Hornet vs Viper

Online typically has planes taking off and immediately fighting, making fuel load not a concern. The F-16 has less range and is more impacted by fuel tanks than big fighters like the F-14 and F-15.

 

 

DCS also makes raw performance more influential than in reality because EW is so basic. The F-16 needs to carry an external jammer, which would be a handicap if ECM mattered. Also, while the F-16 has a small radar, FC aircraft are basically crippled in terms of avionics capability. With missiles now getting proper ranges you can shoot on a F-15 or Su-27 before it can even detect you, which is crazy.

under what conditions? Even with the supposedly inferior FC modelling i can typically discover F/A18's or Vipers within 60 - 70 nautical miles, and thats at 1000-2000m. At such low altitudes its generally impossible for amraams to want to go further than 15 nautical miles. They have the SA advantage purely because of Link 16, not because the radar is so good that they can close the gap to under 20 NM without ever being seen.

ONly at high altitudes can you expect to lob them and at high altiudes without any terrain in the way it should be even higher detection probability.

So there should be no way even with dumbed down systems that F15C will not see Hornets or Vipers, under 20 nautical miles to allow them first detection capability. IF thats the case then its a pilot issue not a aircraft system issue.

Generally I get 40 (INT PRF)-60 (HI) mile detection range out of the Eagle while in the F-16 it's between 60-80. This is head on detection, with other aspects being a bit less. I can go back and double check the numbers, but the new AMRAAM can pretty easily cover 40 miles. With the new loft profile, flying low doesn't provide as much protection (besides breaking radar line of sight of course) since the missile only has to deal with thick air during the terminal dive.

I don't see why the F-16's wouldn't want to stay high, though if they needed to stay low for some reason Datalinks can still provide them with good SA and let them know when to popup and lob a missile. It's not to say that this will happen in every engagement, but it's a possibility.

I also have to put out a disclaimer that I don't really fly online so I'm basing this on my own offline testing.

Generally I get 40 (INT PRF)-60 (HI) mile detection range out of the Eagle while in the F-16 it's between 60-80. This is head on detection, with other aspects being a bit less. I can go back and double check the numbers, but the new AMRAAM can pretty easily cover 40 miles. With the new loft profile, flying low doesn't provide as much protection (besides breaking radar line of sight of course) since the missile only has to deal with thick air during the terminal dive.

 

 

I don't see why the F-16's wouldn't want to stay high, though if they needed to stay low for some reason Datalinks can still provide them with good SA and let them know when to popup and lob a missile. It's not to say that this will happen in every engagement, but it's a possibility.

 

 

 

I also have to put out a disclaimer that I don't really fly online so I'm basing this on my own offline testing.

Yes if a MP servers allows F14B + Aim54, that is a reason for any pilots to wary of high altitude flying. :D

IL have to test the OB build. I haven't done any serious online MP flying in OB as of yet due to performance issues that everyone is constantly complaining about ( stuck to stable for online flying) , so i am totally ignorant of noticing any amraam changes.

going from being able to wishfully hope for a max 15 nm to a 40 nautical miles with an Aim120 shot at low altitude sounds too good to be true!

going from being able to wishfully hope for a max 15 nm to a 40 nautical miles with an Aim120 shot at low altitude sounds too good to be true!

It's a completely different missile, you should definitely try it out. The guidance needs tuning and will often mess things up, but the kinematics are far beyond what they used to be.

It occurred to me I hadn't really tested it on low flying targets until now though. This shot missed due to losing track of the target but it got pretty close, even with the missile veering from side to side due to the wonky seeker logic:

EDIT

Have not uploaded to Youtube in a while, for some reason the video is in really low resolution, it was supposed to be 1080.

Yes if a MP servers allows F14B + Aim54, that is a reason for any pilots to wary of high altitude flying. :D

 

 

IL have to test the OB build. I haven't done any serious online MP flying in OB as of yet due to performance issues that everyone is constantly complaining about ( stuck to stable for online flying) , so i am totally ignorant of noticing any amraam changes.

 

going from being able to wishfully hope for a max 15 nm to a 40 nautical miles with an Aim120 shot at low altitude sounds too good to be true!

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

All the people writing here that the Viper outdoes the Hornet in DCS BFM have assuredly played against AI Hornets only. With the current FMs Hornet has better Rate and Radius. Vipers only advantage is the thrust though it‘s almost never enough to win the fight (talking guns only). I invite everyone who thinks differenly to go up against me, viper vs hornet.

All the people writing here that the Viper outdoes the Hornet in DCS BFM have assuredly played against AI Hornets only. With the current FMs Hornet has better Rate and Radius. Vipers only advantage is the thrust though it‘s almost never enough to win the fight (talking guns only). I invite everyone who thinks differenly to go up against me, viper vs hornet.

people are talking big picture not just guns only. I can cont the number of times i had a bfm merge in multiplayer that turned guns only i would be able count them if had only 1 hand, with fingers to spare.

In missiles acm the Viper is even more outclassed then in a gun scenario. Systems and performance wise.

In missiles acm the Viper is even more outclassed then in a gun scenario. Systems and performance wise.

This assertion is based on...?

This assertion is based on...?

As already stated based on the fact that the Hornet with the current FM has Radius and sustained + instantaneous rate advantage. Furthermore, playing energy in the Viper whilst relying on thrust becomes infinitely more dangerous when missiles are involved.

Systems wise the Viper is not even locking targets with jhmcs automatically. Slaving Aim-9 seeker to the hmd is painfully slow when compared to the hornet.

Systems wise the Viper is not even locking targets with jhmcs automatically. Slaving Aim-9 seeker to the hmd is painfully slow when compared to the hornet.

jhmcs doesn't lock automatically in Hornet either unless you are using radar close combat modes and they slew seekerhead onto target, and in that case you can do the same with the viper.

Still need to cage/uncage seekers either way . Utilizing f16 jhmcs is not painfully slow, works fine.

As entertaining as these topics can be, i'll try and make a serious post to give my opinions on the subject. In essence, i agree with this:

yea basically this. the F18 and Viper are close matches in a dissimilar way.

To elaborate, based soley on my personal (and limited - i do not consider myself expert or even particularly good with both planes) experiences with both planes in DCS, i have come to the following conclusions:

PvE: having flown one against the other and either against other planes, these two are really close indeed. Yeah, they fly differently, and they seam to like different altitudes more, but whenever i go with one against the other, i feel much less distinction then if i take, say some other plane, like the M2000 or the F-14. For my own personal taste, i find the F-16 a bit more "stiff" then the F-18, but also more "speedy". Between 5000 and 15000 ft, i really fly both planes the same when going against AI's. Bellow this, the 18 is less hampered by it's lack of thrust, and above this the 16 is less alpha and g limited.

PvP: i haven't really flown enough of either against other people, but i have flown against both in other planes, mostly in the F-14. At the start of my MP sessions, the Hornets seamed more dangerous, mainly because of their ability to bleed energy rapidly and shorten their turning radius. Mind you, i'm only talking WVR here. It took some time before i was able to "read" the 18's current state and act accordingly, but once there, they are just like any other bandit, only as good as the pilot behind the stick. After several months of fighting both however, tend to think that a well flown 16, is more likely to give me hard times then a well flown 18. Maybe (just maybe) this is related to the fact that the 18 is more of a bank and yank plane then the 16 and as such it attracts more novice players. You are more likely to win a random gunfight if you just pull on the stick in the Bug, then you are in the Viper. Against more experienced flyers it's a different ball of course, but that level of experience is not the norm out there, at least not on public servers.

BVR i think deserves its own paragraph. Despite the better radar, and larger ordnance capacity, for my tastes and likes, the Viper holds an advantage. I can not stress how important is the ability to add a few dots on the mach meter before you actually loft your Fox 1 or Fox 3. And the Viper is just plain better at that across the board. The odd things is, i don't seam to notice the gross player base actually take the advantage of this. Maybe it's because 90% of open server clashes are at tree top altitudes and down there, the thick air doesn't help missile ballistics all that much. Still.....if i had a penny for every time i managed to hit a bandit with a Fox 2 at ranges that would put your average Sparrow to shame...... Dunno, maybe people are over reliant on HOBS.

Finally....... that whole thing about equal pilot skill...... there ain't no such thing. And even if there were, are we considering equally bad, or equally good? Cause in the first case, they probably end up shooting each other in the face, so.......a draw? And in the 2nd case, even if they merge, they are most likely to make a couple of turns and then head back to base, to live and fight another day. So......again a draw? Even in a gun fight, i just don't see any tactic or move performed by one of them, that doesn't have a response available to the other to counter it.

There you go, my several dozen of cents, i know it's a bit of a long one, but hey, it's a good topic!

jhmcs doesn't lock automatically in Hornet either unless you are using radar close combat modes and they slew seekerhead onto target, and in that case you can do the same with the viper.

 

Still need to cage/uncage seekers either way . Utilizing f16 jhmcs is not painfully slow, works fine.

Well, of course I'm talking close combat modes, since there is no other way to lock with jhmcs. You should be able to do the same in the viper, though this is not the case atm. Hornet locks automatically when the reticule is over the target, in the viper you have to hit tms up when on the target to achieve a lock.

True, you have to uncage/cage seekers in both, but in the Viper you also have to slave the radar to the jhmcs in order to be able to slew it with the hmd.

After several months of fighting both however, tend to think that a well flown 16, is more likely to give me hard times then a well flown 18.

Nice summary. Though if in the 14 either Hornet or Viper gives you hard times, then it solely comes down to the difference in Pilot skill. In that case also a sabre can be a dangerous opponent.

Another thing to factor in is, if you really want to be dangerous in a hornet in air 2 air and against good pilot, forget carrying 10 amraams. Take 4 amraams ans 2 9x with 2 bags that you should drop before the engagement.

A clean hornet with 4 MRM + 2 SRM is a much closer match to a viper and accelarates incredibly fast. Put a double amraam launcher and all your accelartion goes to hell.

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

F/A-18C has HUGE DRAG. Does not exist in the reality. ED has to do something for that. We all know why they are giving boost to F-16C. It's obvious

F/A-18C has HUGE DRAG. Does not exist in the reality. ED has to do something for that. We all know why they are giving boost to F-16C. It's obvious

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

Another thing to factor in is, if you really want to be dangerous in a hornet in air 2 air and against good pilot, forget carrying 10 amraams. Take 4 amraams ans 2 9x with 2 bags that you should drop before the engagement.

 

A clean hornet with 4 MRM + 2 SRM is a much closer match to a viper and accelarates incredibly fast. Put a double amraam launcher and all your accelartion goes to hell.

 

 

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

This is the point :thumbup:. The staff wants to load 10 AIM120. There is no way. With 2x120 and 2x9X you can fly mach 2 above 40.000ft for sure.

I think it's a bug, but even single AMRAAM pylons on the wings destroy the Hornet's acceleration. I've compared the two a few times, here are the rough accelerations from ~M 0.85 at 30000 ft:

Wing mounted AIM-120's slow the Hornet down more than external tanks on the F-16, but with 4AAM it's OK.

falcon_120

YouTube

C.W. Lemoine

Real F/A-18 Pilot Tries DCS: F/A-18 - Part TWO

18:00 talks about F/A-18C DRAG

falcon_120

 

 

YouTube

C.W. Lemoine

Real F/A-18 Pilot Tries DCS: F/A-18 - Part TWO

 

18:00 talks about F/A-18C DRAG

F-16 and F/A-18 at FL400 and FL500 with 2x120 and 2x9X about 35% of fuel.

16, FL400

16, FL500

18, FL400

18, FL500 (the most significant difference)

I don't know if it serves a lot, but it's more to spice up the discussion. :D

You need to provide data to ED not just words from real pilot. As have been said by the COO herself, ED is data driven developer.

On top of that he right away says it may be due to the throttle curve. If you watch the entire thing he comments that the entire throttle range in game seems to be compressed into a smaller region than the real thing according to his experience.

Nice summary. Though if in the 14 either Hornet or Viper gives you hard times, then it solely comes down to the difference in Pilot skill. In that case also a sabre can be a dangerous opponent.

Against a sabre you can easily disengage at will, be it tomcat, hornet or viper , purely because all of them have vastly superior T/W ratio and top speed that is so disproportionately better to the sabre they may as well be UFO', making typical dog fighting entirely unnecessary. Its not exactly a winning strategy to bet that all pilots are so dumb as to not be able to do anything other than do horzontal turn pulling as much as they can on their stick to fly in circles.

The only missiles sabre could ever carry would be a pair of Aim9B's which are such absolute **** and have extreme limitations for their launch parameters they entirely unsuitable for any meaningful BFM manuvers, not to mention are easily spoofable even when flying in a straight line.