Why Fighter Pilots hate Aim120's in Training

I was sitting with a buddy of mine a retired USAF F15 and F16 pilot and we got to discussing DCS and specifically Aim120's. We both agreed that the advent of the AIM120 while great if you went to war took a lot of the fun out of our training as visual merges became a lot less frequent.

So why do I tell you this well DCS is a simulation, no one is actually gonna die, your pride may get dented but thats the worst of it. Without active missiles you are always gonna end up close and this leads to some great visual combat. I hear people complaining occasionally about the AIM120 performance in game vs reality well obviously we cant talk about that however my point is who cares.

If you play DCS to experience what its like to fly a fighter the last thing you want is is an active missile, cos if you use it properly you are practically never going to merge and the merge is one of things all fighter pilots live for.

So if I was running Ed I would forget about improving the AIM120 until it is declassified and you can do it properly and get on with releasing the F4 and the F14 and please make my NVG view smaller in VR so I can see under them like reality oh and if they worked in both eyes would be good too.

Drex put together an excellent Dynamic Caucasus multiplayer server with no active missiles it is great if somewhat complicated when you 1st start. It is worth working through as it leads to some excellent fights a lot in visual merges. Try it and hopefully you will agree with me.

the aim-120 in dcs is a symptom

your pride may get dented

here is the actual problem that people dont want to solve

The AMRAAM has long been a very central part of the US air to air arsenal in their 4th Gen jets and later - in fact it is arguably the lynchpin. So long as DCS jets like the Eagle and Hornet are popular and in circulation, modelling the AMRAAM will remain an intrinsic part of simulating them. The weapon is just an inextricable part of US doctrine.

Personally I enjoy the art of "jousting" at BVR just as much as WVR turning and burning. There is a considerable amount of skill that can be developed mastering both arenas. I for one am glad we have the opportunity to do so.

I just listened yesterday to an F-35 pilot interview. He said that no fighter pilot, ever, (F-35 but also 4th gen legacy fighters) would want to bring the fight WVR, to the merge. Both in combat and in exercices like Red Flag.

Envoyé de mon iPad en utilisant Tapatalk

I just listened yesterday to an F-35 pilot interview. He said that no fighter pilot, ever, (F-35 but also 4th gen legacy fighters) would want to bring the fight WVR, to the merge. Both in combat and in exercices like Red Flag.

what he's saying isn't exclusive with what op is saying. there is no argument that in terms of pure tactical considerations wvr is undesirable.

but the merge is a place where one gets to enjoy the freedom of flying, and that's a major part of the passion for many aviators. what op is saying is that video games affords us the freedom to look beyond the matter of winning and losing and enjoy dogfighting as an art.

notably in speed and angels, one of the tomcat pilots stated that despite achiving his dream of flying in a jet in combat, he ended up being happiest flying his stearman bipe.

 

Personally I enjoy the art of "jousting" at BVR just as much as WVR turning and burning. There is a considerable amount of skill that can be developed mastering both arenas. I for one am glad we have the opportunity to do so.

Exactly. Isn't it great to have the option in our sandbox Simulator.:thumbup:

If you want to go WVR, just create missions exclusively using aircraft not equipped with AIM120s and the problem is solved. To suggest that everyone has to share your viewpoint is a little BVR, wouldn't you agree?

If there is a plausible AIM120, it simply widens the choices - which is what a sandbox is all about I thought?

I like BVR more that WVR fights, I don't share your viewpoint...

To clarify a point slightly I am not anti BVR it's an inherrant part of A2A ( it was a large part of my job for 10 years ).

I did one Flag where the debrief was a lot of fun (sometimes they could drag on ) it wasn't the guys that took all the Fox 3 that were animated it was the 10 guys that somehow ended up in a massive furrball. An unusual occurance with the advent of Aim120.

I did have one similar experience on Drex's server with 4 of the Reaper guys. The fact there were no active missiles certainly contributed to us all getting into the situation and we all had a laugh about it on TS afterwards.

To summarize for most of us that flew pre and post amraam . The inherrant limitations of the Fox 1 made for a lot more fun.

Please don't missread me DCS is always training of course IRL I would have wanted to kill the bandit pre merge and would never want to get into a visual merge your life is on the line. Of course your F35 guy says he doesn't want to be in a visual merge he is not flying a computer simulation.

Fighter pilots themselves have changed everywhere. It's funny how the generation that graduated in the last decade or two is completely different from those immediately before them.

The new guys are more serious, strict, procedural and direct in their approach - they're exactly what modern air forces want from a pilot, in other words.

However, the 'old school' fighter pilot is a completely different animal. Intrepid, adventurous, cocky to no end, often pick the cool way over the standard or safe way, hopeless romantics and avid social drinkers, with a love for dangerous low passes and good old guns dogfighting. Those who've spent time, are friends or grew up with fighter pilots of different eras know what I mean.

Despite the new crowd being the most tactically efficient, the older generation is the one that made fighter aviation what it is. Without them there wouldn't be the magic and the romance of fighter aviation, and though the change makes sense from a military point of view, it's really sad to see the old school fighter pilots bow out one by one as time goes.

EDIT: Right, so how this ties into the first post! I completely agree with the sentiment Windy, but I think the developers need to treat all tastes equally, as they're going for accuracy over experience. We as players can create spaces where we do it the old way, and spaces where it's done the new way, and that's the cool bit. This also applies to air-to-ground, laser bombs and cruise missiles are all fair and fun but they don't get anywhere close to the grit of rolling over straight into the fire to deliver destruction up close and personal.

Lol Lucas yep I am that old.

I always thought that if the focus of development was more concentrated on ACEVAL/AIMVAL era it would bring a more engaging, skillful and entertaining environment. The classification is not nearly as bad so there could be more adversary aircraft / systems going around from the 70s and 80s which would contribute to an overall more complete environment, which matters most of all in my opinion.

I think at this point it's pretty clear that we'll be getting modern modules of all timeframes, my only hope is that the mission designers' ability to recreate a certain era will not only continue to exist but grow over time.