F/A-18 Gun Accuracy & Thrust Question

I read somewhere during my internet travels that guns in the DCS F/A-18 were gimped for national security or something to that effect (I believe it was a comment on a YouTube video). As one who particularly enjoys 1v1 guns dogfights in the 18 ... does anyone know:

1) If this is even true?

2) If so, to what extent they are made inaccurate? (if known)

Honestly, it seems unlikely that anyone with access to a genuine F/A-18 would pose a greater risk because the guns in DCS are accurate. The guns sensor already gives you a "shoot" cue, so even if the one in DCS is wrong, the real one will be right. I'm leaning toward it being typical YouTube BS.

On a somewhat related note, I think the F/A-18 is a very underrated dogfighter. The high AOA ability is downright deadly in the hands of someone that knows how to use it. Everyone always squawks about how it's inferior to the F-16 and F-15 for dogfighting, but I think it's competent against both. A guns-only F/A-18 is downright nimble.

It definitely lacks the raw thrust of the 15 and 16, though, and gets dicey when the other two go into the vertical, but it's not a sitting duck by any means.

Which brings me to my last question ...

3) why does the F/A-18 seem to be so perceptibly under powered compared to the other two? On paper, the difference doesn't seem massive. I've seen various sources with wildly different T/W stats, so I'll just use Wikipedia's numbers.

F/A-18 Thrust/Weight: 0.96 (1.13 with loaded weight at 50% internal fuel)

F-16 T/W: .095 (1.24 with loaded weight & 50% internal fuel)

F-15 T/W: 1.07 (1.26 with loaded weight and 50% internal fuel)

A difference, sure, but all planes a bit above 1.0 by the time they merge, with a ~0.1 advantage to the 15 and 16.

Are the T/W numbers that float around just off?

Actually, a clean hornet with 6k lbs fuel and 200 lb pilot comes in at 1.21

Are those numbers dry or with reheat. From what DCS shows us, viper has a much larger increase in thrust and fuel consumption when using reheat compared to hornet

I read somewhere during my internet travels that guns in the DCS F/A-18 were gimped for national security or something to that effect ... If this is even true?

No. There has been some longstanding disagreement over exactly what the gun accuracy should be in aircraft equipped with the M-61 Vulcan cannon based on publicly available documentation and YouTube videos. Gun accuracy was increased a few patches ago, now some people are happy with it and others still think it's too inaccurate. It has nothing to do with national security and everything to do with armchair pilots and researchers trying to figure out exactly how the real world works from the other side of a computer monitor.

3) why does the F/A-18 seem to be so perceptibly under powered compared to the other two?

McDonnell Douglas and the US Navy were primarily concerned with giving the Hornet engines that were extremely reliable and handled well at lower throttle ranges - such as when landing on an aircraft carrier. To get that, they sacrificed raw power.

Don't trust Wikipedia numbers, they're sometimes correct for a specific circumstance, but they never tell you what that circumstance is. Thrust to Weight is a complex number, and is not a constant number for any given aircraft. Not only can an aircraft's weight changed based on stores and fuel load, but different sub-types (blocks / lots) of each aircraft often have different dry weights as well. For example an F-16C Block 40 is not the same weight as an F-16C Block 50, and even the F-16C Blocks 50 and Block 52, while mostly identical, have different engines so they have both a different weight and different thrust. On top of that engine thrust varies based on altitude and air temperature, so even identical aircraft will have a different T:W in different aeronautical conditions. Which all means if you have a T:W number for an aircraft without knowing the exact sub-type of that aircraft, its fuel and weapons load, and the altitude and temp it was at, the number is almost useless.

Are those numbers dry or with reheat. From what DCS shows us, viper has a much larger increase in thrust and fuel consumption when using reheat compared to hornet

Reheat. I just took the empty jet weight, added fuel and pilot:

Empty Weight: 23K lb

Engines: 2 x 17,750lb wet (11K dry) = 35,500lbs

35,500 / (23,000 + 6200) = 1.215

Military power in the same situation would be 0.75

No. There has been some longstanding disagreement over exactly what the gun accuracy should be in aircraft equipped with the M-61 Vulcan cannon based on publicly available documentation and YouTube videos. Gun accuracy was increased a few patches ago,

 

<snip>

Makes sense. Thanks!

Are those numbers dry or with reheat. From what DCS shows us, viper has a much larger increase in thrust and fuel consumption when using reheat compared to hornet

Whenever I say "flying", I mean virtually in DCS ... that's my frame of reference so if it's different in real life, well, I wouldn't know.

That said, I was surprised when I fired up the F-16, loaded it up with weapons, then took to the skies. It feels a lot like the Hornet when weighed down. I have to get the thing naked before it feels like the bat out of hell that everyone talks about.

That's what caused be to look at the T/W numbers, and see how close they were. But Bunny is right, who knows what they are at the moment you're throwing it into burner?

Whenever I say "flying", I mean virtually in DCS ... that's my frame of reference so if it's different in real life, well, I wouldn't know.

 

That said, I was surprised when I fired up the F-16, loaded it up with weapons, then took to the skies. It feels a lot like the Hornet when weighed down. I have to get the thing naked before it feels like the bat out of hell that everyone talks about.

 

That's what caused be to look at the T/W numbers, and see how close they were. But Bunny is right, who knows what they are at the moment you're throwing it into burner?

The thing to remember is that 1000lbs on viper is a much much higher percentage increase in mass compared to 1000lbs on hornet. Not to mention EDs funky modelling of drop tank drag on viper and the super super sluggish flcs.

Thrust to weight isn't everything. Hornet has much more drag than a Viper. It has less sweep to the wings, two tails, and the LEX.

Those T/W numbers are probably extremely generous about the installed thrust. The engine thrust number is derived from static test stand numbers. Installed thrust is often significantly lower owing to intake effects (which may vary across the airspeed range).

I can absolutely assure you the Hornet does not have an actual T/W >1.0

Speaking of Hornet guns, there's a thread about it here-

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=271654

And in it I proclaimed-

I use manual aiming most of the time because it's much more fun (we don't need no steenkin pipper); the gun is boresighted to that small cross (arrowed), so the cross is what I use to lay the gun on target.

However (and this is where the fun comes in), you have to use all your awesome skill and experience to allow for gravity drop by aiming slightly above the target at med/long ranges as in these stunning screenshots.

(It works for air targets too, it's fun using the gun like a chainsaw to scythe off wings)-

McDonnell Douglas and the US Navy were primarily concerned with giving the Hornet engines that were extremely reliable and handled well at lower throttle ranges - such as when landing on an aircraft carrier. To get that, they sacrificed raw power.

My Dad worked for McDonnell Douglas in the 80's and 90's. This is spot on accurate. Everything is a trade off.

 

That said, I was surprised when I fired up the F-16, loaded it up with weapons, then took to the skies. It feels a lot like the Hornet when weighed down. I have to get the thing naked before it feels like the bat out of hell that everyone talks about.

 

And that's very much real life. A Clean viper is practically unbeatable in a 1v1 turning fight against most adversaries (pre-AIM-9X and HMCS). But as soon as you load anything on it, even tanks - it's a different animal. It's not bad unless you have a bunch of Mk-82s as well. But it's not the untouchable that it is when clean.

Speaking of Hornet guns, there's a thread about it here-

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=271654

 

And in it I proclaimed-

I use manual aiming most of the time because it's much more fun (we don't need no steenkin pipper); the gun is boresighted to that small cross (arrowed), so the cross is what I use to lay the gun on target.

However (and this is where the fun comes in), you have to use all your awesome skill and experience to allow for gravity drop by aiming slightly above the target at med/long ranges as in these stunning screenshots.

(It works for air targets too, it's fun using the gun like a chainsaw to scythe off wings)-

 

Sigh