F/A18E/F Super Hornets block 1 and BLock 2 E/F ( lot 26)

I would love a superhornet. Though i'd rather have the 2 seat version to add something we dont have on the f18c from ED.

And i would love an AESA radar...

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

Didnt a mod team/Wanted to be 3rd party try the F-18E or something and ED said no :thumbup:

Didnt a mod team/Wanted to be 3rd party try the F-18E or something and ED said no :thumbup:

ED Never said no, CoreTex was developing one, and they folded due to circumstances not involving ED or DCS.

If your looking a the E variant, might as well throw in the Rafale and Grippen on the wishlist.

Personally, I don't see what the rush is to later gen fighter jets, when there are so many other jets that would be great additions DCS. Ed would probably agree.

If your looking a the E variant, might as well throw in the Rafale and Grippen on the wishlist.

 

 

Personally, I don't see what the rush is to later gen fighter jets, when there are so many other jets that would be great additions DCS. Ed would probably agree.

You've not read a single thing from the OP if you think this is the equivalent making adding rafayle or gripen a viable project

You've not read a single thing from the OP if you think this is the equivalent making adding rafayle or gripen a viable project

What more do you want? current F/A-18 already has an advantage over any other fighter in DCS, the E variant is a lot more than 25% larger Airframe size and new air intakes, it has more powerfull engines and has a lot more to offer that won't be discussed here.

The current F/A-18 is nowhere been close to been completed and people want the next more improved version, you even have comments, "no we want block 2" lol ..... where does it end? UAVs?

We have the F-14 soon, hopefully, the F-16 and A-7 coming in the near future that's good enough for the next 2-3 years and hopefully by then the current F/A-18c will be close to completion.

I have to agree with F900EX here, as cool as it would be to have a Super Hornet its not really needed in DCS at the moment especially with so many other modules that are coming down the pipeline, such as the ones F900EX mentioned as well as the Mi-24, F-15E Strike Eagle, F-4 Phantom, etc.

If Echo Foxtrot or Golf were to be in DCS, they'd likely only be AI anyway.

Biggest issue is they're close enough to the same thing visually and capability wise to have extensive 'overlap' as module, but are sufficiently different that nothing could ACTUALLY be reused between them. From a financial perspective, it's probably a situation of high expenditure for uncertain gain.

For example, F-16C may be functionally similar to the F-18C, but it LOOKS very different. Meanwhile the Super Hornet is functionally very similar but ALSO visually very similar. I think instances of multi-version aircraft we've received so far had extensive overlap physically and functionally, but that wouldn't be the case here, necessitating a full 'from scratch' situation.

Biggest issue is they're close enough to the same thing visually and capability wise to have extensive 'overlap' as module, but are sufficiently different that nothing could ACTUALLY be reused between them. From a financial perspective, it's probably a situation of high expenditure for uncertain gain.

 

For example, F-16C may be functionally similar to the F-18C, but it LOOKS very different. Meanwhile the Super Hornet is functionally very similar but ALSO visually very similar. I think instances of multi-version aircraft we've received so far had extensive overlap physically and functionally, but that wouldn't be the case here, necessitating a full 'from scratch' situation.

Not entirely from scratch.

The an/apg73 phase 2 radar coding can be copy pasted. Atflir plus its symbology stays the same.

And a good chunk of coding related to mfd pages can be reused. Requiring only some alteration ( like alpha numeric colour which is something modes have already done) and expansions to accommodate a few changes. As well as the ability to duplicate mfd pages via ufcpd. To name a few.

I otherwise understand what you mean f16 is a different service aircraft that is functionally similar but different

Hence why the f16c will be much closer to being a from scratch project than a fa18e would

What more do you want? current F/A-18 already has an advantage over any other fighter in DCS, the E variant is a lot more than 25% larger Airframe size and new air intakes, it has more powerfull engines and has a lot more to offer that won't be discussed here.

 

The current F/A-18 is nowhere been close to been completed and people want the next more improved version, you even have comments, "no we want block 2" lol ..... where does it end? UAVs?

 

We have the F-14 soon, hopefully, the F-16 and A-7 coming in the near future that's good enough for the next 2-3 years and hopefully by then the current F/A-18c will be close to completion.

And now all you've do e is moveyour goalpost..

No says this has to be added now, or before ed finishes the hornet out of ra

. And I didnt even say ed is the only one allowed to make it, but it would be practical given thier experience of creating the legacy hornet and the research the put into it and some of the code used.

A) dcs is a sim. This isnt war thunder were balance should be an excuse for hampering development of new modules.

B)

Why have more aircraft? Because people like aviation. And this sim is ever expanding. Plus it's also a business. They cant just stop making aircraft. , They still have bills to pay

By your logic why bother develop an f16c or an f15e if thier mission profiles overlap, and poor poor redforce cant throw in as many mission comparable aircraft.

Before you decided to change your goalpost, the point I addressed was one of the major points of this op. Killing the misconception that the f/a18e/f is too classified or too modern, compared to the legacy hornet we have.

Asking for gripen or rafayale ir even a block 2 superhornet is unrealistic.

Those are not feasible because of not enough information being accessible to make an accurate enough simulation at the present.

These wouldnt ever happen unless es ir a 3rd party got an exclusive contract to make a sim for respective aircorces and got permission for a civilian version.

A Super Hornet would be very cool, however in this case I wouldn't expect it for awhile, I think think the customer base for the Super Hornet and Legacy Hornet would overlap a little too much and many potential customers would buy one or the other rather than both in the case of say the F/A-18C and the upcoming F-16C.

Practical business stuff aside, I would love to see a Super Bug in DCS world! If I'm remembering correctly Wags was asked about Super Hornet AI units in a past interview (I am unsure which one) and he said something to the effect of, yes they would look into it and would want to do the external model very well cause its a module they might look at in the future. Not to get anyones hopes up, just showed that it is on ED's radar.

The Super Bug would be a great addition simply for the increased endurance and extra stores compared to the Legacy Hornet. That said, if they were serious, I'd prefer it be the Block 2 with the APG-79 AESA radar. I realize that's tougher to simulate over the APG-73 because of classified material. It would be the first true 4.5 generation aircraft in DCS.

I'd love to see functional AI Growlers, but thats the end of the topic for me. Even that, I'd rather Prowlers simply because it would fit the timeline better.

Not entirely from scratch.

 

The an/apg73 phase 2 radar coding can be copy pasted. Atflir plus its symbology stays the same.

 

And a good chunk of coding related to mfd pages can be reused. Requiring only some alteration ( like alpha numeric colour which is something modes have already done) and expansions to accommodate a few changes. As well as the ability to duplicate mfd pages via ufcpd. To name a few.

 

I otherwise understand what you mean f16 is a different service aircraft that is functionally similar but different

 

 

Hence why the f16c will be much closer to being a from scratch project than a fa18e would

You're forgetting that appearances arent everything, the Processors in the Super Hornet and the Redundancy are entirely different.

The Screens may look the same, but I guarantee the Software behind them isn't as "copy/paste" as you are making them out to be.

You're forgetting that appearances arent everything, the Processors in the Super Hornet and the Redundancy are entirely different.

 

The Screens may look the same, but I guarantee the Software behind them isn't as "copy/paste" as you are making them out to be.

Man you really like to play the contrarian don't you? in another thread you went out of your way to make out the to make out to be the SH to closer to Legacy.

You can try to play contrarian and twist what i say allyou want, but Im not forgetting anything. Ive discussed quite in depth both similarities and Changes within OP. 90% of the software was the same in the Block 1 super Hornets to the Legacy Hornets. of the time period.

The further update processor Software suite updates started with LOt 25 series. ( which are not substantial Changes in the grand scheme of things) Redundancy is only related to the FCS pages which can be adjusted accordingly, and again varies on the LOT. ALl; ive said ive said there are Codes that can be reused, and that it still easier to work with a platform from the same family. I never said all was the same. So my point is stil valid stands the Super Hornet has far more commonality with the Legacy, than a Viper, But lets not make it about that.

Even so would we even notice a processor upgrade? its not like the Legacy Hornet stutters or crashes because its CPU cant keep up with tasks. Its one of those things that we as pilots likely wouldn't even notice.

The Super Bug would be a great addition simply for the increased endurance and extra stores compared to the Legacy Hornet. That said, if they were serious, I'd prefer it be the Block 2 with the APG-79 AESA radar. I realize that's tougher to simulate over the APG-73 because of classified material. It would be the first true 4.5 generation aircraft in DCS.

I suppose ED will always chose what is more readily available to avoid unnecessary estimation .

But AFAIK thats the Prime difference TBH between Say a F/A18E/F Block 1 production Lot 25-26 and a Intial Block 2 variation.

Primarily just the addition of the AESA RADAR. IRST another features followed on a few years over time to Block 2. But your right you could saythat Block 1s dont quite fit into 4.5 gen category, and are arguably still 4th generation fighters

Thats why id personally prefer a Lot 25 Super Hornet Block 1, despite having less similarities to the Legacies. It already has the new DDI displays, and designers were already making room to accommodate for future planned upgrades ( block 2) so Both variations could intentionally made. A block 1 and then eventually a block 2 followup if ED has enough information ( or is feeling confident enough for guesstimates) in the form of a retrofitted Block 1 to block 2 standards, as was intended with these late Block 1 lot productions.

Lots 21 through 24 / LRIP 1-3, All had the Updated Processors that are part of the super hornet design itself.

Lot 25 introduced HOL, New Displays and prepared airframes for Block II configurations, because Lot 24 was the first Lot to be eligable for fleet upgrade to Block II or Block 1.5 as some pilots call it, since not all of the Block II features made it to the upgrade due to structural design of the nose section.

Lot 26 started Block II

Most of the Block I / LRIP Hornets are no longer being deployed and are in reserve roles with Sqns that stay stateside.

Those Airframes will be the first to be replaced by Block III, and some will be rebuilt to Block III.

I never said A Lot 1 Super Hornet would be an easy copy/paste.

I suggested that once the Lot 20 Legacy and all systems are complete it would be an Easy PORT.

Meaning alot of the sub systems would be easily ported from one to another AFTER the main systems are done and the base cooding is complete.

If it is superbug, I'll definitely buy it. Even if it's $100.:thumbup:

Not entirely from scratch.

 

The an/apg73 phase 2 radar coding can be copy pasted. Atflir plus its symbology stays the same.

 

And a good chunk of coding related to mfd pages can be reused. Requiring only some alteration ( like alpha numeric colour which is something modes have already done) and expansions to accommodate a few changes. As well as the ability to duplicate mfd pages via ufcpd. To name a few.

 

I otherwise understand what you mean f16 is a different service aircraft that is functionally similar but different

 

 

Hence why the f16c will be much closer to being a from scratch project than a fa18e would

Really? Is the current F/A18C Lot 20 using the same radar model as the F/A18E BLK1? Phase II AN/APG73?

Lots 21 through 24 / LRIP 1-3, All had the Updated Processors that are part of the super hornet design itself.

 

Lot 25 introduced HOL, New Displays and prepared airframes for Block II configurations, because Lot 24 was the first Lot to be eligable for fleet upgrade to Block II or Block 1.5 as some pilots call it, since not all of the Block II features made it to the upgrade due to structural design of the nose section.

 

Lot 26 started Block II

 

Most of the Block I / LRIP Hornets are no longer being deployed and are in reserve roles with Sqns that stay stateside.

 

Those Airframes will be the first to be replaced by Block III, and some will be rebuilt to Block III.

 

 

I never said A Lot 1 Super Hornet would be an easy copy/paste.

I suggested that once the Lot 20 Legacy and all systems are complete it would be an Easy PORT.

 

Meaning alot of the sub systems would be easily ported from one to another AFTER the main systems are done and the base cooding is complete.

Correctly, the F-18E BLK I has been partially upgraded to BLK II's AMC&D, and the radar is still APG-73 V2, but MC is not AYK-14V. Try something like VRS F-18E.

Really? Is the current F/A18C Lot 20 using the same radar model as the F/A18E BLK1? Phase II AN/APG73?

yes SH ( block 1s) were fitted with the Same radar starting from lot 21 going to Lot 25.

ITs only with the block 26 and afterwards are the first production Block 2, with the AN/AGP 79 AESA radars as the new fitted radar .Prior Lot 25's as the last batch of BLock 1 Super Hornets, but unlike earlier lots were made future proof to be eventually retro fittable (at least to an extent) to anticipated Block 2 standards, these also first to come with the newer LCD DDI displays that are commonly seen in current service block 2's

So id say for a developmental perspective given on information available ideally a Lot 25 would be best option.

Hypothetically in a future event if enough data becomes available on the AN/APG 79 AESA radar, ED or any 3rd party could just offer a Module upgrade ( Kinda like ED did with NS430) to turn Lot 25 into Block 2 standard plane by allowing upgrade to the AESA radar.

F/A-18E Super Hornet

The Super Hornet seems to be superior to the Hornet. It has more powerfull engines better avionics and can carry more load.

I think that if the work to make it requires many resources then why do it DCS already has the hornet maybe its better to do another plane...But if its a almost ready project i think i will be very happy that dcs had the super hornet:)

The Charlie version of ED its incredible, i wish a Super Hornet, but not like a Better versión, just like a complement to the charlie version in joint navals ops. But its was really interesting see a Foxtrot Version to play Multiplayer on a two seat Super hornet like in the Heat Blur F14, That will help a lot for training purposes and make a this "Wishlist Module" a completely different module to enjoy.

The Charlie version of ED its incredible, i wish a Super Hornet, but not like a Better versión, just like a complement to the charlie version in joint navals ops. But its was really interesting see a Foxtrot Version to play Multiplayer on a two seat Super hornet like in the Heat Blur F14, That will help a lot for training purposes and make a this "Wishlist Module" a completely different module to enjoy.

Agree, the 18F would be a much better option, it would set it apart from the single seat F-18C, and it would give people a naval alternative to the Future F-15E module in the ground attack role. Makes a nice middle ground between the two modules