Next DCS (US) Fixed Wing Aircraft Wish List

[Rhen]

You missed my point... but perhaps that's my fault, and is not important to the topic of this thread. The number of Lightnings ordered will hardly make up for the lack of all aspect stealth that the Raptor would bring to a conflict with an enemy possessing newer SAM systems. We would have lowered the per-aircraft cost of Raptors with an increase in numbers ordered. The savings would come out of the budget for the Lightning II.

 

The other point is that if we fail to attain air superiority in the first few days of the conflict, as we are now used to, we make it a protracted and costly affair losing much higher numbers of aircraft, men and material. The amount of money lost here would be more costly than if we'd have bought more Raptors and less Lightning IIs.

 

Anyway, this is off-topic and if you'd like to discuss this portion of things, we could move it to the military/aviation forum.

[thaisocom]

Reading the JTAC stories from Afghanistan, it seems like the gun-runs of the A-10 are still highly welcome by troops in contact! ;)

 

Once you're danger-close, you might feel a bit sweaty when an aircraft drops bombs from 20k ft above you. :D

There's nothing like A-10's GAU-8 Avenger out there!!!:D

[Snoopy]

You missed my point... but perhaps that's my fault, and is not important to the topic of this thread. The number of Lightnings ordered will hardly make up for the lack of all aspect stealth that the Raptor would bring to a conflict with an enemy possessing newer SAM systems. We would have lowered the per-aircraft cost of Raptors with an increase in numbers ordered. The savings would come out of the budget for the Lightning II.

 

The other point is that if we fail to attain air superiority in the first few days of the conflict, as we are now used to, we make it a protracted and costly affair losing much higher numbers of aircraft, men and material. The amount of money lost here would be more costly than if we'd have bought more Raptors and less Lightning IIs.

 

Anyway, this is off-topic and if you'd like to discuss this portion of things, we could move it to the military/aviation forum.

 

Very good points! Right now the US Government is thinking short term and not what challenges could arise from China, India and so on....

 

 

AND...stay on target bring on the 15E (one can dream can't he :D)

[Eddie]

Very good points! Right now the US Government is thinking short term and not what challenges could arise from China, India and so on....

 

That type of thinking isn't limited to the US Govt, I think most western country's governments are guilty of it.

 

AND...stay on target bring on the 15E (one can dream can't he :D)

 

Indeed. If we ever got an E model, I might even be able to convince an old Tornado WSO friend of mine to fly back seat for me. But then that might be considered cheating. :D

[thaisocom]

Very good points! Right now the US Government is thinking short term and not what challenges could arise from China, India and so on....

 

 

AND...stay on target bring on the 15E (one can dream can't he :D)

They sure have quantity but what about quality?

[jp203000]

It can be anything but F15E.

[Eddie]

It can be anything but F15E.

 

Your statement was correct, right up until to added the last two words.

[thaisocom]

F-15E Strike Eagle is among the tops in my list.

[Frostiken]

Reading the JTAC stories from Afghanistan, it seems like the gun-runs of the A-10 are still highly welcome by troops in contact! ;)

 

Nah, the F-15E's avionics were upgraded to allow good support to employ the M61 on ground targets. Accuracy is problematic due to the lack of PAC control, but the gun even on the A-10 isn't that great against softies either simply because of the nature of trying to hit a little dude hiding and running around in cover. If you watch videos of all kinds of gun runs in the 'stan, mostly they land all around the make a hell of a racket. Generally the cannon is used to flush them out of cover. Against vehicles and such, the M61 works just fine, and the GAU-8 is just overkill - nothing in Afghanistan needs the 30mm, and API hasn't even been used in-theater. The gun isn't that bad though - last time I was in the sandbox we got an excellent kill against one of the Top 5s with some HEI :D

 

Speed and accuracy of the rest of the package are way better than that stupid gun anyway - when the alarm comes down and troops need help *now*, F-15Es are always the first to respond.

 

Once you're danger-close, you might feel a bit sweaty when an aircraft drops bombs from 20k ft above you. :D

Which is why they'd want an F-15E where one guy is glued to the pod, instead of an F-16 where the pilot is too busy thinking about how much his helmet is messing up his bitchin' haircut while trying to fly and not drop bombs on every Canadian, Brit, or Aussie within 50 miles :D

 

I might even be able to convince an old Tornado WSO friend of mine to fly back seat for me

We showed off the aircraft and cockpit to some Bundeswehr IDS pilots and when they saw how much crap we have inside they went: O_O

 

In our current "modern theaters of war" Afghanistan and Iraq, actually something much slower and forward based is what ground troops desire for CAS, like the currently proposed AT-6B:

The key words there is 'forward based'. That isn't a luxury the F-15E nor the A-10 currently has, and Afghanistan is a huge, huge country with these aircraft only based out of Bagram and Kandahar respectively. As such, the A-10s can stay in an area longer, but the F-15Es can get there three times faster. When it comes to AOWs or the like, A-10s are just fine, and if they split the load evenly when it comes to planned ATOs, but when things go tits up and troops are in trouble the A-10 is useless.

 

The marines, OTOH.... Which could explain why the harrier is the next, best CAS platform requested by those who play with rifles and carry their socks into combat (God bless them!).

Surely you can't be serious. The Harrier is probably even more useless than the F/A-18 in Afghanistan.

 

The Mudhen also has its limitations when it comes to real, high-intensity conflict, with a mature IADS.

Because of lack of stealth? I don't think that's really a strike against it, since stealth is hardly the 'norm' for anyone these days. In thirty years when the F-15E finally has a replacement, it most likely will be a bigger concern, but until then, that's what EF-111s and EA-6Bs are for :D

 

F-15E Strike Eagle is among the tops in my list.

I mostly just hope we would get at least a Suite 5 model.

 

The avionics package will *destroy your brain*. The A-10Cs avionics package is a Speak and Spell in comparison :D

Edited September 30, 2011 by Frostiken

[RIPTIDE]

Which is why they'd want an F-15E where one guy is glued to the pod, instead of an F-16 where the pilot is too busy thinking about how much his helmet is messing up his bitchin' haircut while trying to fly and not drop bombs on every Canadian, Brit, or Aussie within 50 miles :D

LOL :D

[Eddie]

the M61 works just fine

 

20mm is for small girly types who own mirrors and use moisturiser. Real men use a 27mm Mauser.

 

None of this multi-barrel, fire 8,000,000,000 rounds in the hope that one will actually hit the target, rubbish.

 

:pilotfly:

[Frostiken]

Anyway, this is off-topic and if you'd like to discuss this portion of things, we could move it to the military/aviation forum.

Off-topic of what? :]

 

This thread may as well have been titled "STAR DESTROYER VS. USS ENTERPRISE" :D The only reason to post in it is to argue why your aircraft is better :)

 

20mm is for small girly types who own mirrors and use moisturiser. Real men use a 27mm Mauser.

 

None of this multi-barrel, fire 8,000,000,000 rounds in the hope that one will actually hit the target, rubbish.

 

:pilotfly:

 

We just do barrel rolls and the Talibs explode because of the awesome.

 

Notice I didn't mention the F/A-18. Because, well... V

Edited September 30, 2011 by Frostiken

[Eddie]

We just do barrel rolls and the Talibs explode because of the awesome.

 

No, that'd be because you were too busy looking in the mirror to attach the weapons correctly. :p

 

Notice I didn't mention the F/A-18. Because, well... V

 

It belongs to the Navy and is therefore operated by Men who like spending their time locked in a metal box full of Seaman?

[Laud]

@both of you: lmfao!!!

[Mt5_Roie]

"This thread may as well have been titled "STAR DESTROYER VS. USS ENTERPRISE" The only reason to post in it is to argue why your aircraft is better"

 

That wouldn't even be a fair fight. The Star Destroyer is like 4 times the size of the USS Enterprise and has the firepower to boot.

[HerrKaputt]

"This thread may as well have been titled "STAR DESTROYER VS. USS ENTERPRISE" The only reason to post in it is to argue why your aircraft is better"

 

That wouldn't even be a fair fight. The Star Destroyer is like 4 times the size of the USS Enterprise and has the firepower to boot.

 

Not to mention that the Force pwns everything else you throw at it. Speaking of which, ED doesn't have to model an AI human co-pilot if they make a sim of a two-seat aircraft. They might as well model an R2-D2!

 

*beep boop blip!"

Enemy bogey at two o'clock? OK R2, take him out!

*blip bleep boop beep!* <distant explosion sound>

Nice job R2! Now sit tight while I get another medal and you get nothing.

*booeep booeep*

[Succellus]

Model a R2 D2... Well DCS Star wars episode 4 or 5 or 6 or anything in beetween those would be freaking awesome !

 

The problem will be convince the repair crew not to wipe out r2 d2 memory so we dont always have a rookie r2 d2 in the weapon seat.

[Succellus]

Umm the AT-6b is obsolete before lauch. it will only be adopted trough made by americans politic.

There s foreigner solutions more eficient and more ready for the same role like the Brazilian Super Tucano.

 

Anyway i don t see why go back to WW2 solutions when the hog is there unless they are less costly to produce and the shot down rate of CAS like a10 would be high which is not.

 

F15 pilot have easy lives, like come fast press the pickle, hope you helped, and get running back to base. Not that much effective, nor diferent to the f16.

[Frostiken]

Anyway i don t see why go back to WW2 solutions when the hog is there unless they are less costly to produce and the shot down rate of CAS like a10 would be high which is not.

 

Errr, it is. Huge numbers of A-10s were lost in Desert Storm because battlefield commanders had no idea how it would fare against semi-competent air defenses. They got completely shredded. Generally you try to avoid losing expensive aircraft you don't have replacements for. When the A-10 was made in the Cold War, money was practically infinite and it was okay to lose planes and even pilots - the F-16 was built to be a cheap, lightweight disposable fighter - the infantry of the sky. This is why a billion of the stupid things were made.

[Beagle One]

"This thread may as well have been titled "STAR DESTROYER VS. USS ENTERPRISE" The only reason to post in it is to argue why your aircraft is better"

 

That wouldn't even be a fair fight. The Star Destroyer is like 4 times the size of the USS Enterprise and has the firepower to boot.

Depends on what USS Enterprise you meant...the NCC-1701E USS (United Star Ship) Enterprise stand a good chancen to blow a Startdestroyer out of Space...size does not matter here...see Borg Cube ;)

[Pilotasso]

20mm is for small girly types who own mirrors and use moisturiser. Real men use a 27mm Mauser.

 

None of this multi-barrel, fire 8,000,000,000 rounds in the hope that one will actually hit the target, rubbish.

 

:pilotfly:

 

I got the reverse talk from pilots here. We use both the mauser and the 20mm hell.

[Frostiken]

Dear god what have I done

[Rhen]

The key words there is 'forward based'. That isn't a luxury the F-15E nor the A-10 currently has, and Afghanistan is a huge, huge country with these aircraft only based out of Bagram and Kandahar respectively. As such, the A-10s can stay in an area longer, but the F-15Es can get there three times faster. When it comes to AOWs or the like, A-10s are just fine, and if they split the load evenly when it comes to planned ATOs, but when things go tits up and troops are in trouble the A-10 is useless.

 

Yeah, when writing discrepancies in 781s I've encountered a few chiefs that have selective reading… :book: I think I said that Mudhens and hogs aren't FOB'd. Just like a crew chief! Pilot tells you something and it goes in one ear and out the other! :doh:

 

When harriers were FOB'd to An Numinayah in Iraq, and FOB Dwyer in Afghanistan, they provided the reduced response times required by the infantry they supported. It wasn't the Mudhen. Harrier pukes train with their infantry brethren. Hell, they even sleep in the same tents on the same base. They spend much more time doing CAS, period. Likewise hog pilots train for their attack role. They don't cloud things up by trying to perform air superiority, intercepts, or deep interdiction - especially at 500 knots.

 

Those forward operated harriers spent 65% of their sortie duration over the target. Contrast that with CAS assets out of Kandahar, which spent 55% of their sortie duration over targets. Mudhen? Less than that unless there's a dedicated tanker.

 

You might say, "BIG DEAL! 10% doesn't make up for anything!" But I say that with their basing so close to their supported troops, they were able to refuel and REARM faster and get back on station rapidly to further support the infantry. Yes, it makes a BIG difference and is one of the many reasons why ground pounders like slow aircraft, forward based, that specialize in the attack role, not an aircraft that flies fast and CAS is more an afterthought than a primary role. The GIB may have his cranium buried in the pit, but 558 Lbs moving at terminal velocity will still leave a pretty swimming pool hole when dropped for close CAS, and that's not even mentioning the high-explosive.... :music_whistling:

 

For example, the gun on the Mudhen is set for air-to-air. It's not depressed (in more ways than one, LOL!), like the gun on the harrier and hog. Most bad guys, flying their MiGs hate getting shot at and receiving their jump wings while engaging in BFM, so they pull on the stick and G up to keep the death dot off their noggin. On an aircraft dedicated to air-to-air the "gun" is canted above the longitudinal axis a few degrees. So while the bad guy is pulling G's to confound my BFM, I don't have to pull as much lead. The bad part is if I ever have to strafe anything, my dive angle would dangerous. Hell, I could even fly into my ricochets if I'm going FAST & don't pull hard G to angle away from the strafing axis. I'll have less than one second to fire, maneuver, and recover before overdosing on dirt. Believe me, I know, as a few of us got in trouble strafing targets in our "not a pound for air-to-ground" models.

 

The harrier and hog, don't have these problems. The depressed GAU-12 & -8 allow attack pukes to come in on a shallow trajectory. They have more time, and their guns fire at a lower rate. These things make their guns more accurate with a smaller "mil" error. Mudhens need not apply - at least not with guns. Do you really think a paveway or JDAM is suited for close CAS? Now, ferreting taliban out of caves, or dug in beneath a building, while maintaing stand-off distance? That's another story.

 

As for the usefulness of the A-10, if it's not on station, I agree with you. That's why in these low-intensity conflicts, the apache, spectre, UAVs and some form of low, slow, cheap, fixed wing aircraft might be developed to forward deploy and provide close CAS.

 

Surely you can't be serious. The Harrier is probably even more useless than the F/A-18 in Afghanistan.

 

I am serious… And don't call me Shirley. :noexpression: Chief, you probably don't get out much, meanwhile us pilots get to mingle with other services quite frequently. We get to see & hear marines talk about what they'd like and what they don't. I'm not talking about other pilots, although they seem brain damaged enough to like the harrier. I'm talking about grunts. They seem to have no problems with either the harrier or hog. I've heard nothing but how freakin' happy they are to hear the fans on a hog, or their brethren flying in their harriers. Oh, read the above again about forward basing harriers for a better understanding of the utility of a harrier on a 4,000ft runway, and it's ability to support close CAS missions.

 

Because of lack of stealth? I don't think that's really a strike against it, since stealth is hardly the 'norm' for anyone these days. In thirty years when the F-15E finally has a replacement, it most likely will be a bigger concern, but until then, that's what EF-111s and EA-6Bs are for :D

 

Yes, because of the lack of stealth! Look, going up against a Gargoyle equipped foe is not a job for Mudhens when there's Raptors and Lightnings, despite the presence of compass call, growlers, etc. the losses… Well, let's just say that Mudhens would be better served as second line AFTER the Raptors have done the heavy lifting and Lightning II follows up. Once the Gargoyles are out of commission, then you can go in with your Mudhens. Do you really think we have 30 years before the next conflict with some other nation? You need to read the Early Bird, or at least read pay attention to the news, or at least the current events we're involved in right now.

 

Off-topic of what? :]

 

Talking about why we should've ordered more Raptors, less Lightning II's and the associated budgetary constraints, the decision-making, or lack thereof, with respect to future threats is not the topic of this thread. I'd have thought you could discern that... :smilewink:

[Rhen]

Dear god what have I done

 

You've gone and made fun of ... a viper pilot... vs. an Eagle pilot!

 

I don't see the problem here.... :megalol:

[Rhen]

20mm is for small girly types who own mirrors and use moisturiser. Real men use a 27mm Mauser.

 

None of this multi-barrel, fire 8,000,000,000 rounds in the hope that one will actually hit the target, rubbish.

 

:pilotfly:

 

I always thought the cockpit of a Tornado smelt like a French "hoor" house, myself... :D