Litening for Hornet

I cannot wait for LITENING.

I am so looking forward to being able to do full 9-line CAS with a sensor and lasing like we had in A-10C. For those of you that never flew the Hawg, you are going to love having the LITENING on your jet!

 

I'm eagerly awaiting for the LITENING also.

 

What's a "9-line" Close Air Support ?

 

Is that IRIS-T on the spanish f18???

Now THIS is what I'd like to use - go away 9x.

Ah, sure.

 

nvm.

 

It seems so.

But why would you prefer it that much over the AIM-9X ?

What's a "9-line" Close Air Support ?

 

That's when a well known moderator and community manager here tidies up the threads

 

Joke aside, have a look at how to drop GBUs with the Hornet until there's a "teapot", e.g. LITENING II, availabe. That's the 9-line stuff.

The 9 line format is used by a JTAC (aka FAC) on the ground to control close air support by aircraft.

 

Close air support is when the ordnance is to be dropped in close proximity to friendly forces. The JTACs job is to ensure the pilot engages the correct targets, without endangering the friendly forces. Even if the aircraft is equipped with a targeting pod, this does not negate the need for a JTAC and brief when in close proximity to friendlies.

 

The 9 line format is standardized and provides all the necessary info to do this. It can be seen in game when you use the AI JTACs, and is as follows:

 

1 - Initial point

2 - brg from IP to target;

3 - rge from IP to target;

4 - target elevation in MSL;

5 - target description;

6 - target location (grid);

7 - mark to be used;

8 - location of friendlies;

9 - egress direction

 

Remarks and restrictions: may include mandatory attack headings, time on target, weapon to be used, etc.

 

Mandatory readbacks are lines 4,6 and remarks.

I cannot wait for LITENING.

I am so looking forward to being able to do full 9-line CAS with a sensor and lasing like we had in A-10C. For those of you that never flew the Hawg, you are going to love having the LITENING on your jet!

+1

That's when a well known moderator and community manager here tidies up the threads

 

Joke aside, have a look at how to drop GBUs with the Hornet until there's a "teapot", e.g. LITENING II, availabe. That's the 9-line stuff.

 

The 9 line format is used by a JTAC (aka FAC) on the ground to control close air support by aircraft.

 

Close air support is when the ordnance is to be dropped in close proximity to friendly forces. The JTACs job is to ensure the pilot engages the correct targets, without endangering the friendly forces. Even if the aircraft is equipped with a targeting pod, this does not negate the need for a JTAC and brief when in close proximity to friendlies.

 

The 9 line format is standardized and provides all the necessary info to do this. It can be seen in game when you use the AI JTACs, and is as follows:

 

1 - Initial point

2 - brg from IP to target;

3 - rge from IP to target;

4 - target elevation in MSL;

5 - target description;

6 - target location (grid);

7 - mark to be used;

8 - location of friendlies;

9 - egress direction

 

Remarks and restrictions: may include mandatory attack headings, time on target, weapon to be used, etc.

 

Mandatory readbacks are lines 4,6 and remarks.

 

Very good, thank you both!

 

But why would you prefer it that much over the AIM-9X ?

 

I guess because it will allow to simulate a full spanish hornet loadout?

 

Apart from that, both iris-t and aim9x are very similar capacity-wise.

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

I'm eagerly awaiting for the LITENING also.

 

 

 

What's a "9-line" Close Air Support ?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It seems so.

 

But why would you prefer it that much over the AIM-9X ?

 

 

 

Yes spanish hornets are much like C version capability wise..and can employ iris-t and meteor missiles

Yes spanish hornets are much like C version capability wise..and can employ iris-t and meteor missiles

I dont think they can employ meteor missiles as of now. I could be wrong though .

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

I dont think they can employ meteor missiles as of now. I could be wrong though .

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

 

 

According to this book, which I happen to own they can.

But maybe it is only a software compatibility but they don’t employ it..

 

According to this book, which I happen to own they can.

But maybe it is only a software compatibility but they don’t employ it..

 

Yeah I think its down to that. As of now the only meteor operator that happens to have the hornet is Spain (did i leave anyone out?), and in this case, I think Meteor will be left for the Typhoons. However in spain there is a unit called CLAEX in charge of SW updates and weapons integration, and i'm pretty sure they will integrate the meteor with the hornet, just in case there is an operational need. BTW is there any pictures of hornets with meteors already? :)

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

The 9 line format is used by a JTAC (aka FAC) on the ground to control close air support by aircraft.

 

Close air support is when the ordnance is to be dropped in close proximity to friendly forces. The JTACs job is to ensure the pilot engages the correct targets, without endangering the friendly forces. Even if the aircraft is equipped with a targeting pod, this does not negate the need for a JTAC and brief when in close proximity to friendlies.

 

The 9 line format is standardized and provides all the necessary info to do this. It can be seen in game when you use the AI JTACs, and is as follows:

 

1 - Initial point

2 - brg from IP to target;

3 - rge from IP to target;

4 - target elevation in MSL;

5 - target description;

6 - target location (grid);

7 - mark to be used;

8 - location of friendlies;

9 - egress direction

 

Remarks and restrictions: may include mandatory attack headings, time on target, weapon to be used, etc.

 

Mandatory readbacks are lines 4,6 and remarks.

 

You may have meant "restrictions" are mandatory readbacks. Remarks are not mandatory.

 

Only 4, 6, restrictions and the JTAC can also request additional readbacks.

You may have meant "restrictions" are mandatory readbacks. Remarks are not mandatory.

 

Only 4, 6, restrictions and the JTAC can also request additional readbacks.

 

Yes, that’s what I meant :)

Any idea on how these pods are interacted with in the cockpit. The Hog spoiled me by allowing almost exclusive operation through HOTAS, while the Harrier requires a lot of MFCD button pushes. Just curious where the Hornet is on the spectrum of user friendliness when it comes to TGP's.

You have the fov button for magnification and sensor select switch for selecting ddi...other then that is more similar to the harrier then to the A10...no china hat and no data management switch for zooming

You have the fov button for magnification and sensor select switch for selecting ddi...other then that is more similar to the harrier then to the A10...no china hat and no data management switch for zooming

 

 

Fair enough, thanks for the response!

Is there any chance to get TGP in next OB update?

No, only "several improvements include weapon accuracy and pullup cue...." like Wags said.

Maybe we get Datalink and HARM updates on February 27th. After that in March, I hope for the targeting pod.

So bad...

No, only "several improvements include weapon accuracy and pullup cue...." like Wags said.

Maybe we get Datalink and HARM updates on February 27th. After that in March, I hope for the targeting pod.

 

Not so fast... "Next week we plan a new Open Beta with some new and exciting Hornet features!" was what was in the weekend update on Friday. I'd expect to see at least the HARM and Datalink in the next beta...... Although, the Litening POD is probably still pretty far off.

so ultimately ED decided to add litening 2, on station 4 cheek capability even though neither US Navy nor USMC F/A18C hornets flew in such configuration.....

 

so much for authentic loadouts. Aim120 for wingtips when?

Edited February 18, 2020 by Kev2go

Isn't the cheek station uses by other f18 drivers like Canadian and maybe Spain?

 

I know there was comment that ED was targeting the USN/USMC specific ones, but it let's other countries use their actual loadouts and those that don't want to, don't have to I guess.

 

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

Isn't the cheek station uses by other f18 drivers like Canadian and maybe Spain?

 

I know there was comment that ED was targeting the USN/USMC specific ones, but it let's other countries use their actual loadouts and those that don't want to, don't have to I guess.

 

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

 

I know for sure RCAF uses the cheek station.

I know for sure RCAF uses the cheek station.

 

RAAF uses the cheek station too

My suspicion is that there were major delays with at ATFLIR, first to the point that the LITENING was introduced, and after to the point that a cheek mounting was available.

I think we will be waiting a very very long time for ATFLIR.

I like how people complain because the TPOD can't be mounted on the cheek station, then ED adds the capability, and people complain again that it shouldn't be mountable on the cheek station. ED really can't win with this community.