Spamraams - Hornet

Its an old DCS model tho the new F-18C is going to be updated. My post got deleted for that reason.

 

Message has been deleted. Reason: Not new Hornet

reality has a tendency to get in the way of theory

 

Right on the spot! :D

Really strange A/A configuration.. a great A/A power.

However I think that 2 AIM-9 or other IR missile should always be loaded.. sometimes the enemy is able to keep near You and so You should have all the fire solutions.

At the end, correct me if I'm wrong, If an F-18 plan to stay in the air for a long time since it has so much AIM-120 it should load 2 ext tanker.

So the powerest real A/A configuration could be: 2 Tanker - 6 AIM-120 (MRM) - 2 AIM-9 (SRM)

Edited January 15, 2018 by Joker69°

In reality it should be possible to carry 10 AIM-120C on the Hornet, am I correct ?

 

Correct. Eight under the wings and two on conformal stations or whatever the armpits are called. :D Can't recall.

 

Really strange A/A configuration.. a great A/A power.

However I think that 2 AIM-9 or other IR missile should always be loaded.. sometimes the enemy is able to keep near You and so You should have all the fire solutions.

At the end, correct me if I'm wrong, If an F-18 plan to stay in the air for a long time since it has so much AIM-120 it should load 2 ext tanker.

So the powerest real A/A configuration could be: 2 Tanker - 6 AIM-120 (MRM) - 2 AIM-9 (SRM)

It depends on the flight profile, but in pure A-A role I'd use 6x AIM-120 on the inner pylons and armpits, 2x AIM-9M/-9X on the tips and a centerline tank, with outer pylons removed. If you loiter a lot, I'd guess the two-tank config could indeed be reasonable, but the weight/drag penalty offsets some of the added fuel. I am under impression that the config of three external tanks makes little sense for any reasonable combat flight profile.

 

I'd figure completely removing the outer pylons, and carrying a single centerline tank can give almost similar combat endurance to having the twin LAU-127s under the outer pylons and two external tanks under the inner ones. Again, it certainly depends.

Edited January 15, 2018 by AKarhu

Yes, I agree with you.. 3 external tanks are only for NAV transfer. When You are in A/A Mode You need zero, 1 or 2 tanks depending of NM and time you plan to stay in the sky..

6 MRM and 2 SRM as maximum A/A Power. Obviously in case of problems you can always eject the tanks and have a fighter with much more ACM capability.

Swiss and Finnish Hornets do have foldable wings, which country had that version?

I don't think Spanish version features foldable wing tips. Don't know anyway if they are fixed or not. Anyway, don't recall haven't seen a Spanish Hornet carrying a tip Amraam, what doesn't mean they aren't able.

 

 

S!

And of course, while I don't think it has anything to do with the wingtip AMRAAMs, having the wing fold mechanism inoperable doesn't really speak much at all about the structure of the wing. Anyways, at least the wing fold handle is in place in Spanish Hornets - or has been - by quickly searching up some photos.

will still be great if we can get up to 10 Amrams with those add on launchers ( even if it cant carrry wingtips) :D

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 16, 2018 by Kev2go

And of course, while I don't think it has anything to do with the wingtip AMRAAMs, having the wing fold mechanism inoperable doesn't really speak much at all about the structure of the wing. Anyways, at least the wing fold handle is in place in Spanish Hornets - or has been - by quickly searching up some photos.

You're right I remember some pics back in the day, like 1986-87, when Hornet first arrived of some Spanish Hornet featuring folded wings. Since then and bearing in mind they are fully ground operated and plenty of room, I don't recall having seen any more pics on the subject (though some more Hornets were bought later featuring naval items). Don't really know if the system is still there or not, but since they don't use it it may well have been fixed/reinforced in the latter overhauled versions. Still don't recall having seen them using Amraams, AFAIK Spanish Air Force have it though.

 

 

S!

You're right I remember some pics back in the day, like 1986-87, when Hornet first arrived of some Spanish Hornet featuring folded wings. Since then and bearing in mind they are fully ground operated and plenty of room, I don't recall having seen any more pics on the subject (though some more Hornets were bought later featuring naval items). Don't really know if the system is still there or not, but since they don't use it it may well have been fixed/reinforced in the latter overhauled versions. Still don't recall having seen them using Amraams, AFAIK Spanish Air Force have it though.

 

 

S!

 

Swiss and Finnish AF actually benefit from the wing fold, as both employ underground aircraft facilities, originally dimensioned, I'd guess, for Mirage III (Switzerland) or MiG-21/Draken (Finland).

 

The wing fold mechanism itself is quite an elaborate part of the wing structure, not sure how simple it would be to strengthen the wing in overall even if it was disabled. Anyways, I don't think the wing fold feature itself is really related at all to the tip launcher capability.

I asked Wags in a life stream some time ago if we will be able to have twin pylons for example to load 10 slammers and he said "Yes!"

He did then though point out that you can already see aim9x on twin pylons in his videos so not 100% sure if he was more responding to the twin pylons than the slammer load.

10 AMRAAMS and 2 AIM-9X and 1 TANK is an Authorized loadout.

The 120 also had HOBS programming now.

Your first pic is a Super-Hornet @reiser.

10 AMRAAMS and 2 AIM-9X and 1 TANK is an Authorized loadout.

 

Heh, better hope you fire half of them off before you get to the merge.

 

:lol:

Heh, better hope you fire half of them off before you get to the merge.

 

:lol:

 

Yeah - as far as I can gather, a dual AMRAAM pylon assembly weighs something like a 1000 pounds each.

Heh, better hope you fire half of them off before you get to the merge.

 

:lol:

 

Well, this is where the "game balance" concern gets answered for all the people that somehow manage to not regard DCS as a sim.

 

 

Bluefor is being handicapped by enabling a loadout that provides an irresistible temptation for many players to try dogfighting with as much mass and drag as they can possibly pile onto their plane.

 

 

It should be a godsend for Redfor flyers, . . .

 

 

as soon as they manage to break the habit of trying to superglue extra R-27 ER/ETs onto their Sukhois.

Yeah - as far as I can gather, a dual AMRAAM pylon assembly weighs something like a 1000 pounds each.

 

LAU-115C+Dual LAU-127 = 294 lbs

So like 964 lb with 2 AMRAAM ?

LAU-115C+Dual LAU-127 = 294 lbs

 

1x BRU-32 (76 lbs)

1x LAU-115C (120 lbs)

2x LAU-127(2x 87 = 174 lbs)

2x AIM-120(2x 335 = 670 lbs)

 

76 + 120 + 174 + 670 = 1040 lbs

Edited February 24, 2018 by Alfa

1x BRU-32 (76 lbs)

1x LAU-115C (120 lbs)

2x LAU-127(2x 87 = 174 lbs)

2x AIM-120(2x 335 = 670 lbs)

 

76 + 120 + 174 + 670 = 1040 lbs

 

So all of that weighs as much as a Phoenix missile.

So all of that weighs as much as a Phoenix missile.

 

Yeah I guess :)

1x BRU-32 (76 lbs)

1x LAU-115C (120 lbs)

2x LAU-127(2x 87 = 174 lbs)

2x AIM-120(2x 335 = 670 lbs)

 

76 + 120 + 174 + 670 = 1040 lbs

 

if you want to go that route,

 

you forgot the weight of the SUU-79, and the AIM-120C Warheads

 

So:

 

1x SUU-79 = 350

1x BRU/32 = 79

1x LAU-115C = 120

2X LAU-127A = 87 * 2 = 174

2x AIM-120C = 348 or 356 w/ Warhead depending on Block, we'll assume Block IV or Newer so 356 * 2 = 712

 

 

So, Grand total Of: 1435 lbs

So what?

Can't the LAUs be jettisoned if needed?

With a2a refueling available it is still easily doable in DCS. Even for the trolling joy of it...

Noone will chew your ass if you dump a boatload of expensive missiles in a sim.