F/A18E/F Super Hornets block 1 and BLock 2 E/F ( lot 26)

It's even more than that, 2 versions of the F-4E plus the naval Phantom and then the other platforms. If the Strike Eagle turns out well, Razbam may attempt it one day but even they are neck deep in different projects. TBH, I'd rather see a paid update to our Charlie Hornet, A-10 style. Having a newer C+ USMC jet with GBU 54, better HOTAS functions and smaller improvements (double altitude readout, AOA readout when trimming), colored DDIs and so on. In fact, having a paid update may incentivize ED to revisit the current deficiencies in certain systems of the Hornet, like the INS-navigation suite or the radar workflow or the lack of MSI.

Let's see if ED can finish the current Lot 20 Hornet first. If they do a good job delivering that, I'd definitely pay for an upgrade, whether we're talking about a C+ or just a mid-to-late 2010s avionics upgrade, like in the A-10C 2. As it is, I'm not paying for an upgrade to a half-finished module.

I would also be more than happy to pay full price for a Rhino module from ED, provided they finish the Hornet first (as a proof of concept) or from another developer (obviously the Hornet's status wouldn't matter, if it's another dev).

dont see the point of a C+, its a low production variant that wont be deployed.

17 hours ago, SkateZilla said:

dont see the point of a C+, its a low production variant that wont be deployed.

Yeah, I'm not hung up on the C+ specifically, call it a late 2010s C, an A++, a CF-18, F/A-18 F or whatever. If it's going to be an upgrade from ED to the current Lot 20 Charlie Hornet, similar to the A-10C II, they should first properly finish the current Hornet first.

But this is of course not important if another dev picks it up a Rhino.

Edited February 14, 2022 by Harker

6 minutes ago, Harker said:

But this is of course not important if another dev picks it up a Rhino.

I speculate (and emphasize this word) that the issue with the Hornet is that it was full of new tech that required ED to make completely new API for certain functions that were never supported before. And due to that, they must have blown through the budget allocated for the Hornet. Plus, when initially doing certain systems, they probably didn't have the full picture (or had imprecise SMEs or documentation) which lead to a fundamental misunderstanding of what MSI is in the Hornet alongside many smaller things. Having an upgraded version would probably allow them to have enough resources to properly finish at least some of the pressing issues.

14 hours ago, WobblyFlops said:

I speculate (and emphasize this word) that the issue with the Hornet is that it was full of new tech that required ED to make completely new API for certain functions that were never supported before. And due to that, they must have blown through the budget allocated for the Hornet. Plus, when initially doing certain systems, they probably didn't have the full picture (or had imprecise SMEs or documentation) which lead to a fundamental misunderstanding of what MSI is in the Hornet alongside many smaller things. Having an upgraded version would probably allow them to have enough resources to properly finish at least some of the pressing issues.

The budget for core API development should be separate from individual project (module) budget, since it is not specific to one project (module). And literature review is an essential first step of any such project and has its own budgeted hours, same as everything else. If what you said turned out to be true, then it would point to very bad practices, both from the upper  management (project planning, hour planning) and the development/team leading sides (bad literature review and implementing stuff without consulting manuals). At least some of this is probably the case and if it it is, then the company will have to take the hit and still deliver the product they charged for. That's fine, managers can make mistake and employees aren't perfect all the time, it's human. The motivation to be the perfect employee is not always at 100% and that's just part of reality, no matter the industry. I'm more interested to see how they handle that though, because if they don't take the hit and deliver anyway, then it gives me no indication that it won't be repeated. Furthermore, if they cannot flesh out the systems of a Legacy Hornet, then I doubt they can do so for a Rhino.

But again, if they deliver on the Hornet and then announce a Rhino (or an upgrade to the Hornet), I'll be the first to buy it.

22 minutes ago, Harker said:

But again, if they deliver on the Hornet and then announce a Rhino (or an upgrade to the Hornet), I'll be the first to buy it.

Fair, and I don't disagree with this. 

On 2/12/2022 at 8:45 PM, SkateZilla said:

C+ Hornets are likely Classified in terms of the upgraded avionics, outside of the known items, there are many new items that are still classified

Also the order is about to be reduced to 15 fighters from 19, which was dropped to 19 from 25 and to 25 from 30,

USMC may have to face facts, as far as US Navy and funding is concerned, the Legacy Hornet is dead. why dump money into it and upgrade it only to retire it in 8 years, by time the last C+ comes back to the USMC it will fly for 4 years. One of them has already crashed and isnt recoverable, so that will make 14 total C+ Hornets, if anything, they can use them as a buffer aircraft between the hornet and the F-35, because the C+s will never go on another navy deployment, so there's little point to even having them.

 

 

I think you miss the point of the C+ .  It's not an upgrade to make it a frontline fighter.... it's a cheap upgrade of an old paid-for airframe, to allow cheap state-side TRAINING flights in a "future cockpit" airframe. I'll bet it will be used to introduce future F-35 pilots to that style "sensor fusion" and situational awareness workflow... not in a simulator but a real afterburning, G pulling Mach + fighter. A "flying simulator" if you will.

It's cheaper than a Super, and can do most of the training for Super. Using parts that are gonna soon be out of the system, parts long ago paid for. Basically, by spending a little on the upgrade, they save the taxpayer a lot, and get some remaining value from millions already spent. And the minute it costs more than it's worth, they'll be dropped like it's hot! 

It was never about upgrading to deploy, it was likely about concern over airframe hours on the Superhornets, wanting to extend the life of those frames by offloading thousands of hours onto old airframes that otherwise would be scrapped anyway. Really this is about saving money for the budgets, it's smart financially. And operationally for saving the Supers' wear and tear, maintenance costs and airframe hours. They'll drain the last of the Legacy parts, and one by one as they are no longer flyable they will be retired. 

 

2 hours ago, Rick50 said:

 

I think you miss the point of the C+ .  It's not an upgrade to make it a frontline fighter.... it's a cheap upgrade of an old paid-for airframe, to allow cheap state-side TRAINING flights in a "future cockpit" airframe. I'll bet it will be used to introduce future F-35 pilots to that style "sensor fusion" and situational awareness workflow... not in a simulator but a real afterburning, G pulling Mach + fighter. A "flying simulator" if you will.

It's cheaper than a Super, and can do most of the training for Super. Using parts that are gonna soon be out of the system, parts long ago paid for. Basically, by spending a little on the upgrade, they save the taxpayer a lot, and get some remaining value from millions already spent. And the minute it costs more than it's worth, they'll be dropped like it's hot! 

It was never about upgrading to deploy, it was likely about concern over airframe hours on the Super hornets, wanting to extend the life of those frames by offloading thousands of hours onto old airframes that otherwise would be scrapped anyway. Really this is about saving money for the budgets, it's smart financially. And operationally for saving the Supers' wear and tear, maintenance costs and airframe hours. They'll drain the last of the Legacy parts, and one by one as they are no longer flyable they will be retired. 

 

Umm,

The C+ was supposed to be 30 Airframes, Upgraded and extended to 8K Hours, enough to field 2 Sqns until F-35B/C's are all delivered (which are now delayed).

Those Sqns were also supposed to Deploy with the USN, however, the USN already announced after the Legacy Hornet Rapid Retirement to aid in USMC Fleet Readiness issues, that the USN will not be carrying any Legacy Hornet maintenance or fleet supplement items on their deployments.

USN Dropped it from 30 to 25 to 19 then to 15 airframes being upgraded, and the final number will be 14, as 1 has crashed and is not recoverable.
Originally they wanted the USMC Hornets to be able to be close to the super hornet blocks on deployment, but since they are not longer going to be used on deployments, the USN has slowly reduced the number of airframes they want upgraded.

It'd be better off as a Trainer for Pilots wanting to transition to USN Super Hornets,
As the C+ is literally a C airframe retrofitted with the Late Block II Lot 28 Equiv. Cockpit Systems and Displays, with exception of the Radar (which was scheduled to be updated with OFP-29C+), Current APG-79 will not fit in a -C nose housing, -79v4 is reduced in size for legacy hornets, and USMC would be upgrading about half their fleet to AESA -79v4s, but even that is now being suspended after the initial 9 were delivered.

C+ is pretty much a C Sent back to Cecil Field to be gutted, depot level maintenance, extended to 8K Flight Hours and upgraded to Lot 28 Spec systems.

The F-35B/C is completely different sensor system, and cockpit workflow than even the C+

They can better class it as Boeing Upgrade test program for canada and other Legacy Hornet Operators.

Edited February 14, 2022 by SkateZilla

On 2/12/2022 at 12:39 AM, Harker said:

On 2/12/2022 at 12:08 AM, Kev2go said:

in a sidenote Im wondering how is it some Super Hornets have Green font/ symbology. Though most have White?
 
IS this a feature that pilots can choose? or is Green font from an older software suite that still hasn't been phased out? ( this video is from 2018 btw)
 
 

Can't say for sure, but I think it's just a color option. In DCS, you can choose your display font color in the Harrier through the EHSD page, as it carries modern MPCDs.

 

But Legacy Hornets never had an option to change display? they had colour MPCD starting in 1989 introduced with lot 12's and then circa 2003ish  MPCD's were starting to be replaced with AMPCD's. 

 

I have seen footage of some USN Legacy Hornets having white font on AMPCD . So i would assume its option it came only with a newer software suite than what we have in DCS on our legacy Hornet? 

 

Edited February 16, 2022 by Kev2go

 
But Legacy Hornets never had an option to change display? they had colour MPCD starting in 1989 introduced with lot 12's and then circa 2003ish  MPCD's were starting to be replaced with AMPCD's. 
 
I have seen footage of some USN Legacy Hornets having white font on AMPCD . So i would assume its option it came only with a newer software suite than what we have in DCS on our legacy Hornet? 
 

I never said that the AMPCD in Legacy Hornets was unable of doing the same, I don't know if it did IRL. I said that the font color in those Rhino videos is probably pilot selectable and not fixed to one color, as is the case for the DCS Harrier. It could be a software feature that was introduced later than 2003 or different LCD panels using the same button interface. I don't know enough to say.

On 2/17/2022 at 12:54 AM, Harker said:

On 2/16/2022 at 9:23 PM, Kev2go said:

 
But Legacy Hornets never had an option to change display? they had colour MPCD starting in 1989 introduced with lot 12's and then circa 2003ish  MPCD's were starting to be replaced with AMPCD's. 
 
I have seen footage of some USN Legacy Hornets having white font on AMPCD . So i would assume its option it came only with a newer software suite than what we have in DCS on our legacy Hornet? 
 

I never said that the AMPCD in Legacy Hornets was unable of doing the same, I don't know if it did IRL. I said that the font color in those Rhino videos is probably pilot selectable and not fixed to one color, as is the case for the DCS Harrier. It could be a software feature that was introduced later than 2003 or different LCD panels using the same button interface. I don't know enough to say.

Yeah, I can't speak for the F/A-18C but in the F-16C you can set the colour freely for pretty much anything you want in the data cartridge, even the individual colour of different types of symbology on the FCR and HSD. So it's not completely unreasonable that the F/A-18C would have something similar for its colour displays.

Count me as very hopeful to one day see a proper F/A-18E and EA-18G in DCS World.   Or at least one that doesn't supplant the F/A-18C.  Let's just say my fav jet to photograph is the G, then the E, then the F.

I hope the modern displays/computer have an option for general font color, I still like green better over white for now.

17 hours ago, Worrazen said:

I hope the modern displays/computer have an option for general font color, I still like green better over white for now.

 To each his own. But I think the white font overlays better over the Moving map. maybe thats just me ( based on mod i used for font change and DDI changes) 

More important than font colour I  certainly prefer seeing TGP and Radar Mapping in Greyscale.

 

 

Timing for releases such as the F/A-18 Super Hornet can depend on things.   For example, I would be very surprised if DCS released a special edition F/A-18 for the upcoming movie called Top Gun:  Maverick.  

movie releases have no impact on ED's schedule, nor does it influence anything,

if that were the case, they woulda waited till 2024 for the Iron Eagle Reboot to release DCS:F-16

With the recent release of Top Gun: Maverick, is there new interest from ED to model an early Rhino version? I imagine, there could very well be interest from the market since currently only MSFS and other non-study level sims have it model (albeit really badly). 

Thinking/typing out loud for a second, The Warthog had a recent update (Tank Killer) that required an additional purchase so I don't see why the Rhino couldn't act as an additional revenue stream for ED; I for one would be willing for pay for it.

While I'd go for an F/A-18F (especially if we can get colour DDIs), there's enough problems with the current Hornet (both in terms of missing functions and functions that don't work properly), which would carry over to the Super Hornet (and potentially add some more).

It would have to be a separate module, although as far as flying it, some things would transfer from the Hornet. It seems major features listed in the Hornet's planned feature list are all being worked on, right now, so now it's the time to call out any serious omissions and bugs in the existing ones.

Either way, I don't believe ED still has no plans to do the Superbug, not after watching the damn movie.  Unless someone beat them to it, that is. I hope when it comes, we'll get both E and F, preferably with Jester flying the back seat on the latter.

7 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

Unless someone beat them to it, that is. I hope when it comes, we'll get both E and F, preferably with Jester flying the back seat on the latter.

I like to hear that.

I repeated thousand times on this forum that F/A-18F(block 1 is ok) is a "must to fly" aircraft for me as tomcat driver. 

On 2/18/2021 at 1:17 PM, BIGNEWY said:

Hi,

 

welcome to the forum, It is not in our plans sorry. 

After 100500th thread like this, don't you think it's time to pin this info on top of this forum sub-section?

 

I think there are currently two threads about Rhino on the same page of this sub-section.

Edited May 29, 2022 by killkenny1

11 hours ago, obious said:

With the recent release of Top Gun: Maverick, is there new interest from ED to model an early Rhino version? I imagine, there could very well be interest from the market since currently only MSFS and other non-study level sims have it model (albeit really badly). 

Thinking/typing out loud for a second, The Warthog had a recent update (Tank Killer) that required an additional purchase so I don't see why the Rhino couldn't act as an additional revenue stream for ED; I for one would be willing for pay for it.

A lot of people want the Super Bug, trust me. It would be very nice to have a USN 4.5gen aircraft, but there's the rub: How do you sell it? Answer is very, very simple. You won't be able to easily. Why? Well, let's go through the list:

1. In terms of weapons, the only thing it can carry that the legacy can't, is the AIM120D. It might be able to carry some other toys as well, but I'm not entirely sure off hand.
2. While the Super Hornet has longer legs, and better engines, it's thrust/weight ratio is actually worse than the Legacy (0.93 vs 0.96)
3. You get two extra stores... that are rated for missiles, or small (and I mean less than 500lbs) bombs only.
4. Systems wise, you're looking at a Hornet 2.0.

Basically, for ED to really sell this thing to current Hornet drivers, they'd have to do it the same way they did the A-10CII. As an expansion to the existing F/A18C Module, rather than a full stand alone product. For best results, I'd argue that they'd be better off with the F version, as it offers multi-crew to the mix, and gives more reason for people to want the upgrade. So, the upgrade package would offer:

1. Multi-crew airframe
2. two extra hardpoints for weapons
3. improved engines
4. increased range without bags
5. increased MTO
6. A better ACLS
7. And other small features

But to pull this off, ED would need to make:

1. A new model
2. A new flight and damage model
3. A new engine performance model (because of the new engines)
4. Add a new radar to the mix
5. An AI for the back seat to handle the Fs functions in the back

That's almost a full module just in those items alone, and I don't think it'd be fair of us to ask they do the work required to make a full module, and only charge the upgrade cost. Yes, they can save work because the two share many systems... but there's still quite a bit of work to complete before they could even release it.

So... short of the long, do I want the Super Bug? Yes. Do I think it's practical for ED to make it right now? Not really. Do I think it'll come to DCS? Eventually.

16 minutes ago, BIGNEWY said:

People asking is no problem, it helps us consider our future options 

To be fair, there are a lot of people starting threads or reopening existing ones begging for a Super Hornet, and while I myself want one, I know it's not likely in the cards given that there's actually more important things being worked on right now (like Vulkan)

8 hours ago, Tank50us said:

A lot of people want the Super Bug, trust me. It would be very nice to have a USN 4.5gen aircraft, but there's the rub: How do you sell it? Answer is very, very simple. You won't be able to easily.

You contradict yourself. How do you sell it? Answer is very, very simple - just read your first sentence again

Of course you're right that it's not some upgrade - it's the whole new module but work on the core has nothing to do with it.

You contradict yourself. How do you sell it? Answer is very, very simple - just read your first sentence again
Of course you're right that it's not some upgrade - it's the whole new module but work on the core has nothing to do with it.

It's a different plane, yes the avionics is very similar...also with the fcs they would not start from scratch, but yet different 3d model and different flight model.
Also it would be sold at full price probably...with maybe a discount for Charlie hornet and super carrier owners but those are just guesses.
It is different from a10c/a10c II as that is just some addition and a different 3d model.
Probably if they had already finished the legacy Hornet they could have thought of the echo.
But I don't think a lot of people would take it well if they announced a super bug without finishing and fixing all legacy Hornet stuff

Inviato dal mio Pixel 6 utilizzando Tapatalk