Quick Question

Honestly guys, I doubt these technical differences are big enough to actually decide over victory in combat (in DCS). These radars are pretty much on the same level with similar capabilities after all.

Honestly guys, I doubt these technical differences are big enough to actually decide over victory in combat (in DCS). These radars are pretty much on the same level with similar capabilities after all.

Technical differences in terms of additional operating modes(to the extent they exist) - no, but difference in radar power certainly could be.

The N019(MiG-29) and N001(Su-27) share some 70-80% components and are "on the same level with similar capabilities" as well :) . The difference in size(radar power/range) is roughly comparable to that of the APG-73 vs. APG-63.

Honestly guys, I doubt these technical differences are big enough to actually decide over victory in combat (in DCS).

Agreed. All the technical differences in the world wouldn't save me. Pit me in an F-22 Raptor against a well-trained pilot in a MiG-21, and I'll lose every time, if I'm honest. ;)

If i'm honest i'm a much better bear hunter than a pilot of any plane. I doubt that will ever change, but I hope to become a better pilot.

I made a decision though. Since the F/A-18 is so far away. I'm going to concentrate on the A-10C and see if I can become a decent AG pilot. It can only help if later I decide to go with the F/A-18. If I decide to stay with the A-10C it won't be a bad thing. I do like the ugly old girl and she's pretty relaxing to fly.

Ok, that's done. Carry on, guys.

If i'm honest i'm a much better bear hunter than a pilot of any plane.

Well, soon you will have that option in the virtual world too :)

http://omegataupodcast.net/172-chasing-bears-with-the-phantom/

F-18 isnt that far away though, unless you are referring to out of beta. Im pretty sure we will see early access in Q4.

A2A probably the first operational systems, and the rest will just feed in over time, giving us time to slowly learn every system.

If it comes sooner all the better, but i'm not going to sit around waiting for it. When I can buy it I will. Meanwhile, I need to fly something else.

I'm pretty sure all planes that launch from the carrier with war loads land there as well

 

Sent from my SM-G920W8 using Tapatalk

I meant more along the lines of, how often does an F/A-18 take off from a carrier to do AG?

I meant more along the lines of, how often does an F/A-18 take off from a carrier to do AG?

I think, they do training AG flights to practice weapon employment on targets based on some islands, but not so often. Mostly, it's A/A practice and takeoff-landing practices. IMHO;)

That depends on the battle groups tasking. If they are in the Persian Gulf or off the coast of Syria to fight IS, then an F/A-18 will take off to do AG pretty much daily.

Other than that they practice weapon employment on small islands and splash targets, but I don't know how frequently.

The pilots have to maintain currency. Almost every fly day you will see jets going off the pointy end with blue death to train for A/G. Same for A/A, they are constantly training. When deployed to the boat, the main reason for landing anywhere else other than the boat would be for weather or a broken jet that had to divert. When doing combat operations, the jets leave the boat, do their missions, and then come back to the boat. If they land anywhere else they will not have their squadrons maintenance support available for required inspections and servicing.

Occasionally, if a squadron has assets that are in high demand such as Electronic Attack Prowlers/Growlers or VF-154's AFAC F-14A det in OIF a squadron will send a maintenance detachment to shore to support flight operations in country but that is more of an exception than a rule when they originally deploy to the AO on the boat. Even in these cases, the jets will return to wherever they launched from.

If i'm honest i'm a much better bear hunter than a pilot of any plane. I doubt that will ever change, but I hope to become a better pilot.

but what if the chances were equal?! :D

but what if the chances were equal?! :D

 

[ATTACH]167265[/ATTACH]

That's true. I'd like to be 10 times stronger, be able to accelerate to 30 mph in an instant, have long claws and teeth, be able to smell 1/2 mile away, and hear three times better than I can. Then i'd be equal to a bear.

So, to equal it up a bit I use an early 1800's flintlock replica that goes off 50% of the time while I stalk bear deep in the mountains alone at 74 years old. I carry no backup except a bowie knife.

We have too many bears in Colorado. Hunting for them is good conservation and how the DOW keeps the bears in control.

If you think what I do is safe and easy. Come with me sometime and face a bear at 10ft and see if you can stand your ground when the bear charges you.

You sound like a tree hugger and make all hunters sick. I bet you eat meat, but let someone else kill it for you. Hunting for my own meat is a natural instinct that can't be ignored. Most men will have it.

Oh hell! I can't go against my grain. I'm a fighter and anything else won't satisfy me. I'm going to just fly the F-15 and stop looking for something else. A/G will never satisfy me.

At least the F-15 has the proper flight model. If it ever gets a clickable cockpit fine, but It won't matter that much. The joy is in the fight, Not clicking switches.

That's true. I'd like to be 10 times stronger, be able to accelerate to 30 mph in an instant, have long claws and teeth, be able to smell 1/2 mile away, and hear three times better than I can. Then i'd be equal to a bear...

Sorry, Buzz, I'm just jokin'!;)

I'm from austria, where we also have to hunt and shoot our deer to prevent our woods from overpopulation, because wolves and bears (their natural enemies) have been almost hunted into extinction over the past centuries.

I know just a little about hunting...

...and sorry, I didn't want to disrespect you with my comment!

Good hunting, mate! ;)

(and sorry for being off-topic)

Ok, sorry for the misunderstanding. It's a touchy subject as you probably already know. The bears here are becoming a problem. We're having too many maulings now and one hiker was just killed. The bears are also eating all the fawns and elk calves. We need to get it in control.

No harm, no foul buddy.

Sorry, for getting off topic guys. Back to the F/A-18.

So, in DCS can someone specialize on AA and just do that with the F/A-18?

The Hornet is a multi-role fighter. Can do Air to air or air to ground. They can also self escort to a target. Meaning carrying an AMRAAM or two, while slinging bombs. The reason the hornet got the F/A designation, is when it was conceived, the engineers thought they'd have an F-18 and an A-18 depending on what computers were loaded into the aircraft. Basically you'd swap black boxes to swap roles. Turns out the computers were small enough, and modular enough to encompass both rolls in a single jet. Putting it in air to air, or air to ground mode with the switch of a button.

We had a jet break, and land in Iraq during OIF. Had to send a rescue det. to go fix it. It's rare but it happens. When a squadron is gearing up for deployment, they do month long boat detachments. Those are usually done close enough to land bases, so jets can divert due to weather or maintenance issues. Underway you'll either have divert bases available, or be in , "Blue water ops." Which means get aboard, or ride the waves (no diverts). Prior to heading to the ship the pilots have to get in their FCLP's (field landing carrier practice) to become current. So they fly day and night FCLP's to get everybody checked off. It's a rotating process in a seagoing squadron, as qualifications can lapse. Hornet pilots spend a decent amount of time practicing air to air and air to ground. The jet is basically designed to escort itself to a ground target, so both skills are needed, and kept proficient.

As far as the, "What jet is better." argument. You have to figure the Hornet was designed to replace the A-6 and A-7 in ground attack, plus bridge the gap between them, and the Tomcat. Tomcats would defend the fleet, and do long range intercepts, and Hornets would get themselves into, and out of harms way to deliver their air to ground weapons.

So, the Hornets main task is AG, but has AA weapons to defend itself. Kind of like the A-10C, but the Hornet is much more capable in AA compared to the Hog. It can't loiter like the Hog either.

I was wrong in my thinking. I thought the Hornet was the other way around.

How would you compare the Hornet to the Falcon?

no, in the 60s they realized that a2a aircraft generally make for good a2g platforms.

however, in terms of warfare the goal is always on the ground. a2a is what you have to fight through to contribute to the ground war with a2g.

simply occupying the air doesn't really do anything by itself, nobody lives there, it doesn't produce any resources or materiel.

so both the f-16 and f-18 were designed for a2a, but ended up primarily as light bombers because that's the bulk of warfare.

Got it. Thanks.

So, the Hornets main task is AG, but has AA weapons to defend itself. Kind of like the A-10C, but the Hornet is much more capable in AA compared to the Hog. It can't loiter like the Hog either.

 

I was wrong in my thinking. I thought the Hornet was the other way around.

 

How would you compare the Hornet to the Falcon?

I wouldn't compare the Hornet to an A-10. Gotta figure it's a jack of all trades. A2a and a2g. Some countries use the Hornet as the sole jet to defend their airspace, plus hit ground targets. It's quite capable in both realms. Just would t say it's the master of either.

I don't think it's the most accurate to compare the "A-18" to A-10. The way I understand it, when doing AG the F/A-18 would be more in the line with AJS-37 or the ground attack variant of Tornado, in terms of their role, in my opinion.

The A-10 is in fact a CAS aircraft, which was designed to have a very long loitering time, and is designed to fly slow to make it easier to detect and aim for ground targets on demand at least before the introduction of precision guided bombs in A-10C.

While on the other hand when doing AG mission the F/A-18 is more comparable to a true attack aircraft, which gets in, launch the weapon, and gets out, and do these fast.

no, in the 60s they realized that a2a aircraft generally make for good a2g platforms.

 

however, in terms of warfare the goal is always on the ground. a2a is what you have to fight through to contribute to the ground war with a2g.

simply occupying the air doesn't really do anything by itself, nobody lives there, it doesn't produce any resources or materiel.

 

so both the f-16 and f-18 were designed for a2a, but ended up primarily as light bombers because that's the bulk of warfare.

To supplement this point, what I understood is that in order to have a good fighter you need to have a low wing load so that your wing is able to generate addition lift when you want to use it to out turn your opponent with maneuver. And they realized that this additional lift enabled by low wingload can be also used to carry heavy bombs and missiles while still being able to fly, and from there you get the idea of a fighter that's also able to delivery AG weapons.

How would you compare the Hornet to the Falcon?

Here is a four part comparison between the Hornet and Falcon written by a pilot who flew both.

https://fightersweep.com/1494/hornet-vs-viper-part-one/

https://fightersweep.com/1539/hornet-vs-viper-part-two/

https://fightersweep.com/1904/hornet-vs-viper-part-three/

https://fightersweep.com/2378/hornet-vs-viper-part-four/

Yes, i've read that about two hours ago. I've been researching the differences between the F-16 and F-18 since i've also installed BMS 4.33. Now i'm trying to decide between the two sims.

Yes, i've read that about two hours ago. I've been researching the differences between the F-16 and F-18 since i've also installed BMS 4.33. Now i'm trying to decide between the two sims.

Keep in mind in your quest that the F/A-18 in BMS 4.33 is basically a re skinned F-16. In DCS your going to have a sim that is modeled after F/A18c data.