From a timeline standpoint, in 2005 the JHMCS was operationally deployed in the fleet, and AIM-9X achieved USN IOC in February of 2004. Would there have been many of either in service? dunno. I doubt you’d see many X-Rays outside of the magazine downrange because every weapon has a service life, and catapult launches and arrested recoveries dramatically shorten that life. The -9M existed in bulk and was completely sufficient to match the air threat posed by insurgent forces in OIF and OEF (read; none). Heck, even in the early days of OIR I’ve seen pictures of F/A-18Cs flying around with Sparrows. In 2014.
That doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t get them. The aircraft has the capability to use them, people will want to employ them. For example, I’m fairly sure there have been more IR-MAVs fired from Harriers in our screenshot thread alone than in the entire history of the weapon in naval service.
You can create your missions to align with history as it actually occurred, but you don’t need to limit the capabilities of the module because F/A-18s were not using the extents of their capabilities during their deployments at the time.
I’d more hazard it’s because the A-10 has poisoned biased an entire generation of sim pilots that the Maverick is the best and only solution to any situation involving ground vehicles. This isn’t generally the case when it comes to fast movers, but people get set in habits.
Göögle translatation: In the kingdom of sweden we call it the Rb75 and it truly is a magnificent weapon that we bought from the united presidenthood of the americas, for the Viggen fighting aircraft.
Bork!
It is important for neutral kingdom of swedness that enemy is not damaged. So tiny bomb not so big bang and parachute make bomb land soft. Only scare the russians, or they can be angry and stop buy IKEA!
What? Real man spend early year sim glorious IL-2, drop many of bombs, crush fascist horde. Lazy capitalist need guided smartphone to kill enemy, real man need only grease pencil and bomb of iron.
Actually…Lief Eerikson, och hans norska, Viking-vänner upptäckte Amerika först…and established the first Ikea…so maybe it should be called , Norway-West?
By the way…you wouldn’t be able to get our hands on a couple tubes of Kavli Caviar Mix? It has been so long since I’ve had a “fix” of that wonderful ambrosia from the sea…alas shipping would be outrageous.
EDIT: My wife is craving Baconost…but we think we found an online store.
We are in 100% agreement. That is a wonderful thing about DCS, the ability to explore the possibilities.
My point is more about development priorities. I realize that my lone voice from the Mudspike wilderness is probably not going to change a thing about those priorities…but on the off chance it does…
From what I have seen, the state of the FA-18C with AMRAM is now a good fighter that can take on SU-27s with AA-10 C/D (R versions). So IMHO, perhaps a priority focus on advancing its A2G capability should be considered at this point?
A little off the subject but since @Troll mentioned IKEA…for any of you who have gone through Olso-Gardermoen airport…is it just me or do you also think they bought the entire terminal at IKEA…it sure looks like. it.
In my experience, you’re drastically overstating the completeness of the F/A-18s air to air systems at this point. Weapons don’t make the plane. It might have AMRAAM and Sparrow, but large parts of how those weapons interface with the aircraft are either placeholders or non existent. The radar is currently problematic on two fronts. On one it is entirely new technology, and there are bugs introduced by this new complexity (locks dropped when they shouldn’t, the antenna doing things that are impossible, etc.). On the other is the fact the radar is missing any number of modes and features it will have. It is not finished, and a bit buggy, which combines to give us a radar that is in many ways substantively less capable than its FC3 (and the Mirage) counterparts. In A-10 parlance, this would be like if the LITENING was just a AGM-65D seeker stapled to the wing that you couldn’t fire.
On the obverse, the Hornet is perfectly capable of employing ground weapons as it is. There are a few complaints of varying intensity, but three of the four major delivery modes are modelled. There are enough weapons modelled that outside of ships and certain SAMs, there really isn’t anything you can’t kill. Any new weapons (JDAM, HARM, Harpoon, MITL, Mavs) will require substantial development of new sensors (ATFLIR, SURF radar), the state of which are unknown to us and would presumably require work on the A/A systems to be put on hold.
I would rather they finish what they’ve started with the A/A stuff, then move onto the chunkier bits of air to surface. We’ve already got the A-10C, the Viggen, and the Harrier to terrorize the poor grunts, DCS as yet doesn’t have a real fighter module. (The Mirage doesn’t count).
Either way it’ll be fun to see how it all develops (and becomes instantly moot when I get my F-14).
Ooookay…
IKEA is Swedish! Although, back then there was no Norway, or Sweden. Just that place on the english maps that said «Here be Dragonships».
Well… I know a guy, that know a guy, that has access to some prime grocery store quality Kavli… And Baconost. I could probably get him to throw in a couple of Freia chocolate bars as well.
Seriously, we take care of our Vikings in exile.
PM me an address and I’ll make it happen.
That’s the place! Imagine; «The United States of Wine» with a Viking tribal chief. But noooooo…
I have spent many days on airport standby at OSL. I know it well enough to realize that the entire airport was a political venture. At least the expansion from Mil to Civ. Need I say more?
You obviously have more background so I defer to you on the state of the Hornet’s A2A radar – and fully understand that it is the entire weapons system–jet, radar, missiles–that makes or breaks a fighter sim.
I don’t have the FA-18 yet so I guess I should probably not be pontificating. My thoughts were more questioning adding the AIM-9X at this point (which given the differences from the M is likely not an unchallenging task) rather than shift some focus to the more sophisticated A2G aspects of the Hornet.
That said, I agree that a still “not there” A2A radar is a showstopper and needs to be done right first.
