sbs

Except for like helicopters

[sharp birch]

Have you noticed that every new vehicle must bring at least one new MFD page?
The FA-26 brings Radar.
The F-45 brings TSD.
The AH-94 brings ground radar.
The T-55 brings HUD repeaters and smoke.
The EF-24 brings jammers.

So, what new MFD pages will this new vehicle bring?

[winged roost]

You've posted this on at least three separate suggestions.

HSD, MAV, HAD, who knows
How about a NAV page that has optional terrain data, and works more like the SA page from the F/A-18C or the HSD from the Viper? Or! A Terrain Following Radar?
Ooh! How about a TV page for guiding TV-guided weapons like Mavericks or AGM-62, or GBU-8/15?

All things people have heavily upvoted

[fiery osprey]

What he said, there’s a TON of things that could be added for new MFD pages if that’s what we’re using as a metric for “newness”

This is a SS from Gunship III, but imagine this as the NAV screen, using the GND radar setting for terrain data for useful approach to target. Essentially an older version of what the AH-94 has, but more usable with longer range

TV guidance screens (not what we have currently, the camera stays on the munition as it’s guided in, unlike targeting pods), a display of the “guide line” used by the TFR for manual control (which could also be its own screen like the F-111, but I digress)

[flint stump]

Yeah and iirc baha said it's "the goal" to add new additions to aircraft. So there could be planes that don't add much literal new things, other than playstyle

But for now I do assume he would want to add as much stuff until there isn't much more to add

[crude sinew]

"new gameplay mechanic"

[fiery osprey]

TFR, aerial GND radar, WSO guiding weapons in at long ranges, faster time-to-target with greater loads compared to F-45, reduced RCS similar to F-45/FA-26

I know I keep saying this but y’all keep asking

Unless you’re just quoting it

[swift sand]

I really wasn't a fan of the idea initially, but seeing the mock ups, and all the ideas about more complex A2G weaponry, and terrain radar and all that, I'd honestly be kind of down to fly this thing.

[stray cedar]

I think the 24 should've been the Vark, but I do think TFR would be amazing

[fiery osprey]

Agree on that, considering it historically was used for EW, but the EF-24’s pretty sick either way

[winged roost]

“Mom can we have EF-111”
“We have EF-111 at home, sweetie.”

[gleaming hare]

in that universe, this post would be "F-14 please"

[lost compass]

(and it's a lot better)

[stray cedar]

no side by side :(

We have 3 tandem seat aircraft, I yearn for the side by side cockpit

[crude sinew]

it'll happen soon enough

[fiery osprey]

https://tenor.com/view/shut-up-cat-monch-cat-monch-spinfal-gif-19376414

[fiery osprey]

Nah the EF role has already gone and passed, hence why I’m thinking of ground attack specifically (even tho the Bronco idea’s a good one, Nuclear Option already has one)

[lost compass]

Womp womp

I like being mach 3.1 capable sorry

🗿

[fiery osprey]

Get wing ripped

Stay on topic, ground attack only

[lost compass]

nuh uh

[fiery osprey]

Realistically tho, the wings should rip off of an F-14-like platform way before Mach 3

Cuz if this thing is made, I fear it’d be capable of Mach 3.5+ if things don’t change 💀

[winged roost]

So you guys want like a more capable A-12 / SR-71?

but swing-wing?

https://tenor.com/view/actually-quantum-mechanics-forbids-this-no-nope-actually-no-gif-23354294

Super fast / swing wing does not really mix at higher than say... Mach 2-2.5? Any faster and it either needs to be powered by something like RAM/SCRAMjets, or carry a shit ton of fuel. Either way, the maximum non-modded map size would probably feel tiny

I'd like to see something that's worse in speed than the 24, but slightly more powerful than the 26, but can also carry like 20,000+ lbs of bombs

[fiery osprey]

I’m actually saying the opposite, I don’t want that, but the EF-24’s got some ridiculous engines to push it past that

And this is supposed to be faster overall

Especially on the deck

[winged roost]

For Example, my Super Phantom:

Top to Bottom:
2x GBU-10
8x GBU-38
2x AIM-144 ULRAAM (Like a larger AIM-174/54 hybrid thingie (I wanted to see the largest possible missile I could fit in the internal bays))
4x GBU-12
12-14x AIM-120/METEOR
4x AIM-9X (Block II)
24x GBU-39/53
8x AIM-120/METEOR on dual racks
18x Mk82 / GBU-38

2x Center Internal Bays, 2x Side bays for 2x IR missiles each

Obviously it can't carry all of this at once, but if scaled up? 👀

[fiery osprey]

Is that a Blender model?

[winged roost]

Yessir, all done by hand

[fiery osprey]

That’s dope af, wish I were that good at modeling

Instead I’m struggling with Flyout doors

[winged roost]

Lots of trial and error, lots of patience

[fiery osprey]

Tho TBH I feel like a Phantom’s a little too old, and we have enough tandem aircraft

Even if it’s a cool concept

[winged roost]

Make it larger, and make it a single / three seater, like some of those experimental bombers from the 60s-70s

[keen token]

Why do people get so attached to concepts that are probably not gonna happen

It’s just gonna upset you

[winged roost]

Squeaky wheel ◀️ Grease

[fiery osprey]

Idk, why do people put out concepts that might not happen?

[keen token]

cause they think it should happen but yall get really invested and in depth

i mean good on you but idk how healthy it is, maybe thats just me not being very good at being invested in things

[fiery osprey]

Ratings keep going up, and I really think it would be fun (let me fly a bomber with my brother goddamnit)

[winged roost]

Things to dream about are how we maintain our creativity. (I have an unhealthy obsession with modernizing old aircraft)

[lost compass]

It’s not the engines, it’s the fact it has almost no drag with the wings back

The FA26 has slightly more powerful engines but a ton more drag iirc

[gleaming hare]

based on the climb rate differences and acceleration i think the ef-24 does have better engines

[lost compass]

It has less drag..

by a lot..

[gleaming hare]

yeah i know

but climb rate and acceleration are more dependent on thrust differences

[lost compass]

🤷

[gleaming hare]

im not sure how they weigh relative to eachother

[lost compass]

a fully loaded mischief is like 33000lbs or something

[tired creek]

depends on your climb angle
if you're climbing at like 10 to 20 degrees it's still mostly drag

[gleaming hare]

thats kinda what i mean

the ef-24 can go way way faster at 70-90 degrees angle

it'd be pretty easy to figure it out, by setting both planes to the same GVW and then looking at the TWR

or ripping it from files

[tired creek]

well guess what

26 has more thrust than the 24 in MIL and AB

[gleaming hare]

🤷‍♂️ i was wrong

no problem

[lost compass]

by how many lb-ft or kg?

or whatever baha measures thrust in

fucking bahaunits

[gleaming hare]

bahamuts

[tired creek]

for the 26
41.3k lb MIL
67.2k lb AB

for the 24
27.9k lb MIL
63.3k lb AB

[lost compass]

Jeez

Yeah so the mischief is a lot weaker in mil?

[gleaming hare]

thats a lot different

how do the weights compare

[tired creek]

getting that info now

[lost compass]

the mischief is fat I promise

(I'm gonna be so wrong)

(it's gonna weigh like 90000lbs less)

[gleaming hare]

the TWRs end up being somewhat similar, so i think the ef-24 will be a bit lighter

though dry weight f/a-26 is nuts

[lost compass]

and if my most recent suggestion gets added (CFT Hardpoints) the FA26's TWR will be like 0.45 with more bomb.

FA26 "Bombtruck" instead of wasp

😭

[tired creek]

unsure if this is correct

but the 26 weighs 20.000kg
and the 24 weighs 18.000kg

[lost compass]

ITS TWO TONS LIGHTER?

😭

[tired creek]

there is very little fuselage between the engines

[crude sinew]

24 is smaller

[tired creek]

like look at the engine difference

[lost compass]

goddamn

[gleaming hare]

now look at the fuel tank size differences

they are insane

[lost compass]

what the fuck are those engines pratt and shittney W9000-G69????#

[crude sinew]

the engine :

[lost compass]

💀

you made me spit my fucking water

[crude sinew]

economy of scale, the bigger it is, the more efficient it gets

[winged roost]

Does this mean I can make the suggestion to reduce the silly drag penalty on the 26B?

From what I read it sounds like it’s fabricated to be really draggy.

[lost compass]

Do that for the T55 as well

[winged roost]

Nah, it’s fine. Just a little underpowered for use as a fighter

[lost compass]

But I wanna cruise at mach 1.3 not mach 0.89 with only two amraams

[winged roost]

Perfect reason to suggest an F/A-55

[tired creek]

not you too joe

[winged roost]

Hey, I never said I’d suggest it

[gleaming hare]

erm, acthual;ly

FA-55

[crude sinew]

FT-55 would be the correct designation

erm actually*

[gleaming hare]

if it were another variant not meant for training is would be FA

the T-50 has the FA-50 combat variant

[crude sinew]

yeah but that doesn’t follow nomenclature

if you take the T-55 and modify it for fighter use

it’s a FT-55

[gleaming hare]

nuh uh

[tired creek]

well they did that IRL and it went from t-50 to f-50

[crude sinew]

but that doesn’t follow the nomenclature

like for the A-37

which should be called AT-37

the AT-38 and AT-6 follow the rule properly

[fiery osprey]

If it’s what they actually use, maybe it is the nomenclature

[crude sinew]

TA-50, FA-50 and F-50 are manufacturer names done by the koreans

so they don’t need to follow US DoD nomenclature

[lost compass]

I felt this video was fitting

[fiery osprey]

Very fitting, mostly EF-111s but yeah

[lost compass]

because ef111s are the best

(They have a maneuver kill)

[fiery osprey]

True!

Aardvarks, pigs and ravens

[crude sinew]

man the old 2 tone SAC tankers look nice

[fiery osprey]

Baha removed the “unique function” requirement for aircraft, aircraft-request people rejoice

[gentle grove]

Hmmm? Still in #faq:

The goal is to bring in at least a few completely new gameplay mechanics with each vehicle.

[fiery osprey]

Oh, it’s no longer in https://discord.com/channels/319915885575798785/1243595148823363704

Still the goal, but no longer a requirement

[gentle grove]

That was edited 6 months ago

[fiery osprey]

Oh

I may be a little stupid

Or optimistic

Take your pick

[lost compass]

it was.. never there though?

[fiery osprey]

Stupid then

(I swear it was there)

[paper socket]

Honestly, I know where you went with having the F-111. But as everyone already said, the EF-24G would already act like one. They are both Tandem aircraft, both have a good TwR, both of them have good hardpoints. They both have EW, (Only on the EW-111.) They both have Swept Wings, the similarities just make it too much of a burden to make. (I wanted to have an F-111 type-aircraft in Vtol Before the EF-24G lol.)

[fiery osprey]

Tandem and side-by-side aren’t the same thing. On top of this, the EF-24 honestly kinda sucks at ground attack, which is the whole point for the F-111.

Rather than getting an aerial radar like we’re used to, it would have a ground-scanning radar which also would feed a terrain-following computer data to maintain safe flight and even targeting information in adverse conditions (say, fog at night)

[paper socket]

Same concept, thank you for correcting my mistake. I wouldn't fully agree on the EF-24G sucks at AG statement though.

[fiery osprey]

Superficially it would be similar, but would vary drastically in role

[paper socket]

I'd say its the best ground attack aircraft actually.

[fiery osprey]

I disagree, the F/A-26 and F-45 trump that

[paper socket]

Meh.

Guess its a matter of preference.

I don't even know if Baha could code a Ground Scanning Radar though.

[fiery osprey]

Believe me, I love the EF, but that excels in interception lol

[tired creek]

we have the ah-94🤯

[paper socket]

I mean, the man can code a Radar Cross Section just for the DLC.

[fiery osprey]

Well, it is partially on the AH-94

[paper socket]

But a Ground Scanning Radar is sort of out of the question.

I don't know if Baha could implement it.

[tired creek]

the ah-94 has a ground radar💀

[paper socket]

Yeah, fair point.

I don't fly around in the AH-94 alot to notice 💀

I mostly fly in the Tyro lol.

[paper socket]

I feel like the AH-94 would be a more superior ground attack aircraft than an aircraft such as an F-111.

[crude sinew]

you can’t really compare
very different types of A2G
CAS and interdiction

[paper socket]

Some-what debatable.

The AH-94 is just more suited for these Air-To-Ground.

[crude sinew]

no, the AH-94 is not suited for interdictoon

[paper socket]

I said its suited for Air to Ground.

Well not directly.

[crude sinew]

yeah
i’m saying it’s excellent at CAS
but an F-111 is an interdictor

you would not do interdiction with an attack helicopter

you do it with strike fighters

[paper socket]

Hm.

I'm still not on keen with the concept of figher-bombers as well.

Ahem.. F-105.

*Cough Cough.

But I guess different aircraft to the F-111.

Atleast the F-111 was abit more useful compared to the F-105.

[crude sinew]

it replaced it

was the succesor

[paper socket]

Pretty much.

[crude sinew]

itself replaced by F-15E

today you’d use those and F-35s

but you’re not gonna fly into enemy airspace with an apache to blow up a bridge

[fiery osprey]

The goal of the F-111 was get in below radar cover extremely quickly, bomb their targets, then get out as fast as possible

Effectively it was a tactical bomber, similar to the likes of the B-1 which would come later.

Lore wise, because of its size, it could be feasibly put onto an aircraft carrier to perform a similar role to the B-11 without having to rely on a separate branch. The EF-24 can act as a bomber, but it mainly excels in interception and electronic warfare. Rather than tie up assets suited for different roles, it’s better to have a few heavy-hitting assets on the ready.

That’s also not to mention the unique weaponry it could feasibly use, like TV-guided bombs and missiles, i. e. GBU-15s. It could ALSO carry higher capacity guided bombs like GBU-8s, which the EF-24 would struggle to use.

The aircraft itself would have a few new features such as terrain following and having target acquisition in inclement weather where laser pods fail, and could gain more tools to further improve its strike capability.

The other thing is the F-111 had an internal weapons bay, which a modernized aircraft could easily expand upon. Stealthy gameplay wouldn’t be limited to the F-45, but would drastically limit the capacity of the aircraft. The 45 would still remain supreme in the role of stealth, however.

I should really rework my post to be more concise

[crude sinew]

one the one hand i would not mind having this, because i know i’d fly it and probably love it considering i do low level toss bombing as is in the 24.
On the other hand the true new features are A2G radar and TFR, which i think should be added to all the planes.

[fiery osprey]

The EF-24 shouldn’t have it due to its unique radar system, the F-45 doesn’t need it due to its sensor suite, the only ones that could use it would be the F/A-26 and T-55. People have already requested radar pods for the AV-42, so that could fit as new equipment. As for the latter two, the T-55 could use it seeing as its real world counterpart does, but I’m not sure about the F/A-26 due to its hybrid nature.

Terrain following would only really be available on aircraft with phased-array systems like the F-45, but the other aircraft would need specific separate radar pods for it, which I’d be all for. Would be nice to have something other than TGPs in the sensor pylon

However, that isn’t covered in this request.

[fiery osprey]

And it wouldn’t have to be swing-wing, but maintaining the look of a swept FB-111 without it would lead to a hell of a time landing on a carrier. That sweep angle puts even the F-117 to shame.

[crude sinew]

the T-55 could use it seeing as its real world counterpart does
by that logic all the planes should indeed have it.
Surface search is a pretty important part of A2G and modern radars are very good at having a bunch of different modes.

Also TFR isn’t AESA only what ? F-111 didn’t have an AESA

I think all the planes should have all weather capability

so much for "near future" otherwise

tho it shouldn’t necessarily have GMTI and target spotting like the 94

left to user skill

[fiery osprey]

TFR isn’t AESA only, but in that case would require a separate radar dish to do those functions (I.e. Pencil Beam radars, not standard search dishes)

Pretty much only the Su-24, Tornado, and F-111 have terrain-following algorithms in this sense of the technology used

Not only that but the terrain following algorithm on the F-111 could be changed to minimize G-forces felt by the pilots or minimize time above ground level, making it a bit more unique in that regard

If you want to add it to other planes, then you could make this one more unique by implementing that feature. Other aircraft have gotten weaker versions of unique features before, so it’s not impossible to see something like that in the future

[crude sinew]

i suppose yea

[dire scaffold]

games have cursed people with an idea that air to ground is just loitering over a target that cant shoot at you and dropping 1 laser guided bomb at a time with a tgp

theres more to it

[fiery osprey]

Reworked the proposal to include what was talked about in the comments, and went more in-depth on the unique armaments and terrain-following radar. If you have any thoughts, lemme know below

[fiery osprey]

Will also reiterate that it does not have to be a swing-wing aircraft, but the wing geometry for naval operations would likely require it to be one.

Like, look at this wing sweep!

[fiery osprey]

(I lied, I made it more verbose)

[flint stump]

Aarvaaaaaaaaaark

[fiery osprey]

(Rewoeked) F-111 Style Tactical Bombing/Interdiction Aircraft

(Reworked) F-111 Style Tactical Bombing/Interdiction Aircraft

[crude sinew]

unless a potential integrated system in the tail or body of the aircraft could be done like the EF-111/EA-6B
The bulge in the tail of the EA-6B and EF-111 houses ESM equipment (RWR), not jammers i believe

[fiery osprey]

Yep, you're right, it's a sensitive radar receiver, not countermeasures. My bad

Removed the tail part, as I learned the EF-111 could carry an AN/ALQ-99E in the internal bay. With our RWR tech nowadays, it can probably be kept to integrated systems

[flint stump]

I think bomber or intercepter>EW for an aardvark

Because then it's literally just the jamcat

[lost compass]

I honestly don’t know how to feel about this, I want to like it but some of the parts of it I just cannot agree with

[fiery osprey]

EW is not the focus, I added it as a “could be included”

Besides, you’d be sacrificing your internal bays for a worse jamming system as compared to the Mischief

The focus is the weapons, TV guidance and the like

[lost compass]

Primarily the EW and Interceptor parts of it, as it’d just be an EF24, giving it a medium jammer or something between the ALQ131 and ALQ245 would be nice for an integrated noise only jammer sure

[flint stump]

AGM 62 AGM 65A

[lost compass]

But having it be focused on the weapons makes me like it more

[flint stump]

RAAAH

[fiery osprey]

Emissary, it’s not an interceptor. If you’re using it as an interceptor you’re using it wrong. Like, 10 AMRAAMS and no other weapons is not the way to go

[lost compass]

Giving it it’s own unique weapons pages and whatnot and such to make the gameplay more challenging but also keeping it fun would be a way to keep players liking it

[fiery osprey]

Not to mention that’s no gun included

[lost compass]

Which is why I find myself agreeing with this now

Giving it weapons with unique guidance would make the aircraft stand out far more than others

[flint stump]

^

[lost compass]

Remove the AMRAAMs

[flint stump]

More weapons based and in depth deployment

[lost compass]

give it like a few sparrows at maximum for air to air

and focus it on ground pounding

Keep it stupid keep it simple.

[fiery osprey]

I feel like the AN/ALQ-99E would be the perfect medium-effectiveness self-defense jammer. Not as effective as the AN/ALQ-245, definitely not as low-observable (especially with the giant tail pod), but easier to use than the AN/ALQ-131

[lost compass]

I feel like this would go well with the current gameplay loop

But I’d have it be an integrated part of the plane similar to the jammer of the 45, and keep it noise only as well

[fiery osprey]

Not removing the AMRAAMs, they’re a staple on all aircraft. But you get the worse ones anyways, so no datalink and you have to use a bad A2A radar

[lost compass]

Not all aircraft in game have amraams?

The 94 and 42 don’t

[fiery osprey]

42 has no radar, 94 has no capability to launch them

Anyways, one sec

[lost compass]

I still like the idea

Don’t get me wrong

[fiery osprey]

The idea is partial integration, so you’d miss out on having a TGP or but, but could still carry munitions on the wing pylons. If you’re running non-stealth, the jammer would help mask yourself at least

[lost compass]

Just don’t know how to feel about the usage for air to air

[lost compass]

Integrated TGP, underslung on the belly like on the original >>

well not really integrated

The vark rolls it out from the bomb bay

[fiery osprey]

As said before, if you’re using it for A2A you’re using it wrong. Idk about giving it STT missiles only, but I could see it using them, but not internally

[fiery osprey]

That’s the idea, like a Pave Tack system

[lost compass]

I see

Anyways I shall leave you to it

Gotta go try to find my cat

[fiery osprey]

Good luck

[fiery osprey]

Basically yes

I just did the larger Walleye II because big boom

Wait no I forgot it

Shoot

Added to request

I swear I put that there

[fiery osprey]

Expanding on pylons, I imagine it to be something like this:

E1/E12 - 1-6 Mk. 82, 1-3 Mk. 83, 1x Mk. 84, 1x M118, 19-57x Hydra 70, 1x AGM-65, 1x AGM-62A

E2/E11 - Same as E1/12

E3/E10 - 1x AIM-120, 1-3x AIM-9, 1-2x 9E, 1-6 Mk. 82, 1-3 Mk. 83, 1x Mk. 84, 1x M118, 19-57x Hydra 70, 1-3x AGM-65, 1x AGM-62A/B, 1x GBU-8, 1x GBU-15, 1x TV-Cruise Missile, 600 gal tank, AN/ALQ-131

E4/E9 - 2x AIM-120, 1x AGM-65, otherwise same as E3/E10

E5/E8 - 1x AIM-9, 1x AIM-9E

E6 - GAU-12/22, Pave Tack integrated pod, AN/ALQ-99E (removes E7), 2x AIM-120, 2x AIM-9, 2x AIM-9E, 8x Mk. 82, 3x Mk. 83 (removes E7), 1x Mk. 84, 1-2x TV-CM

E7 - 2x AIM-120, 2x AIM-9, 2x AIM-9E, 8x Mk. 82, 3x Mk. 83 (removes E7), 1x Mk. 84, 1x Mk. 83, 1-2x TV-CM

E5-E8 are internal, E1-4 and E9-12 are external. E1, 2, 11, and 12 all limit wing sweep completely, so be mindful when using these

[crude sinew]

Mission makers already when they need to place down 50 believable targets per player slot

[fiery osprey]

People want a bomber, so they’re gonna get a bomber

Fr tho I don’t see more than one or two of these per mission

And besides, if you’re taking the max load you’re gonna be limited in speed

[blissful quartz]

I got a odd question. Are we going to add the dump and burn?

[fiery osprey]

Yes

[blissful quartz]

Sweet, other than that. I like the idea of the new missile system and the aardvark!

[fiery osprey]

I knew reworking this was a good idea

[crude sinew]

FYI, FB-111 was a strategic bomber version
it was later redesignated F-111G when it transitioned into the precision interdictor role
FB-111 is a non-systematic designation and is invalid

[fiery osprey]

Noted

Redesignating B-111

[crude sinew]

oh god

[fiery osprey]

Jk but it probably would be a B-series aircraft in-game at least

Or maybe just an A-series

[crude sinew]

navy never had B series

A-3 and A-5 were the navy bombers

[fiery osprey]

A it is then

[crude sinew]

i would call it a bomber tho

For what it's worth tho, i'm still not sold. Sorry but the radar is the only new feature here, and i would much rather those capabilities be added to current planes.
Ground mapping should be available to all aircraft, and TFR should be available to at least some of them with a NAVFLIR pod.

[fiery osprey]

Is TV guidance not enough for you?

[crude sinew]

should also be for every aircraft

[fiery osprey]

boring :(

[fiery osprey]

As if this wouldn’t be able to be unique even with those being shared.

• Ground mapping could be implemented on all aircraft, but won’t because DLC aircraft require unique systems and Baha has stated he won’t add the AH-94’s system to a non-DLC craft. Also, NAV screen
• Terrain following could be implemented on other craft, but would have a programmable ride setting only on the A-11 (+3G - 0G indicated to +1.25G - 0.75G indicated). It would also have the option to have the TFR on WITHOUT the autopilot, letting the pilot follow the system instead
• Weapons could be shared, but unlikely

The Pig has enough tricks to warrant it’s return, IMO

[crude sinew]

I agree this would be fun to fly, one of my favorite things to do in VTOL is low altitude, high speed, night time, precision toss-bombing in the 24. Which is what you would do in this (Aardvark shit).
But that's kinda the issue, the 24 is so damn close to doing what this does. Every aircraft this far has really warranted a brand new plane because it just couldn't be an addition to existing ones. Obviously options for brand new gameplay are scarce, but this is damn close to a reskin is my point, no matter how many little details you can use to differentiate them.

[flint stump]

but big afterburner

[fiery osprey]

If that’s your opinion, that’s fair enough. I still think a pure bomber would be fun, instead of the multitude of multiroles we have now

[flint stump]

ye

and people seem to forget that they don't have to buy the DLC

and that nothing is ever gonna be for everyone

[fiery osprey]

And it’d be more fun than a stuck-at-subsonic stealth bomber, I’d at least like the option to go supersonic

[crude sinew]

then we have a fondamental difference in view haha, i like multirole. I wish the 24 got ground radar and TFR so that it would be an F-15E.
I like having to switch to A2A mode in the middle of my ingress. I like when i get busy

[fiery osprey]

As if the EF-24 needs to be more powerful 💀

I don’t mind multirole, but it just feels like it robs the aircraft of character. Like the Mischief is a good blend of being especially good at interception and jamming, as it should be, while sacrificing ground attack capabilities without cheap guided missiles

The F/A-26 is the opposite, where it can do everything really well and is therefore the pinnacle of aviation design and nothing should be added because of it

Though I also have my gripes with the F/A-26’s design but that’s neither here nor there

[fiery osprey]

@lost compass Just had a thought, what if the radar's limited by its scope? Like, since it's a ground radar, it could only go 10° up to -45° down, with a max range of 16 nm?

[lost compass]

Sir

It is 4am

[fiery osprey]

My apologies

[cobalt storm]

I'd say extend it to 32 or make it have a consistent data link page, also will it have any GPS weapons

[fiery osprey]

It can carry GPS and Laser guided versions of all bombs, I just denoted series for simplicity

[cobalt storm]

Ok, a suggestion I also have it for the a/a radar have it so you have to manually slew the radar with the smaller scope

[fiery osprey]

So similar to the EF-24?

[cobalt storm]

I guess yeah

[fiery osprey]

Not sure about that one personally, but I could kinda see it

Also can't add it cuz I hit the character limit 😭

[cobalt storm]

Can I suggest though making a new post as when most people see the 93 dislikes they skip past this post

[fiery osprey]

My brother also recommended that, though I don't think the mods would allow th\at

...Hm

@fast wind would that be allowed? Reposting this while deleting this one to reset the counter?

[crude sinew]

likes don't matter

[fiery osprey]

yeah but a new guy seeing 93 dislikes isn't gonna make them inclined to read the rework lol

[crude sinew]

suggestions are for baha, i don't know if he cares at all about likes and such

i personally don't care about reposting and stuff

[fiery osprey]

Eh, fair

But it would give an idea of the public's desire for it

[crude sinew]

i suppose, it's one of 2 elaborate bomber posts
There is desire for a bomber by ceratain players, that's quite clear

[feral isle]

Likes to dislikes would give him an idea of popular opinion around it, I doubt he would ignore them.

[crude sinew]

sure, it’s not irrelevant but

• The people here are not a representative sample of the VTOL playerbase, (un)popularity here doesn’t mean it applies to the rest of players.
• Public opinion isn’t always the correct opinion

[light oracle]

Has anyone modeled this yet?

[fiery osprey]

I kinda have

Using Flyout at least

[fiery osprey]

I really oughta change the inlet from DSI to diverted diamond tbh

[fiery osprey]

@light oracle

[light oracle]

hmmmm, i guess since i have nothing to do i will try my hand at it

in blender ofc

[fiery osprey]

That would be hype as hell

[light oracle]

Do you want it to look like your flyout design or just model a base f-111 and modify it from there

[fiery osprey]

More like my Flyout design

I’ve been reworking it a bit tho

https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/1341956738626355300/1348513214861807701/image.png?ex=67cfbc4c&is=67ce6acc&hm=a4ffeeabceedb5e8dd74d7fb6e986d3b1cee46dd043419ca45fd303f7136dc91&

This is what I have so far

[light oracle]

Ah ok, well I will see what I can do tomorrow

[fiery osprey]

Been a while since I played, here's what I've got for general concept of shape.

As you can see, pretty damn good frontal stealth and decent enough side for its purposes

I also just love the look of the long nose leading to the fuselage

[hasty narwhal]

While this looks cool, I have a couple concerns

1. This things turning circle would be the size of Ohio

2. It kinda just looks like an Su34, Su57, and lawn dart had a child

3. Holyshit this would be aids to land

4. It doesn't really bring anything to the game that fits Bahas "new mechanics for new aircraft" theme

[crude sinew]

Ohio

[fiery osprey]

What do you mean by #4? TFR Autopilot isn’t in the game and TV guided munitions aren’t a thing. That’s two whole new “mechanics” to the game right there. I’d argue that a ground search radar on a fixed wing platform is a third, but that’s up to you

#1 would be mostly true, it’s not meant for max turning, so with wings swept it’ll get around 5Gs of turning. Still not all that horrible for a ground strike platform, certainly about as much as the B-1 Bone

#2, well I can’t really argue that, the Su-34’s nose was a big inspiration for the nose section of this, putting the shape onto the F-111 was fun

#3 Honestly? Probably not. It wouldn’t be as responsive as a normal fighter, sure, but that’s part of the deal when you fly what is effectively a bomber in terms of weight and maneuverability

The main thing is that it would be a supersonic bomber, rather than a massive subsonic 3+ multicrew one, which is much more reasonable to argue for with the current state of the game, which multiple people have put in their own takes on it

[hasty narwhal]

New mechanics in the sense that warrant a new airframe, that wouldn't be easily applied to another jet. The 24 brought the high-tech slung jamming pods, swing wings, and 54s. all of which are mechanics that do not transfer to other jets (be it for various reasons) with the exception of the 45 getting an altered version of EW for itself.

TFR AP would be a very easy plug&play addition to any jet, as would something like TV guided munitions (technically the AGM-65s are already TV guided smart munitions in VTOL)

Even ground search radar is something that makes more sense on something like the 26 given its armament options

The 24 can already sling dumb/smart bombs accurately at Mach 2+ at 65,000 ASL, on top of being an incredibly effective interceptor. Especially considering the map sizes in VTOL, anything faster or worse at maneuvering is really pushing the boundaries of fitting in VTOLs playspace.

Also in general I think the driving reason for a bomber not being added (sub or supersonic) is that bombers in general are quite boring from a gameplay perspective after the "new shine" wears off

The bombcat can already carry like 20 dumb bombs

[tired creek]

(not a criticism on your post)
TV guided weapons and optical weapons like the 65 are different
optical weapons are FaF, whilst TV guidance is often used when the weapon can be guided in flight via a connection to the launching aircraft, displaying the seeker head like a TV for the pilot/WSO to steer

[hasty narwhal]

That's my mistake, you're right about the distinction

[fiery osprey]

While true, Baha said that DLC mechanics won’t be added to free aircraft, so that basically eliminates ground search radars for fixed-wing in general

[tired creek]

where?

cause what about EW then?

[hasty narwhal]

EW was added to all of the legacy aircraft when the 24 came out

[fiery osprey]

Basic noise EW was, but DRFM and SAS remain EF-24 only

The ground radar from the AH-94 wasn’t added to other aircraft either, despite the AV-42 definitely needing something like that

[hasty narwhal]

That's because the 24 is the premier EW jet, and the 45 uses a simplified single pilot version that autojams frequencies high/mid, too

[hasty narwhal]

That's bc the 42 doesn't have any radar

[hasty narwhal]

With this, the 24 is able to use the different modes exclusively due to it being able to pylon carry the Jamming pods, which are gigantic. Even the 4th gens with their dumb EW pod are forced to carry them on the belly fuel tank pylons due to size/weight

[fiery osprey]

The F/A-26 has it on the outboard pylons, but I get your point

Still, rather than carrying an external pod on a sensor pylon, it would have it integrated.

I’ve made this argument before that if this were added, fixed-wing radar could be made available to carry on other aircraft on the sensor/TGP pylons, letting some carry TGPs and further incentivizing buddy lasing

But that’s up to Baha

[hasty narwhal]

Unless it came with something really distinctively unique and characteristic to separate it from the 24 (i.e TVC, towed decoys, loyal wingmen, etc) to separate itself from it's other jets, an F-111 adjacent aircraft is far less likely than something like a light fighter, eurospec delta, or another altered midsize (YF23-Lite)

[fiery osprey]

I really, really dislike the idea of a light fighter and euro stuff, considering the T-55 and F-45 are right there

We don’t need more air superiority fighters

I’d argue the F/A-26B should be shrunk to be more like a midsize fighter, but that’s mainly due to my issues with the model being gigantic and feeling like it needs a refurbishment

[fiery osprey]

IIRC Loyal Wingmen aren’t gonna be added, since that’s basically what AI aircraft are anyways and they’re not really workable in multiplayer at the moment. TVC would be fun for this, but idk if it’ll happen (though the B-11 in game does have TVC).

The main differentiator from the EF-24 is its role and its subsystems. The EF-24 is a great interceptor and jammer, but a lackluster ground attack platform. This is a purebred ground attack platform with the ability to carry terminally-guided munitions, MACLOS missiles, and larger weight bombs. Some of those could be added for other aircraft, sure, but good luck guiding a cruise missile in while swamped with missiles. It can carry some 120Cs, but it can’t use them as effectively since the plane doesn’t have a TSD-like datalink, requiring a mechanical radar lock - which is already weakened due to its limited range and ground radar sweep angles.

[winged roost]

Only man-in-the-loop TV weapons like GBU-15B and Walleye Datalink are steered in flight. Most TV weapons are FaF

[fiery osprey]

Shoulda put that in the unique mechanics, steerable weapons

We only really have beam-riding weapons in the case of TOWs

[winged roost]

Bullpups.

MCLOS 1960s tech lmao

[fiery osprey]

There’s a reason I added those to the request

[winged roost]

Actual steerable AGM89s

[winged roost]

Or Harpoons

[fiery osprey]

Also added those for cruise missiles

Though my initial idea was more KH-58-adjacent

Seriously though, who wouldn’t wanna have this level of heat?

[winged roost]

Real. I guess the argument is that the 26 or 24 could carry new weapons if added.
Rockeyes,
Napalm,
Larger bombs,
TV guided weapons (Steerable)

[fiery osprey]

They could, but they could just as easily remain unique to the airframe. At least some of them, like cruise missiles.

Napalm is an odd one, haven’t considered that but idk if it would fit

Their usage would be different than if used by this aircraft tho. The EWO for the 24 would be the closest to it, but wouldn’t have a dedicated screen for TV-guided munitions like this would have

[tired creek]

but wouldn’t have a dedicated screen for TV-guided munitions like this would have
that's what a MFD is for😅

[hasty narwhal]

It feels like in terms of implementation, it would just end up being a big T-55 with bombs

a big, fast, dumb jet that can't really do anything besides drop bombs and run away

(We already have one)

[fiery osprey]

Was typing this up as you sent that lol, but if I were to implement it, it would be a side-page of the TGP (like how NAV goes to GPS) where the camera goes from the pod to the sensor of the weapon about to be let loose

[fiery osprey]

Agree to disagree, it still has a punch but it won’t be as strong in A2A as everything else, especially in a turn fight

[hasty narwhal]

Also the F-111Cs were limited to 6.5Gs which is painfully bad in VTOLs environment.

[fiery osprey]

So you wouldn’t be using this in chase’s server, but it’s more for a co-op PVE thing

[fiery osprey]

Not necessarily? It’s just a different play style

[hasty narwhal]

Going mach 2.5 at 6.5Gs is legitimately bigger turn radius than New York City

[fiery osprey]

You wouldn’t be holding 2.5Gs in a turn like that lol, but I get your point

Still better than the F-104

[hasty narwhal]

In the current state of VTOL, gpulling is a necessity given how missile kinematics work. Something that can't gpull is just asking to die. Which is partly why the 24 was viewed so poorly until the gpulling tech was popularized

Especially for something that wants to be high and fast

[fiery osprey]

But the F-111 doesn’t go high and fast

That’s its whole thing

It goes low and fast

With a tunable terrain following autopilot too

It hides in ground clutter for most of its time

[crude sinew]

no

[fiery osprey]

Glad Dauby agreed with me on that

Fr tho, if you’re going high and fast in this thing, either air defenses are no longer a problem, you’re with an EF-24 that’s jamming the hell out of radar sites, or you’re playing it wrong

[winged roost]

It shouldn’t be. Using chaff should far and always be the better option than stressing your airframe temporarily.

It’s a bad mechanic, a learnable skill with a ceiling and floor, so no matter how many missiles you shoot at a mf, he will always dodge it if he’s good enough.

Chaff >>>>>>

Terrain >>>>>>

I can’t stand people who defend G-pulling. You are part of the issue

[fiery osprey]

G-pulling is nice, but way too easy sometimes with things that aren’t a MAD-4

[winged roost]

This is why we need more chaff pods that take weapon pylons so you can choose offense or defense

[fiery osprey]

Ooo, imagine a Tornado’s countermeasure pods on this

Would probably put that on the inboard wing pylon

[winged roost]

👆👆👆👆👆

[fiery osprey]

I see your vision, Joe

Damn shame this thing has 100 downvotes now tho

[raw tiger]

Mfs just love to hate

[fiery osprey]

Fr fr

Or they don’t read lol (can’t blame them tho, 1459 messages and counting)

[crude sinew]

or its’ a bad idea

[hasty narwhal]

Bottom line: bombers are boring

[fiery osprey]

But bombers are the most requested item thus far

(Cue the video of the scroll of bombers)

So it’s a subjective take at best

[fiery osprey]

https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/1327022995956301925/1327045895065440306/Screen_Recording_20240902_040756_Discord-2.mp4?ex=67dfe68c&is=67de950c&hm=5677e28c097103c5234774226f0140021db1aa98159b096e67fc64022c691456&

[winged roost]

When done poorly or envisioned poorly

Atlantis’ has a lot of merit

[winged roost]

I ain’t as dumb as people make me out to be.

[fiery osprey]

Also just realized that this is the second most upvoted bomber post and the most downvoted post at the same time

[winged roost]

People just don’t know what they want

[flint stump]

Duality of man

[fiery osprey]

Definition of "mixed results"

[flint stump]

ejectable cockpit need I say more

[fiery osprey]

4/5 ratio of likes/dislikes. honestly not horrible were it not 100

[raw tiger]

True. I also think this aircraft would be a great addition down the road. Maybe not the next aircraft added to the game.

[fiery osprey]

I agree, I personally think ASW should be the next thing, with this coming after

But this would be pretty easy to make at the very least

[raw tiger]

Agreed. I think it fills a niche role that isn't exactly "needed" but it's still badass kinda reminds me of an A-3 platform as well.

[fiery osprey]

It’d also be closer to the Tornado in terms of role

[winged roost]

All my homies love the Tornado

Such a cool name

[fiery osprey]

I personally don’t see the point of an F111 style strike aircraft. Swing wings are just an expensive gimmick that limits wing payload nowadays and there are other aircraft that have just as much side by side potential.

And we already have a modernised swing wing retro airframe in game in the EF24

A legally distinct F111 doesn’t fill a niche that the EF24 can’t do already or couldn’t feasibly do if stuff like tv munitions were added

[winged roost]

A fixed-wing dedicated strike aircraft is a niche it could fill. With 2x Self defense heaters and all other A/G or ASh weapons

I personally think for new aircraft we need to look backwards instead of forwards. Other than the much rumored UH-60 style heli, the next fixed wing aircraft should be something slightly older and A/G focused

[flint stump]

SKYHAWK PLEASE

[flint stump]

yeah realistically I agree

but I would love an aardvark

[winged roost]

Vark Vark Vark

https://tenor.com/view/f-111-aardvark-vark-war-thunder-my-beloved-gif-7296363476544539424

[flint stump]

in my unbiased (https://discord.com/channels/319915885575798785/1297456695827628113) opinion a skyhawk would be the best fit for a bomber/strike role

[fiery osprey]

The swing-wing isn’t the selling point, you know, it’s the targeting systems and radars. That, and it’s easier to argue for a two-man aircraft over a four-man one

You don’t need a quarter of your lobby to be in one aircraft

[flint stump]

yeah thats a good point

dual TGP would be fire

[fiery osprey]

Which is funny, cuz until I saw their proposal asking the same thing, I didn’t even think about having the sensors with their own cameras in a page

[winged roost]

NAV 👏 FLIR 👏

[flint stump]

^

in the 26 at least

its basically a strike eagle

dude a 2 seater 26 would go so hard

[fiery osprey]

2-seater 26 would be odd but cool

[flint stump]

wouldn't need to even change the plane's dimentions lmao

[fiery osprey]

Honestly you’re not wrong lol

[winged roost]

The 26 model was even scaled down to 85%

[raw tiger]

Doesn't necessarily have to be a swing wing either, but it can have that look. I.e a side by side seating f-52 from call of duty

[flint stump]

That is an FB-22

[raw tiger]

More or less yeah lol

FB-26 when????

Might actually be so tuff

Big ass wings like this

[winged roost]

Such a weird goober

[fiery osprey]

That's also something it could look like

Just that swing wing would give it an easier time for naval ops

AKA most of VTOL's operations

As I said before, maintaining the F-111’s dorito shape would lead to VERY painful low-speed control

[winged roost]

24 is already garbo at low speed

[fiery osprey]

Imagine that but worse

Actually, no

Imagine a Starfighter

[winged roost]

yikes

[fiery osprey]

Considering the wing sweep angle is even more excessive than the F-117, I think that’s a justified reaction lol

At least it has more wing area

[flint stump]

I heard the blackbird cant turn around in the entire state of ohio is that true

At speed

[fiery osprey]

F26XL

[fiery osprey]

If you want a dorito you’re better off with a flying wing design like a Nighthawk

Which isn’t carrier capable and horribly underpowered in this current game

Like, what’re you gonna do with two bombs

[fiery osprey]

That’s the beauty of legally distinct aircraft. You can make the changes needed.

Also subsonic :(

Again, legally distinct and modernised

That can only go so far

A Nighthawk would thematically have the same purpose as an F-45 with internal arms only

And it would still have more

An F-111-like airframe would at least have the payload mass to warrant the bomber/interdictor role

[fiery osprey]

Yeah I know the F-117N was proposed https://preview.redd.it/another-one-the-navy-version-of-the-f117-nighthawk-the-v0-vfor617itp9d1.jpg?width=653&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ac45bf04e22e184bbb600aa2c31bf62f7643a466

[flint stump]

Ew f-117 with wings nevermind

It looks better but really wrong

[fiery osprey]

At best it could carry 2 bombs and 4 AMRAAMs

Or more likely Sidewinders

[flint stump]

E-3 sentry with meteors

Plane idea

And 2000 pound mavericks

[fiery osprey]

E-3 is already proposed lol

[flint stump]

Upgraded maverick

Wait that would be cool if baha made a 1000+ lb maverick

[fiery osprey]

Bullpup II

But yeah cheap SACLOS missiles would be cool

Which is why I included them in this

[flint stump]

Oh yeah I forgot abt that

Arent those TV?

[fiery osprey]

Nope! Radio guided

[flint stump]

Oh strange

I still need to learn a2g on the F4 in dcs I'm putting it off

Bomb charts are scary

[fiery osprey]

Lol valid

[flint stump]

And also I'm putting off PvP too because jester is a dick and wont lock anything D:<

anyway off topic

[cobalt storm]

You can carry 24 mk 82, little hard to miss
, also for dive toss just tell jester 35 dive angle and lock the spot on the ground you want gone

[reef dew]

Just saying 👆🏼and the F-117 idea wouldn’t serve the same purpose as the F-45 if it was made to be a larger Medium+ sized bomber.

If ya don’t like that.. What about the same size, (multi-purpose-bomber), etc. But.. a hybrid stealthy B-1

[crude sinew]

Low altitude, terrain following (B-1, F-111) doesn't go along with stealth, it doesn't make much sense to do both

[reef dew]

But the B-1B does have stealth features. It’s not considered a fully stealth plane, but it has “blended contours and radar-absorbing materials, which lowered the aircraft's speed but reduced its radar reflectivity to one one-hundredth that of the B-52.”

[crude sinew]

10m² is not stealthy

also these numbers seem like pure shit, 100m² for B-52

[reef dew]

🤷🏼‍♂️ That’s what I keep getting when I look it up.

And I’d say 1/10th the RCS of a plane that’s a fairly similar size, is pretty stealthy (for what it is).

But you’re right in saying it’s technically not a “stealth aircraft.” However, (some) stealth features would be pretty awesome, considering trying to G-pull a SAM or ARAAM in a medium+ sized plane would be a real pain in the ass 😅

[tired creek]

Calling a b1 "pretty stealthy" is like calling a elephant light because it's not as heavy as a whale

[reef dew]

Well, after doing some more research, the 10m² is with the wings fully extended, and viewing the aircraft at the angle of its greatest visibility of Surface Area. Apparently, with the wings swept, its RCS is about 2m².

Which I’ll say again.. isn’t a stealth plane. But for its size, that’s still pretty stealthy.

[lost compass]

It’s low observability at most lol

[reef dew]

Eh. I’ll take it.

🤣

[lost compass]

still better than the rcs of the su57

[crude sinew]

the B-1's compressor blades are exposed, aint no reduced frontal RCS lol

[reef dew]

That’s cause by the time you see it, it’s either too late, or you’re lucky to be watching it fly away at 500ft and Mach 2 😝

Don’t need stealth in front when your enemy never sees you coming in the first place! 😅

[lost compass]

It sadly doesn’t do mach 2 from what I know

[winged roost]

The B-1A prototype was alleged to do Mach 2, but the B-1B is speed limited

It can do supersonic on the deck though.

[vernal hornet]

For its size it may be stealthy. That is, if the elephant running makes the sound of a human running, then that probably would be considered stealthy, even if you still can hear it

[crude sinew]

yeah that's the point, flying low and fast is way more fun than just stealth cruising

[fiery osprey]

That third one is really close to what I envisioned (even if it’s just a B-1’s nose)

[fiery osprey]

You right, but you gotta admit the sleek 5th gen design looks cool. That’s mainly why I’d wanna have it, and it further incentivizes the use of internal arms

Should AGM-84s be allowed on the internal pylons? Y/N

[raw tiger]

Yes

[winged roost]

Yes because hot 🥵

[fiery osprey]

Adding to pylon list

Wait, I already had TVCMs there lol

[raw tiger]

Yes, replace B1 nose with a more fifth Gen looking F-111 nose

[fiery osprey]

Yesssssss

(I need to heavily refine this nose section tho it's not fantastic)

[winged roost]

Thicc

[fiery osprey]

Also realizing that the bottom was a lot more flat, so I definitely need to retain that if I wanna have space for the armaments

[raw tiger]

Show us the full show us the full!!

[winged roost]

You could always do fat amy bays

give the vark Abs

[fiery osprey]

Schnozz

[raw tiger]

Holy long

[fiery osprey]

As of rn it has a really thin body, but that is the intention

Need to massively expand the bottom's size tho before doing that

[winged roost]

I might work on one of my own

[raw tiger]

Tried using AI to make some designs but it doesn't understand what I want

This is kinda heat tho

[fiery osprey]

If you do, please send results! I want to work on this more but can't due to actual aerospace engineering classes lol

[raw tiger]

Ai made a similar nose design

[winged roost]

Will do

[raw tiger]

Show us the entire thing please I must see

[fiery osprey]

And from the top, dorito mode

[raw tiger]

Why does it look a little funky at this angle

[raw tiger]

This angle is perfect

Not gonna do single tail?

[fiery osprey]

Single tail is bad for RCS

Also would allow for easier storage on carriers

[raw tiger]

Ugh but it looks so cool

[fiery osprey]

Unless I were to do a folding tail lol

[raw tiger]

Plus the EF-111 tail is sick

[fiery osprey]

I agree, but in lore I feel like the sensors would be put on the aft "stinger" like the Su-34

[raw tiger]

Makes sense

[raw tiger]

I feel like the nose needs to be shorter and the fuselage longer

But that's just me

[fiery osprey]

Fuselage longer I definitely see, especially for extra room for S-Ducting

Long nose is mainly due to the radar tho

And that's how long the F-111's nose is IRL

[raw tiger]

Jesus lmao

[raw tiger]

Maybe that pic just makes it look funky

Like the nose looks absurdly long compared to the body

[raw tiger]

This topside one looks perfect

Maybe I'm trippin idk I haven't taken Norco in like 2 weeks and I miss it

[fiery osprey]

Here's what it would look like from a similar angle (I made the tail boom longer too, cuz I felt like it)

[raw tiger]

Looks much better

Maybe wings shifted back more? Idk

[fiery osprey]

For the wings I'm following a blueprint, so probably not gonna change that all that much

Actually, I might. Just realized this blueprint isn't actually too great with the wing sweep (they're swept already, can't get the shape exactly right)

Swept they're fine, but they really hike forwards a lot

Frontal stealth is absolutely nuts when the wings are swept tho

[raw tiger]

Damn hell yeah

[winged roost]

WIP, but it gets the point across, I think. Upgraded F-111-esque airframe. Went with more F-117 style exhaust ducts and smaller diameter engines, 0.85m or 34 in dia. It can even fly with half the wings missing!

(Don't ask how I removed the half of the wings)

[raw tiger]

Now I really like this

[fiery osprey]

Minor modernization as compared to a major overhaul, peak design

[winged roost]

That's my bread and butter

Modern internals, retro outside

[fiery osprey]

Imma continue my study of a major overhaul tho, I want so bad

[winged roost]

I think the twin tail design is cool, but VTOL needs more big single tails

Tornado, Typhoon, Vark, Phantom

[fiery osprey]

Single tail bad for RCS but I hear ya

It could be worse tho, it could look like the twin-tail Iranian F-5 derivations

(Tiny Hornet)

[winged roost]

I actually really dig how this looks and flies. Couple hundred mile range at 40k feet and baaaaareely touching burner at Mach 1.2

single tail is only bad for side and rear aspect RCS, really.

I'd like to imagine this would fit somewhere in the F-4/A-5 Vigilante / F-111 sphere.

Fighter/Bomber or Heavy Strike role to pick up some of the load from 26 and 24s to allow them to be more multirole

I love that body line on the nose... 🥴

[raw tiger]

Yeah Joe I fw this heavy

Please make an EF/RF variant

[winged roost]

Perchance

If there's one thing I wish the next Ace Combat game had, it's more variety of aircraft, like the B-1, B-2, etc

F-117, F-4, F-5

An F-111 would fuck HARD in Ace Combat

[fiery osprey]

I know AC:Infinity had B-1s and B-2s able to be played

[winged roost]

Yeah…

[fiery osprey]

AC7 has F-117s but they're models from AC:I or AC6 IIRC

[winged roost]

Assault Horizon had it too

AC7’s is AI only and I believe the model is from AC6

[fiery osprey]

And they spawn under weird conditions in one mission only

Anyways, back to work on the model

https://tenor.com/view/to-earn-the-right-to-work-right-to-work-earn-the-right-to-work-the-fine-print-fine-print-gif-9576040394118700442

[flint stump]

I miss aci

even though it was one of the less loved games

and generally not good for story

and the fuel mechanic

[fiery osprey]

I vaguely recall the nighthawk being playable in AC2

Apparently playable in Zero

And 2 as I recalled, but also 5 and 6

“Also, as with the other player-controlled stealth aircraft, the F-117A Nighthawk still can be detected by the enemy radar, whereas the enemy piloted F-117A will only be able to be detected if the player is facing towards them (more prominent in Joint Assault).”

Interesting you can only see them from the orientation that would actually give the lowest return

[winged roost]

What’s neat is that AC7 has stealth parts for multiplayer, and certain missions you can look at the map and see certain targets pop in an out of view, mostly stealth aircraft like F-22, F-35, and Su-57

[flint stump]

Ac7 multiplayer is dead

There was like 1 server with two people on pc yesterday

[fiery osprey]

So apparently the blueprint I had was really bad, so I decided to start from scratch. Again. For the third time. Nose is actually optimized for stealth now, no longer has the "smile" but has a flat bottom now for internal bay shenanigans. The rest of the fuselage should be done by tomorrow.

[fiery osprey]

Not like this matters due to it just being the nose, but still
If it helps, imagine this with this body

[reef dew]

What’s this system you’re using to determine the RCS & stealth factors/ratings? And what’s considered “stealthy” in the Stealth rating #s

[fiery osprey]

The system is Flyout's in-game radar cross section algorithm. What I'm looking for in a design to be considered "stealthy" is as low of a dBsm (decibel per square meter) return

Now, the game is a bit easy to trick (just rotate a cube and you'll get a really good dBsm return since there's no flat plates) but for aircraft designs that aren't always faceted, it's pretty decent

Typically a good front/side/rear is sought after, whereas top and bottom aren't too important due to the wings being a factor

Since this is just the nose, I'm mainly focusing on front/side rather than rear

[fiery osprey]

Crazy S-ducting to hide the TF30-P-100s

[winged roost]

Not as bad as Baha's models

[fiery osprey]

Good enough progress for today

[fiery osprey]

I saw that on the EF-24 and was shocked at how absolutely small it gets lol

So I took some inspiration from that

[winged roost]

The 26 and 24 are just... bad

lmfao

[fiery osprey]

Fr

Next is gonna be the wing sections and then the weapons bays

[winged roost]

👀

[lost compass]

That’s honestly cool that flyout has that

I should totally make an Su57 there…

https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/790913637988171776/1090577325755736105/attachment.gif

[fiery osprey]

I think I'm getting somewhere...

[fiery osprey]

OK, I think this is good enough to stop for today

[winged roost]

I’m still not sold on the twin tails. 🤔

[fiery osprey]

Giving it a single tail made it unstable lol

[winged roost]

😔 We need another single tail airframe in VTOL

Even a Heli

I wish Baha used my Blackhawk model as a basis

[fiery osprey]

Hang on

Just for you @winged roost

[winged roost]

Attaboy

[fiery osprey]

Both look good to me tbh

Wait

I know why it was unstable without it

1. I didn't have a fuel tank in the fuselage
2. Making it straight got rid of the giant lifting surfaces of the tails XD

[lost compass]

Only thing I’d change here is move the elevons lower

(Dirty air bad)

Ideally you wouldn’t have the wings and elevons on the same height as that might interfere with the airflow, giving you less authority

[winged roost]

The thing with that in FlyOut at least is that the wings don’t effect each other, nor other parts like fuselage. It’s a very simple airflow sim, like somewhere between default KSP and FAR

[lost compass]

So dirty air isn’t simulated?

[winged roost]

Nope.

[lost compass]

cringe…

[winged roost]

Well it’s a solo dev

[lost compass]

fair

Still lets us do this

[fiery osprey]

So the thing is, the F-111 actually has the elevators practically in line with the wings when swept. It's kinda cool actually

Like they go just below it

I will change the design up a bit to kinda match that tho

[fiery osprey]

On-Slope seems to be good too, it's actually kinda impressive how much visibility it has with the giant nose

Also pulling 10 degrees AoA has some impressive vapes over the wings

[sharp aurora]

How long did it take you to modle that?

[fiery osprey]

In game time is around 3-5 hours or so, but this is my 3rd or 4th attempt

So probably around 24 hours 💀

[winged roost]

Those are rookie numbers

You gotta pump those numbers up

[fiery osprey]

You right, I still haven’t modeled the doors and stuff

Mainly due to school

But I get done next Wednesday so expect more soon-ish

[sharp aurora]

YAY

[fiery osprey]

@sharp aurora Just checked build time, so far I’ve got:
V1: 1 hr 59 min
V2: 18 hr 6 min
V3: 6 h 21 min

It’s much worse than I thought, a total time of 26 hr 26 min

All 3 versions btw

V1: Wasn't happy with the wings, the aft, and the way the nose was shaped, so I moved to V2
V2: Didn't like the LERX and the way the body was too thin at the part where it recombines with the nose, so I moved onto V3

Also integrating a DSI into the aircraft's silhouette was too hard

[sharp aurora]

After school, if you choose to add on to this, what planes do you have? Also how can I help support this?

[fiery osprey]

Ah, just this plane is all I’m working on (outside of an IRL project)

Honestly not much, I’m just slowly but surely working on it

[sharp aurora]

Plans not planes

My spelling sucks

[fiery osprey]

Oh for plans? Dedicated weapons bays, and doors for gear and cockpit

[fiery osprey]

I wonder if there’s any bomb mods for Flyout

[winged roost]

There's like dummy loads

Search "Invalid's Bundle of Bombs"

[fiery osprey]

Ooo definitely will

[fiery osprey]

Potential upgrade, maybe center-mounted GBU-31s?

Harpoons definitely fit tho

[winged roost]

YEEEEEEEEES

[fiery osprey]

Also rockets

Thanks for telling me about this, Joe!

And for shits n' giggles, AGM-62 Walleye Is

(Imagine the center are Walleye IIs, nobody made a model for it)

I do have a Bullpup model if anyone wants to see it carried

Actually, fuggit

An improbable loadout @winged roost @sharp aurora

[fiery osprey]

By some miracle, it actually works to store 2000 lb JDAMs.

For Mk 82s it'll be the same amount as the EF-24's belly pylons alone

With GBU-38s, it’ll be more like 4/3 capacity per pylon (8 vs 3x2)

For GBU-12s, it’ll be 2/3 capacity per pylons (4 vs 3x2)

[winged roost]

how many rounds in that gun? Gotta be like 1000.

Holy shit bro you've been in the kitchen

https://tenor.com/view/sunnyfication-gif-20299408

[fiery osprey]

2000

I can’t make it smaller

Well I could but like

Not in radius

[winged roost]

Holy moly that’s a lot of damage

How about a little more

[fiery osprey]

I mean, with how it’s stacked it could probably do 6000 rounds

Which is Ace Combat levels of pew pew

[winged roost]

And people still have the audacity to downvote this

[fiery osprey]

Someone just downvoted it right now

Looks like someone didn’t read

[winged roost]

Damn man. No appreciation for a good vision

[fiery osprey]

(Reworked, read first) F-111 Style Tactical Bombing/Interdiction Aircraftir

(Reworked, read first) F-111 Style Tactical Bombing/Interdiction Aircraft

[vernal hornet]

Lol. "Read first" should be a requirement to vote in any way

[fiery osprey]

You’d be surprised…

[fiery osprey]

With how many downvotes it has, more often than not people will think “ah, this proposal must be butt” and not give it the time of day despite the rework

The initial one was a lot more focused on solely bomb loads, where’s this one is more focused on TV-guided and pilot/WSO-guided armaments

https://youtube.com/shorts/Ho1isMmBIFE?si=psD_1AhFarFxWpC8

[lost compass]

It literally went from 60 upvotes to 90 in 2 days

[fiery osprey]

Imagine guiding in weapons with CCTV

[lost compass]

I don’t want to fucking hear it

lmfao

[fiery osprey]

It took a week for that lol

[lost compass]

also cg on joining caw

[fiery osprey]

Trust me on that one

[lost compass]

a week?

[fiery osprey]

Thanks!

[lost compass]

It was at 60 yesterday

am I being schizophrenic

[fiery osprey]

It was ~80 for like, 2-3 weeks

You might be being schizo

[fiery osprey]

Anyways bombs

[lost compass]

Also you should like link the main post inside here

[lost compass]

And ask staff to pin it

Because i am not scrolling all the way up

[fiery osprey]

…I didn’t know that was possible lol

Hold on

[lost compass]

(Theres no jump to top button)

[fiery osprey]

Not on mobile anyways yeah

[lost compass]

yeah

[fiery osprey]

(Discord wen)

[lost compass]

Never

Its discord

Anyways have you finally decided to make it a tandem seater?

like god intended?

lmfao

I CAN SEE YOU ADDING REACTIONS

Omfg

Am I allowed to bring boris into the F222?

[fiery osprey]

@fast wind sorry for the ping, but you’re the only available mod right now. Would it be possible to pin the initial message for this as a wayback button for mobile users? This has gotten super long and it’s a pain to scroll all the way up.

[sharp aurora]

You were going to call it the A-11 or something, right?

I do think it sad how people won’t thoroughly read the idea before they up or down vote it

[fiery osprey]

Correct, either that or the B-111

I use B-111H as my internal designation

[crude sinew]

you can press top right of screen on iOS at leats

[fiery osprey]

Oh yeah that works

Still nice having it pinned

[lost compass]

what…

where

WHERE

[crude sinew]

right of the sensors

[vernal hornet]

Top right of the screen smh 🤦

[lost compass]

I need to tap where my battery is

[crude sinew]

yes

[lost compass]

and even then it only works

1/10th the time

[vernal hornet]

Around that. Try a bit lower?

[lost compass]

discord fucking sucks give is a to the top button instesd

[lost compass]

Doesn’t work

Just copies the name and opens the member list

[crude sinew]

fat fingers

[lost compass]

shut up

[vernal hornet]

Huh??? How did you achieve that?

[lost compass]

tbf I am like the dumbest person alive

[vernal hornet]

I can copy link, open some weird ass subwindow and then i have the battery. For me its invetween the battery and the weird ass submenu button (the submenu button is also the name of the thread)

[lost compass]

Yesh

That

Thing or whatever

💔

[sharp aurora]

I feel like being side to side with you co-pilot/wepons person (idk) is going to cause lots of chaos

[fiery osprey]

Yeah, that’s the best part lol

[sharp aurora]

You said that you were reading skunkworks?

[fiery osprey]

Yup

I uh

Haven’t picked it up in a bit, but it’s on my bookshelf right now

[sharp aurora]

I love that book. Highly recomend it

Did we talk in CAW about the nickname you wanted to give it?

[fiery osprey]

Yeah, Hedgehog

[lost compass]

does it cut hedges

by flying 10ft off the ground

also if it does have TFR

Let it have a SEASKIM mode

please

🙏

I wanna skim the sea at 10-50ft

[fiery osprey]

Yeah I think it would have a sea skimming mode

[lost compass]

One wave and its all over

[fiery osprey]

10-50 ft might be a bit low BUT it should have it lol

Waves? What are those?

[lost compass]

its how low I fly the mischief

😛

[fiery osprey]

[lost compass]

[fiery osprey]

Fellow low flyer

[lost compass]

Only right way to fly it 🗣️

[sharp aurora]

Wait, would it be carrier capable? I feel like it would have to be

[fiery osprey]

Yep

[lost compass]

Tacobell.

[fiery osprey]

VTOL planes when damaged (they are absolutely trailing flame)

[winged roost]

Me when my stabilator that doesn’t contain fuel or oil bursts into flame

Bruh

[fiery osprey]

Weapons bays officially added! They work well too

Posting to update model description

[raw tiger]

🔥

[sharp aurora]

How many hard points are there total? I guess it would be a different number if you have missiles in the bay

[fiery osprey]

Check the FAQ at the top. 2+2 internal (payload + self-defense), 4 swinging external, 4 fixed external, a total of 12

I took it up to Mach 2.0, holy crap is this thing burning

[sharp aurora]

How long are those burner trails?

[fiery osprey]

I'd say "decently long"

Almost as long as the plane. Looks like a dump n' burn

[sharp aurora]

this is not a request this is a question of possibility, Could you add the fuel burn somehow

Like a partical effect

[fiery osprey]

Not possible IIRC at the moment, but I would love to see it in VTOL

[sharp aurora]

I see

Are you going to modle the doors next?

[fiery osprey]

Not sure what I'll do next tbh. Probably canopy doors and then rework the intakes one last time.

[sharp aurora]

Is there someone else in the cockpit with you or is that just a model?

[fiery osprey]

Just a model. Honestly I'm just using FlyOut to convey what I'd like to see in VTOL

Probably gonna start showcasing this in the FlyOut server soon-ish

[sharp aurora]

I see

Good luck

I love how the project is turning out

[flint stump]

Likes are catching up with dislikes 👀

This is the most divided post lol

[fiery osprey]

Real as hell

From 60/100 to 91/106

[zenith mantle]

oh i don't think you've seen the "add civilians" post from when the forum first went up lol

[fiery osprey]

I remember that

[zenith mantle]

god that was a shitshow

-# i still don't think a civilian team is a good idea for vtol tbh, but i'll just leave it at that

[fiery osprey]

Agreed. I’d rather not have my teammates playing war crime simulator and messing missions up
-# not like you can’t set that up with allied infantry you’re not supposed to kill but regardless

[flint stump]

Lmao wasnt there a civilian airliner one too

Baby in a stroller unit when

[zenith mantle]

Too many

[fiery osprey]

Civvy airliner I can somewhat get after doing interception missions

[fiery osprey]

Damn this thing getting to 92 was not expected

[fiery osprey]

To those disliking it, could you at least tell me why? It’ll help me gauge what’s good or not

Damn gonna hit 110 before I get an answer

[raw tiger]

If I had to guess, not enough new stuff to warrant a new aircraft. Too similar to the ef-24, another swing wing, not a vtol capable aircraft.

Just my guesses tho, I love the vark and the spark so I fw this idea heavy

[fiery osprey]

The old one I can certainly understand, but I'd like to see an EF-24 try carrying 10 large-scale missiles

Or 64 Mk. 82s lol

[winged roost]

I remember one of my Super Phantom concepts with the internal weapons bay could carry up to 24x GBU-39s

That would be so much fun in VTOL

[crude sinew]

yeah pretty much this. It’s a 24 with a bomb bay and a TFR.
Just add a NAVFLIR pod with TFR.

[fiery osprey]

Which is why I added my comment in the FAQ message on that

It operates differently

It’s not a fighter, it’s sluggish but fast

And has the ability to strike targets with unique FAF and terminally guided weapons

[crude sinew]

it doesn’t, i fly the 24 like i would the 111. From my POV, we already have this.

[fiery osprey]

Idk man, I fly it like an F-14 more often than not with those A2A missiles ¯_(ツ)_/¯

Or actually using it for its jamming role

Rarely do I do a dedicated ground attack with it, and even less so with the 4x Mk. 82 pylons

[lost compass]

4x GBU39 is possible as well?

It can carry 22 GPS guided bombs

And quite quickly

It.. it literally can

[fiery osprey]

Sorry was thinking of the GBU-38 my bad

[lost compass]

lmfao

[fiery osprey]

SDBs are a bit OP but yeah

[lost compass]

no problem

[lost compass]

they are

Which is why I run MK83s

or AGM161s

[fiery osprey]

Valid

JSOWs for this would be cool tho

And for the F-45

But that’s a different story

[lost compass]

And the 24

[fiery osprey]

Nah

[lost compass]

The 24 is the main SEAD/DEAD aircraft why wouldn’t it have JSOWs, the best DEAD weapon

🤨

[fiery osprey]

…Valid point

[lost compass]

EA18s have JSOWs

[fiery osprey]

I was mainly thinking cuz the F-14s pretty much had no ground armaments to speak of, so a JSOW would be a bit of a stretch

Then again, DEAD weapon

…And it can use AGM-89s and AGM-161s so I guess JSOWs wouldn’t be too far for an upgrade package

Though the F-111 in-game should be able to run a mix of what it did for the AF and what the F/A-18 could run, so both Walleyes and bullpups are applicable, as well as AGM-84E**/**H/K in terms of air-to-surface/anti-ship missiles

[crude sinew]

yeah no i use it as a bomber

[lost compass]

This isn’t an F14 though

same way the AV42 isn’t an osprey

[fiery osprey]

Well, yes, but you know what I was saying at the least right?

[lost compass]

I guess

[crude sinew]

F-14 did have A2G

was pretty deacent at it

[lost compass]

Yeah

[fiery osprey]

Only Mk. 8X series bombs and tested with Zunis, but never really used them in combat

I’ve seen some photos with GBU-12s and 10s, and even some JDAMs, and those make sense too, but it didn’t use any AGMs outside of testing. At least 88s makes sense for the role

[crude sinew]

bombs is what strike aircraft use anyways. LGBs and now JDAMs

[lost compass]

Bombs are cheaper than missiles.

And easier to carry.

[fiery osprey]

Yeah, and every plane can carry bombs. Since people want a bomber, and bombers are a bit redundant by their nature, that requires us to think outside the box. Hence my addition of TV-guided missiles (Harpoon-ER, AGM-130) and bombs (Walleye I/II, HOBOS, GBU-15), especially with the unique below-the-horizon approach you can effectively do an AGM-145 LOAL with extra precision.

Or because it’s an older airframe, the utilization of MACLOS (Bullpup-B) if you wanna carry something big and engage in close quarters for cheap

[fiery osprey]

Unless Baha wanted to add tactical nukes, but this isn’t Nuclear Option

[crude sinew]

well i think you’re missing the obvious, "people want a bomber". What if they don’t ? That’s what the dislikes here show, at least not this kind of bomber.

[winged roost]

People want an actual like bomber bomber

Not a fighter/bomber

We already have the 26 and 24 for that

[dreamy talon]

i want a moab 💔

[fiery osprey]

You right probably, the F-111 is itself classed as a tactical bomber rather than a heavy strategic bomber like the B-52 or B-1

At least it’d be small enough to land comfortably lol

[winged roost]

true