F/A-18C Armament Thread

Sorry if this has been asked before, but will AIM-132 ASRAAM will be available for F/A-18C Hornet?

Thanks

It won't as it is not used by the USN or the USMC.

Sorry if this has been asked before, but will AIM-132 ASRAAM will be available for F/A-18C Hornet?

Thanks

No, Not in use by USN or USMC,

Planned Weapons/Sensors List is Here:

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

Was there any conclusion on dual-rack GBU-12s or -38s?

Was there any conclusion on dual-rack GBU-12s or -38s?

Pretty confident that dual-rack GBU-12s will be possible, we have to wait for confirmation if dual-racked GBU-38s will happen.

GBU-12 yes. The GBU-38 is another story because the BRU-33 does not support/doesn't have wiring to support and employ the bomb. You'd need the BRU-55 instead. That's all I could find.

I haven't read through all the pages of this thread, but has anyone proposed an active seeker head CAP AIM-9 for training missions? This would be another AIM-9 added to the armament list where the seeker head was able to lock up targets but not fire nor would it have a warhead TM-Pack.

F/A-18C Armament Thread

That's a thing already. See the latest screenshots of the hornet released by Matt. They were using dummy Sidewinders

Can the F/A-18C carry a single AIM-9 on stations 2, 3, 7 & 8?

Or can it only carry the double AIM-9 configuration on those stations?

Can the F/A-18C carry a single AIM-9 on stations 2, 3, 7 & 8?

Or can it only carry the double AIM-9 configuration on those stations?

Don't believe you can load a single AIM-9 to the rail, but I suppose you could load 1 on the dual rack

This might help

http://www.thebaseleg.com/keyword/gbu38/i-zP4sb3w/A

Don't believe you can load a single AIM-9 to the rail, but I suppose you could load 1 on the dual rack

I havent seen single AIM-9s on 2,3,7,8, I've only seen dual Via LAU15C+2x127

I havent seen single AIM-9s on 2,3,7,8, I've only seen dual Via LAU15C+2x127

Same here. Wonder if it's capable of doing it and that they just don't do it like that in practice.

Also, your picture shows Hornet carrying Mavericks on the inner pylons. Isn't Hornet limited to two AGM-65's on the outer pylons?

Also, is USN Hornet able to carry armaments on the center-line pylon like your picture shows? Or is that only used by USMC Hornets?

Depends on Block and OFP.

Usually they are only loaded on 2 and 8.

Depends on Block and OFP.

Specifically the Hornet we're getting.

Do we know what version of the AGM-88 we are getting?

Will we also be getting the TAS for use with the HARM? If TAS was ever actually in service. I know it was tested with the F-18C.

Edit: Found a post from Wags. Looks like it's the AGM-88C. I see no mention of TAS in his post though. Does anyone know if the ATFLIR can be used with the HARM or will we just be using the basic modes of the HARM?

Do we know what version of the AGM-88 we are getting?

Will we also be getting the TAS for use with the HARM? If TAS was ever actually in service. I know it was tested with the F-18C.

...

 

Following the early access release, we plan to include many more sensors, weapons, and decoys for the final product. Please note that this list is also subject to change:

 

• 
  
• AGM-88C HARM
  
• AGM-45A/B Shrike
  
• AGM-84D Block 1C Harpoon
  
• AGM-84E SLAM
  
• AGM-84H/K SLAM-ER
  
• AGM-65E Maverick
  
• AGM-65F/G Maverick
  
• AGM-154A JSOW
  
• AGM-154C JSOW
  
• Walleye I ER/DL
  
• Walleye II ER/DL
  
• GBU-10 Paveway II
  
• GBU-12 Paveway II
  
• GBU-16 Paveway II
  
• GBU-24B/B Paveway III
  
• GBU-38 JDAM
  
• GBU-31 JDAM
  
• GBU-32 JDAM
  
• AIM-9X Sidewinder
  
• AIM-120B/C AMRAAM
  
• Mk-40 Destructor Sea Mine
  
• Mk-63 Quickstrike Sea Mine
  
• Mk-77 Fire Bomb
  

 

Decoys:

• ADM-141 TALD
  
• GEN-X
  

 

Thanks

Do we know what version of the AGM-88 we are getting?

Will we also be getting the TAS for use with the HARM? If TAS was ever actually in service. I know it was tested with the F-18C.

 

Edit: Found a post from Wags. Looks like it's the AGM-88C. I see no mention of TAS in his post though. Does anyone know if the ATFLIR can be used with the HARM or will we just be using the basic modes of the HARM?

AFAIK the TAS never entered operational service. I'm not aware of any benefits from the ATFLIR to the HARM, so I'm pretty sure it will just be the basic HARM modes. It's not a Growler ;)

Why not the AGM88D? not enough information im guessing?

Agm88C has become redundant now. in 2003, All AGM88C's began being converted to the AGM88D standard, which includes GPS/INS aided modes for its Guidance system.

Why not the AGM88D? not enough information im guessing?

 

Agm88C has become redundant now. in 2003, All AGM88C's began being converted to the AGM88D standard, which includes GPS/INS aided modes for its Guidance system.

Did a little digging into the differences between all the variants, and I stumbled on this:

However, as of 2005, no AGM-88Ds were listed in the Navy's inventory, and it therefore appears that either the procurement of Block VI upgrade kits has been cancelled or the upgraded missiles are still referred to as AGM-88B/C.

Source: http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-88.html

Look like the navy got on the backlist for conversion? Waiting for existing stores to be expended and replaced by newly made 88D's, or that they were just designated 88C still. Either way this refers to 2005 which i believe was the year 'our' Bug was aiming for.

Did a little digging into the differences between all the variants, and I stumbled on this:

 

 

 

Source: http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-88.html

 

Look like the navy got on the backlist for conversion? Waiting for existing stores to be expended and replaced by newly made 88D's, or that they were just designated 88C still. Either way this refers to 2005 which i believe was the year 'our' Bug was aiming for.

I suppose that explains it.

But in all honesty there really isnt all that much difference ( at least from what i can find from public sourced info) between the upgrades that US navy F/A18C legacy hornets had accumulated by year 2005, and the ones that are in service up until today save for getting some better munitions options perhaps. ( IE newer aim9x Blocks or Newer Harms like the AGM 88E for EG)

The Legacies or on thier last legs, and by schedule set to be fully retired by 2022. SO one probably wouldnt expect the NAvy to invest any more money in a platform that is going to be gone soon, and is already in the minority IRRC ( Far greater SUper Hornet to Legacy Hornet Ratio)

...

It's probably much like you said; some newer blocks for already integrated weapons. Though you had a fair point asking about the HARM-D, since that has the big transition to basically a GPS guided frag weapon which slaves its own GPS mark to the radiation point. Very big change for the SEAD game, though we don't really have to worry about the C/D version in DCS I guess, since radar doesn't really switch itself off on a 'Magnum' call over the radio.

And even if it did turn of their radars, I doubt many people would consider the HARM-C running off into a town or something :doh:

Can AGM-88C be used to lock and fire on ship radars?

Like the Su-25T can do it in DCS?

the HARM operational range is 92nm? Wow. That's one heck of a stand off distance.

Can AGM-88C be used to lock and fire on ship radars?

Like the Su-25T can do it in DCS?

The thing hit a B-52's tail gunner radar..

If the radar operates in the freq range of the HARM's RF sensor, yes. Just know that target movement can significantly degrade the missiles performance. Especially if the radar spins slowly or is blinking on and off. (ie if the HARM seeker gets intermittent updates while the target is moving, its pk will drop)

In the B-52's case, while the target WAS moving, it's tail gun radar was more or less fixated in the direction of the HARM's seeker (ie constant updates)

The thing hit a B-52's tail gunner radar..

 

If the radar operates in the freq range of the HARM's RF sensor, yes. Just know that target movement can significantly degrade the missiles performance. Especially if the radar spins slowly or is blinking on and off. (ie if the HARM seeker gets intermittent updates while the target is moving, its pk will drop)

 

In the B-52's case, while the target WAS moving, it's tail gun radar was more or less fixated in the direction of the HARM's seeker (ie constant updates)

Wow! Amazing.

I hope that DCS will simulate this. :)