Hornet vs FC3 PFM Jets

True the MiG-31 can't maneuver worth anything, but it could just provide BVR cover for MiG-29Ss or Su-27Ss that could obliterate the enemy in WVR. Besides, it's just fun to shoot at enemies before they can shoot at you, I once used a mod that allowed me to use the R-24T, R-33, R-40T, and R-77 on the Su-27, and those+R-60M on Su-33 (so, I know what the R-33 is like).

Many tactics can't be used now with Su-27 as weapons systems are not modeled, that would give the edge.

That changes even more now when F-18C should get far better radar features and capabilities that others modeling lacks. But if it comes as well more realistic radar and targeting system simulations, we will see more WVR than BVR combat.

--

I usually post from my phone so please excuse any typos, inappropriate punctuation and capitalization, missing words and general lack of cohesion and sense in my posts.....

Many tactics can't be used now with Su-27 as weapons systems are not modeled, that would give the edge.

Which ones do you mean?

Which ones do you mean?

--

I usually post from my phone so please excuse any typos, inappropriate punctuation and capitalization, missing words and general lack of cohesion and sense in my posts.....

Even the Ability of the SU27SM to guide 2 SARH missiles simultaneously would be a game changer.

Many datalink ones. Target sharing between flight, target generations via GCI etc. We have just basic datalink capability.

Just keep in mind that FC3 F-15C is missing a lot of features that will be coming with DCS Hornet:

- JHMCS

- AIM-9X

- L16 datalink

:music_whistling:

Even the Ability of the SU27SM to guide 2 SARH missiles simultaneously would be a game changer.

Change to see it can they manage to do that with new radar simulations as all BVR combat would get limited changes.

--

I usually post from my phone so please excuse any typos, inappropriate punctuation and capitalization, missing words and general lack of cohesion and sense in my posts.....

Just keep in mind that FC3 F-15C is missing a lot of features that will be coming with DCS Hornet:

- JHMCS

- AIM-9X

- L16 datalink

 

:music_whistling:

Not to mention APG63(V)2 AESA (along with the unique possibilities that entails), AMRAAM flight profiling & guidance, a host of EW possibilities and, yes, ANY datalink functionality whatsoever.

You are correct, BOTH sides of the FC3 module have been pretty heavily sanitised in some game changing areas.

But you'll never see it because it never happened. You might want to stick with an R-77 for a game-changer.

Even the Ability of the SU27SM to guide 2 SARH missiles simultaneously would be a game changer.

Just keep in mind that FC3 F-15C is missing a lot of features that will be coming with DCS Hornet:

- JHMCS

- AIM-9X

- L16 datalink

 

:music_whistling:

Will those come to the F-15C, as well as the F/A-18C?

When AAM guidance receives a general overhaul all modules should benefit, but there are no plans to implement JHMCS or datalink in the F-15C per an ED post some time ago, of memory serves.

This view may not be shared by all DCS World players, but I sometimes find that the FC3 jets are more difficult to use in combat because you have to remember so many keybinds for your hotas and keyboard, with the Full Fidelity jets all you have to remember is the Hotas commands and then your mouse does the rest...

I find learning the cockpit to be easier to remember than the FC3 keybinds even if the models themselves are simplified

This view may not be shared by all DCS World players, but I sometimes find that the FC3 jets are more difficult to use in combat because you have to remember so many keybinds for your hotas and keyboard, with the Full Fidelity jets all you have to remember is the Hotas commands and then your mouse does the rest...

 

I find learning the cockpit to be easier to remember than the FC3 keybinds even if the models themselves are simplified

Haha never thought of it like that. Difference I guess is that once those keybinds become muscle memory the process of flying and fighting in the jet is a fair bit quicker and more efficient in a lot of cases.

When it comes to modern fighters, DCS modules will have a lot of advantages. Yes, forgetting to fence in on time is A disadvantage, sure.

When it comes to older aircraft, DCS jets would dominate them harder than FC3 jets anyway.

Will those come to the F-15C, as well as the F/A-18C?

well for JHMCS & AIM-9X, no, since the F-15C in DCS is from like the 90's to early 2000's, just before JHMCS was implemented into NATO aircraft.

well for JHMCS & AIM-9X, no, since the F-15C in DCS is from like the 90's to early 2000's, just before JHMCS was implemented into NATO aircraft.

FC3 F-15C is too simplified to point a specific period. At least it deserve the L16.

As far as the radar is concerned, it's simplified even compared to 1979 F-15C (which I suspect is the source of inspiration for HUD and radar).

If the SAMs would be even 20% capable what they are in reality, your HARMS would be wasted in most cases anyways.

in reality radar operators were terrified of HARMs. During KOSOVO radar operators would shut down the second they heard "magnum".

Harms aren't wasted if they are never fired.

in reality radar operators were terrified of HARMs. During KOSOVO radar operators would shut down the second they heard "magnum".

 

Harms aren't wasted if they are never fired.

NATO did shot a lot of HARM :smilewink:

NATO expended a total of 743 AGM-88 HARM anti-radiation missile rounds, launched by EA-6B Prowlers, F-16CJ Weasels and Tornado ECRs. The most notable aspect of this chart is that more than 50% of HARMs were fired at mobile SA-6 batteries, which suffered the lowest attrition of any Serbian radar guided SAM type.

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-2009-04.html#mozTocId368006

NATO did shot a lot of HARM :smilewink:

 

 

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-2009-04.html#mozTocId368006

Fascinating stat - particular wrt the surviveability of the mobile SA6s. I wonder how this influenced the development of weapons like JSOW, JASSM, SDB, AARGM etc...

It's yet another aspect of modern air warfare that would make a fascinating addition to DCS - high(er) fidelity SAM modelling. It would be an absolute game changer on multiplayer servers to know that there are numerous player-controlled GBAD systems out there waiting for you.

The strike packages we'll be able to put together with the Hornet might make this a more attractive form of gameplay for some too...

in reality radar operators were terrified of HARMs. During KOSOVO radar operators would shut down the second they heard "magnum".

 

Harms aren't wasted if they are never fired.

Like you think that pilots broadcasted their communications and locations so widely?

That radar operators didn't simply turn off radars without correct procedure after seeing HARM launched toward them on radar scope?

There are many ways how you can defeat HARM launchs. But the idea that they just sit there listening a cracked radio frequency just a magic word and then panicking is just more urban legend than truth.

SEAD Is successful if you're able suppress enemy air defence, better if even without attacking them.

But Kosovo war is so full lies from NATO that it is difficult to know what really happened there.

--

I usually post from my phone so please excuse any typos, inappropriate punctuation and capitalization, missing words and general lack of cohesion and sense in my posts.....

Fascinating stat - particular wrt the surviveability of the mobile SA6s. I wonder how this influenced the development of weapons like JSOW, JASSM, SDB, AARGM etc...

 

It's yet another aspect of modern air warfare that would make a fascinating addition to DCS - high(er) fidelity SAM modelling. It would be an absolute game changer on multiplayer servers to know that there are numerous player-controlled GBAD systems out there waiting for you.

 

The strike packages we'll be able to put together with the Hornet might make this a more attractive form of gameplay for some too...

Lots of functions should be made by ED as core ground troop logic so air units wouldn't own areas without efforts.

--

I usually post from my phone so please excuse any typos, inappropriate punctuation and capitalization, missing words and general lack of cohesion and sense in my posts.....

That I have been saying. CAS/SEAD pilots currently doesn't have the danger and risk they should have. SAM or almost any AA is more as a dummy for procedure training, than actual anti-air unit.

 

Lots of functions should be made by ED as core ground troop logic so air units wouldn't own areas without efforts.

 

 

 

--

I usually post from my phone so please excuse any typos, inappropriate punctuation and capitalization, missing words and general lack of cohesion and sense in my posts.....

Yes I agree. This would have big effects on both red and blue teams. Red would have to be more careful using terrain masking and low altitude notching en route/over the FEBA to counter blue AWACS and AMRAAMs, while blue would need to be careful of SAM traps set by highly lethal & mobile red team medium/long range SAM systems (Kub/Buk/Tor/S300 etc). Would be lots of fun!

They aren't necessarily wasted if they don't hit either ... that's why it's SEAD, not DEAD.

in reality radar operators were terrified of HARMs. During KOSOVO radar operators would shut down the second they heard "magnum".

 

Harms aren't wasted if they are never fired.

I wonder how this influenced the development of weapons like JSOW, JASSM, SDB, AARGM etc...

Probably a lot. What GGTharos said is true, SEAD was the doctrine back then.

Now, USA and NATO are pushing toward DEAD.

From what I understand, AARGM is designed to find its target, even if emission is turned off.

FC3 F-15C is too simplified to point a specific period. At least it deserve the L16.

 

As far as the radar is concerned, it's simplified even compared to 1979 F-15C (which I suspect is the source of inspiration for HUD and radar).

based on whats written in the manual late 90s- early 2000s fits the description.

based on whats written in the manual late 90s- early 2000s fits the description.

For instance no Raid Assesment Mode which was available in the 1979 manual :music_whistling:

No tactical situation display on the MPCD, not datalink (even simplified like on Su 27).

No faithful reproduction of HOTAS commands...

If you have an open source link about late 90' - early 2000' F-15C weapon system please share :smilewink:

I don't see the point about arguing if the FC3 F-15C weapon system is simplified or not => it is.