F/A-18C capability in EA

So I've been reading a lot about the Hornet so far and watched the awesome live streams.

Based on the info, it seems that the Early Access Hornet will be comparable to the A model in terms of sensors / weapons?

I didn't put a lot of time researching about the A model Hornet, but if you look at A-A radar with Sparrows, Sidewinders, no smart weapons or sensors it resembles the EA, C that we will soon get, right?

From what I've heard it's somewhat like an A model however the A model could carry LGBs (although they needed a separate designator), it could also carry AGM-65s and Walleyes with Datalink pod

The FAQ pretty much answers everything you need on what we're getting:

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=197186

But yes, EA is going to resemble the features from a much earlier version, but I suspect a lot of the more standard weapons will come very quickly.

That is the link giving the answer:

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3285514&postcount=13

No AG radar

Limited AA radar (no TWS)

Limited AA weapon option (no AIM-9X, no AIM-120)

No guided AG weapon

No targeting pod

No JHMCS

No L-16.

Overall incomplete F/A-18A...

Wags said in the last stream, after EA the next priority weapon was the AGM-88 HARM because flyable SEAD is sorely lacking in BLUFOR's inventory.

But as mentioned above,

-No advanced AAM

-AA radar STT only

-No guided AG

-No AG radar

-No TPOD

Wags said in the last stream, after EA the next priority weapon was the AGM-88 HARM because flyable SEAD is sorely lacking in BLUFOR's inventory.

Except BLUFOR has had very good SEAD capability for a long time already.

Viggen offers BK-90 standoff dispenser to actually perform SEAD/DEAD.

Harrier has 4x Sidearms for DEAD/SEAD.

A-10C has LGB/MAV for SEAD/DEAD.

And almost all can do SEAD.

S means Suppression, and you even use artillery for that.

All you need is the location of the target. Viggen has the emission recon capability, A-10C and harrier TGP, most have RWR and pilot have a map. You don't need to fly much to do basic triangulation for general location and then perform a SEAD missions.

What truly is lacking is the ground forces I as intelligence in AI. There is no automatic logic in air defences nor basic forces and that makes ground pounders live way too easy as they don't have a semi-realistic enemy in DCS to beging with!

Except BLUFOR has had very good SEAD capability for a long time already.

 

Viggen offers BK-90 standoff dispenser to actually perform SEAD/DEAD.

Harrier has 4x Sidearms for DEAD/SEAD.

A-10C has LGB/MAV for SEAD/DEAD.

 

 

And almost all can do SEAD.

 

S means Suppression, and you even use artillery for that.

All you need is the location of the target. Viggen has the emission recon capability, A-10C and harrier TGP, most have RWR and pilot have a map. You don't need to fly much to do basic triangulation for general location and then perform a SEAD missions.

 

What truly is lacking is the ground forces I as intelligence in AI. There is no automatic logic in air defences nor basic forces and that makes ground pounders live way too easy as they don't have a semi-realistic enemy in DCS to beging with!

Mavericks... for SEAD/DEAD...? No offense but I don't think that's very effective on most SAM sites...

Mavericks... for SEAD/DEAD...? No offense but I don't think that's very effective on most SAM sites...

Most SEAD missions has been done with rockets and bombs and CM is one of the most important part of it. To draw enemy fire to you etc.

--

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 is the link giving the answer:

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3285514&postcount=13

 

No AG radar

Limited AA radar (no TWS)

Limited AA weapon option (no AIM-9X, no AIM-120)

No guided AG weapon

No targeting pod

No JHMCS

No L-16.

 

Overall incomplete F/A-18A...

Remember that is the Initial Release capability, all "missing" capabilities coming later on sub-sequences updates.

Mavericks... for SEAD/DEAD...? No offense but I don't think that's very effective on most SAM sites...

Mavericks are very effective against SAM sites and are an excellent weapon to perform SEAD/DEAD with. Other effective weapons to perform SEAD/DEAD with include bombs, rockets and cannons in addition to longer ranged weapons. SEAD/DEAD is a mission- either the Suppression or Destruction of Enemy Air Defenses. That means using offensive weapons to attack air defenses to disrupt or destroy their capability to effectively counter an air attack. Enemy air defenses consist of more than just SAM's. They utilize IR and optical systems such as the Zu-23 and SA-9's and SA-13's as well. Fri13 is correct to point this out. What blue has been lacking is a truly effective ARM of similar capability to the Kh-58U that the Russian Su-25T carries to enhance the capability of the blue side to effectively counter the longer ranged SAM threat from outside their WEZ.

Remember that is the Initial Release capability, all "missing" capabilities coming later on sub-sequences updates.

Sure, I do hope so, but the question was "Early Access". So here it is :thumbup:

SEAD/DEAD is not about ARM missiles and long range SAM, that is small part of it.

Most SEAD missions has been done with rockets and bombs and CM is one of the most important part of it. To draw enemy fire to you etc.

Yes sure, Isreal tried that in 1973, look at their A-4 and F-4 loss rate Vs SA-6 :music_whistling:

Nobody wants to do this business this way anymore...

Yes sure, Isreal tried that in 1973, look at their A-4 and F-4 loss rate Vs SA-6 :music_whistling:

Nobody wants to do this business this way anymore...

How you are going to do SEAD/DEAD by using a long range missiles when they activate their ranging radar just second before shooting at you and you are dead in 2-3 seconds from that?

SEAD/DEAD ain't about launching a ARM against SAM site from a 300km distance. It is about going head down and hit a known location somewhere where AA unit was known to be.

The problem as well with SAM sites are that they can see your ARM missile on their radar screens and they will give it a new radiation location before moving a little bit so even a ARM with active millimeter radar that search fitting vehicle profile is fooled.

Actions you can do on desert or rocky mountains are different than what you can do in typical European landscape.

That is so wrong in DCS that ground units doesn't even have one bit logic that a human crew has. It is literally like someone going to shooting range and come to believe that he is amazingly good hunter after putting few holes on cardboard at 10m distance.

--

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.....

Tell me, how are you attacking "Buk" SAM (for instance), with additional short range protection with rockets and bombs without ARM missiles to force them to shut down (even for a short time) ?

A medium range SAM system (multiple units, multiple radars and launchers) moving during ARM flight time ? Really ?

Finally, yes, DCS Electronic battlefield could be better. But at least, AGM-88C will give the blue side something comparable to Red side ARM...it is what it is. Saying we don't need it to do SEAD in DCS isn't serious.

Tell me, how are you attacking "Buk" SAM (for instance), with additional short range protection with rockets and bombs without ARM missiles to force them to shut down (even for a short time) ?

 

A medium range SAM system (multiple units, multiple radars and launchers) moving during ARM flight time ? Really ?

 

Finally, yes, DCS Electronic battlefield could be better. But at least, AGM-88C will give the blue side something comparable to Red side ARM...it is what it is. Saying we don't need it to do SEAD in DCS isn't serious.

Rockets, bombs, or cannon for something like that aren't ideal, but if you have a human wingman (or three), and there's terrain masking enough to let you get into weapon range it can be done.

At times in the Su-25T in game I've gone with Kh-25L or Vikhrs to deal with short and medium range air defenses when the Kh-25MPU was acting weird for one reason or another. Or in cases where there's a mission time limit, and six missiles aren't enough to take on all the targets.

Retarded bombs or canisters can also be an option.

Where lack of a decent ARM really hurts is against long range systems like the Patriot or S-300, or in cases where there are mid range SAMs set up on top of the only hill in a very large flat area. If you've flown SEAD on the Black Sea map you may know the specific hill I'm thinking of when I typed that.

You can't carry that many ARMs so unless the AI is upgraded, or you have players running the air defenses as a JTAC or Commander, it's sort of limiting in any case. There may well be SAM units left after your rails are empty of HARMs or Kh-58s. So if you want to press on you have to go in with something shorter ranged.

Mind you, I'm not at all upset that the F/A-18 will be getting HARMs in DCS. It's really cool. In some ways though, having the plane is better than having the missile.

It's fast, nimble, small, and can carry quite a bit of payload. Oh, and don't ever forget that the sensor and display tools for getting rounds on target are very accurate and very pilot friendly.

If you have to go in at air defenses without a dedicated ARM, the A in the F/A-18 is really going to show it's worth.

I think you guys are misunderstanding the role of SEAD and anti-radiation missiles. "SUPPRESSION", not destruction.

The point is not to kill them, but to make them move and not be active, as you said, avoiding such a missile from long range is not that difficult, but you have to move or stay radar off. This gives your strike package a time window to operate.

If you kill the SAM, well that is a bonus. Mavericks and other weapons which are not reliant to radar source are better suited for DEAD

I think you guys are misunderstanding the role of SEAD and anti-radiation missiles. "SUPPRESSION", not destruction.

 

The point is not to kill them, but to make them move and not be active, as you said, avoiding such a missile from long range is not that difficult, but you have to move or stay radar off. This gives your strike package a time window to operate.

 

If you kill the SAM, well that is a bonus. Mavericks and other weapons which are not reliant to radar source are better suited for DEAD

SEAD/DEAD is also more than just attacking radar guided SAM's.

The main problem is that suppression is not modeled therefor all actions against air defenses are DEAD missions in game. The only thing that might pass as SEAD is playing as bait and running the launchers out of missiles. They still won't be suppressed though. They will just be empty.

I use Mavericks to pick off the track radars of long ranged SAM's so I can prosecute the target objective that they are covering. Without the track radar, batteries of SA-10's or SA-3's are useless.

The HARM will be a game changer for blue side because the F/A-18C will have a considerable self escort capability in addition to a long standoff range against radar guided SAM's. For radar gun systems, IR missiles and optical air defense systems the cannon, bombs, rockets and Mavericks are still going to be required for SEAD/DEAD.

When I refer to SEAD in DCS, I mean either the destruction or neutralisation of air defences. While that may not be what SEAD is IRL, you can't suppress air defences in DCS - as Vampyre has said above. You can either destroy them, disable them or force them to use all their ammo. That's about the extent of your abilities.

Against AAA, MANPADS, short range SAMs or non-radiating medium/long range SAMs, of course you would use bombs, rockets and AGMs - because you can get close enough to use them without being shot down (provided there's no air threat).

Against radiating medium to long range SAMs, I prefer to stay well out of their engagement range. Kh-58s are great for this, except against SA-10s and Patriots. Kh-25MPUs even less so, unless you're lucky enough to be able to use terrain masking to get within launch range. The F/A-18C and HARM pairing means I don't have to run the risk of having to dodge SA-10s or Patriots - only the missile does. And if the missile gets intercepted, you can go back and rearm - the SAM site takes longer to rearm than the plane does.

EDIT: Plus, the F/A-18C is much, much faster than the SU-25T so the F/A-18 might potentially be able to take off, launch, land and reload, take off and launch again before the Su-25T is turning back from its first engagement.

.

 

EDIT: Plus, the F/A-18C is much, much faster than the SU-25T so the F/A-18 might potentially be able to take off, launch, land and reload, take off and launch again before the Su-25T is turning back from its first engagement.

Actually Su-25T ain't slow at all.

When you go to fight with like 2x ARM and 2x S-8 pods, you can fly about 650-750kph. That ain't much slower that Hornet is with similar load. And once you unload Frog, you can almost go supersonic.

Hornet ain't fast as people often think, you don't go supersonic in A-G configuration.

And as Frog can land unprepared bases, it can do very quick turnaround before hornet is even back to carrier.

Hornet should be only about 10-30% faster depending configurations. But as hornet is far more fragile for ground fire, so you really stay away from all such engagement where it can get shot.

--

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.....

I regularly set my SAM radars to switch off more often than not, in 20-40 second bursts of "on". It's fairly easy to do with scripting. We will have to wait to see how they model the HARM modes and weapon memory before really having this discussion in anger, but I suggest you guys should play with them flipping on very irregularly, it's way more fun, if not very unsettling.

Read the online sources about the usage of radar to develop better gameplay ideas.

I regularly set my SAM radars to switch off more often than not, in 20-40 second bursts of "on". It's fairly easy to do with scripting. We will have to wait to see how they model the HARM modes and weapon memory before really having this discussion in anger, but I suggest you guys should play with them flipping on very irregularly, it's way more fun, if not very unsettling.

Read the online sources about the usage of radar to develop better gameplay ideas.

Yea, the Shrike didn't have a memory so shutting off radar worked, but the AGM-88 remembers the source location. Should be pretty interesting to see how servers like blueflag and yours handle that. Guess more and more deadly SAMs will be a thing.

That's the thing, if you read accounts of SAM operators in Bosnia, they will show you how accurate HARMs are after a rigorous EMCON. The guy I read about talks about misses by 30 metres when he moved every 2-3 days and only allowed 20 seconds of tracking radar before a move. This was the chap in charge of the F-16 shootdown and the F-117 too. He survived the rather restrained NATO campaign and lived to talk about it. Others didn't.

I'm yet to test DCS on this with the EMCON set at a good operators average tracking radar exposure to see if the miss rate is equivalent, but we would want to see something in DCS that sits in the ballpark, ie a tracking radar remaining on for a good HARM flight time. I guess 20 seconds was a golden rule of thumb that defeated the memory, assuming no one was ready to fire at the exact time...mind this guy was achieving lock on after launch. If you listen to the cockpit recording of the F-16 shoot down you don't hear too much in terms of RWR warning, at all...scary stuff.

Yea, the Shrike didn't have a memory so shutting off radar worked, but the AGM-88 remembers the source location. Should be pretty interesting to see how servers like blueflag and yours handle that. Guess more and more deadly SAMs will be a thing.

That's the thing, if you read accounts of SAM operators in Bosnia, they will show you how accurate HARMs are after a rigorous EMCON. The guy I read about talks about misses by 30 metres when he moved every 2-3 days and only allowed 20 seconds of tracking radar before a move. This was the chap in charge of the F-16 shootdown and the F-117 too. He survived the rather restrained NATO campaign and lived to talk about it. Others didn't.

 

I'm yet to test DCS on this with the EMCON set at a good operators average tracking radar exposure to see if the miss rate is equivalent, but we would want to see something in DCS that sits in the ballpark, ie a tracking radar remaining on for a good HARM flight time. I guess 20 seconds was a golden rule of thumb that defeated the memory, assuming no one was ready to fire at the exact time...mind this guy was achieving lock on after launch. If you listen to the cockpit recording of the F-16 shoot down you don't hear too much in terms of RWR warning, at all...scary stuff.

Can MOOSE make mobile SAMs move around randomly on their own? That would be pretty cool.

I regularly set my SAM radars to switch off more often than not, in 20-40 second bursts of "on". It's fairly easy to do with scripting. We will have to wait to see how they model the HARM modes and weapon memory before really having this discussion in anger, but I suggest you guys should play with them flipping on very irregularly, it's way more fun, if not very unsettling.

Read the online sources about the usage of radar to develop better gameplay ideas.

As well we would need correct optical guidance and lock targets just in final seconds before missile reach targets etc.

Things we don't have in DCS to make every pilot day a nightmare...

--

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.....

I regularly set my SAM radars to switch off more often than not, in 20-40 second bursts of "on".

Mind sharing please? :)