Very interesting. I should think that at least the addition of Beryoza and Chaika could allow for an additional name; perhaps the "Su-24 Beryoza" and/or "Su-24 Chaika" (although that carries it's own BMPT style misidentification problems). Are there any Su-24 specific loadouts we're missing out on?
The SPO-15 was simply a replacement for the SPO-10/Sirena 3M RWR with wider bandwidth coverage and some digital components - both use superheterodyne receivers. This was a standard upgrade for all Soviet aircraft in the late 70s, the US had a mishmash of older crystal video units and more advanced designs like the ALR-56 on the F-15 and Block 50/52 F-16. Chaika is just a bombsight which could look forward enough to launch missiles, and only during daylight. The probable weapons load for an early Su-24 would be dumb bombs or command-guided missiles such as the Kh-23, a laser designator could be carried on one of the wing pylons. I've seen some references to the TP-23 as a low light designator but that's an IRST, originally carried by the MiG-23.
Since I got tired of trying to find this info over and over again for people, I'm putting it here for future reference. I'm copying this from a different post.
So, there was a discussion about cluster bombs on the forums that had some good points. Mainly, that clusters are rather marginal. Part of this is due to the fact that they don't damage or kill infantry, which can't be easily addressed without doing something like adding a new damage table to the game (or perhaps making the really low AP values of the AP table act in a special way against infantry to cause them damage, which could also work). There's also the issue that all clusters are basically the same, which itself is a bit of a tragedy. I collected data on various cluster bombs/munitions, both those used in the game and those not present, as a baseline for setting up some new cluster guidelines.
So, collected info on cluster bombs used in the game. I have included clusters not already in the game as well. In general, NATO nations (particularly US) seem to have gone for smaller bomblets that let them pack more into a container, while the Soviets went for fewer bomblets that were bigger.
In general, the advantage of cluster bombs was that they had a much larger area of effect than a typical iron bomb, and so were far more useful against things like infantry and light vehicles, and some had decent enough anti-armor capabilities to be threatening to even tanks. This data should be useful for setting up rules for bomb AOE and AP damage, depending on bomblet size and the number carried. For simplicity, I think either three or four categories should be used for AP damage and AOE size.
As a note, a few bombs I'm not sure on the year they were in service. Any help would be appreciated.
MW-1 Year: 1985 Type: Cluster dispenser Mass, kg: 5000 Bomblet kg: ~0.5 (KB44) Bomblet #: 4536 (KB44) Notes: 112 tubes that can be loaded with five different munitions; anti-material/anti-personnel KB44, anti-runway STABO, and three different mines.
For reference, an L15 heavy artillery round contains 11 kilos of explosive and has a damage radius of about 55m. My guess is that HE cluster munitions would be used to slow down enemy forces - they would probably mess up soft-skinned vehicles and materials ('mess up' = mobility kill).
The American's never put guns on the F-4 Phantom II, so is the pod actually as good as an on board gun? I say this because the vulcan is probably the best in game gun for planes. While Irl I believe the F-4 was designed as a interceptor to rely more on missiles. Unless The newer models of it all have the internal gun correct? All the old ones could use the pod maybe at reduced speed, or autonomy?