Yes. the JHMCS is essentially another HUD projected on the helmet glass that is integrated with the aircraft. You can create a DES on the ground. You can see lock symbology outside of the HUD. With datalink you should be able to select a different aircraft’s track and see that without your sensors seeing it.
It’s a lot more capable than the Flanker and Fulcrum’s monocle, which is just a ring on a stick.
it’ll also break your back, but that’s a different problem
I am putting myself in for a MSM.
JHMCS should be a great boon for air-ground ops more than it will be for air-air… But I don’t know exactly what features the bug will get with it. IHADSS can link to multiple camera sources, designate waypoints, targets, etc., all in addition to selectable flight data. I don’t know if the JHMCS can link a TGP to the pilot’s head for vision, for example, much less whether we’ll get that, though it should have the capability to display imagery at the very least.
It’s not like IHADSS in that regard, having the imagery piped directly to your eyes loses some utility at 15,000 feet and mach .9.
In A/G it acts like any other sensor in the jet. The pilot has a cross hair in front of his face. He can select the helmet as TDC Priority, place it over an area of interest (by looking at it), and hitting the TDC designate button. The aircraft creates a designation from that coordinate (just like you can do with the HUD right now).
Once we get TGPs and what not, all your sensors are slewed to look at the designation, so your target pod should automatically slave to your designation.
FWIW that was a capability that IHADSS had mandated because at the time NVGs weren’t a lot of good for flying helicopters at night and FLIR wasn’t a small gizmo. So if you were to take NVGs out of the equation, it does make some sense for a lot of general low-light flying.
At the end of the day, JHMCS integrates with one kind of AAM (unless we’re getting ASRAAM, which would be awesome), as compared to a lot of the fancy stuff it can do when carefully casually accurately throwing stuff onto the surface.
I didn’t think the Hornet was supposed to have better performance than the 27 or 29. Comparable, perhaps, depending on fuel/payload/alt/weather/etc and what area you were specifically looking at like ceiling, range (the 27 wins of course), acceleration, or whatnot, but not better.
The avionics should surpass any 20th century version of those birds by a good margin, though. Ditto its AG capability, with the Russian birds reaching “adequate” ratings under the best of circumstances.
Oh I do hope so. I hate that big green circle.
Unfortunately that green circle is quite accurate for the Russian HMS on the Fulcrum and Flanker. You would get no additional data other than cueing the R-73. For reference on ways to make it more accurate than it is you would actually get LESS info than it gives you right now. It is literally exactly the same as the little flip down cross-hair in the Ka-50, so no ring around the target it is tracking, all it would let you do is point the R-73 at something and then give you indications that the R-73 sees something or not.
This is exactly what I want. I just think with all the nice cockpit visuals, HUD etc., in the Su-27, Su-33, Mig-29s, the big green circle is way too cartoonish. It stands out the wrong way IMHO.
Awesome 
Why? I’ve already got all those…Oh you mean in DCS world…my bad. 
Yes, Navy ranks would be greatly appreciated - same collar devices as USAF, just different names. USMC ranks are same name as USAF…rather USAF ranks are the same as the USMC ranks since the Marines came first.
I would LOL…but when I was at HQ EUCOM, I saw a USAF Major get fired from the briefing team and then promptly sit down at a computer and write himself up for a JMSM.
For you, I’ll endorse it myself! 
Here’s my mod for USN and USMC ranks. I also did some other stuff with the logbook, like adding the Combat V to the proper USAF decorations, adding RAF ranks to the UK, and adding certain aircraft to countries.
Just be forewarned: the mod fails the integrity check for multiplayer (why I have no idea…).
So I’ve been busy or gone for the last few weeks and just fired up DCS and the Hornet for the first time in a while. I thought I’d compile a few of my thoughts from my brief time today messing around with the AI.
Sooo, what’s with the ACM mode being selected every time you select an A/A weapon?
I’m a big fan of being able to castle into the displays now versus having to mash down on the Warthog TDC. That always led to inaccuracies for me and is not the way we do things in the jet.
I like the ALR-67 sound and HUD improvements. However, it’s too quiet. Real world I’ll have the volume knob to about 25% or less on a normal flight, around 50% volume if I actuallly want to reference it for defending to a threat. As modeled currently, at full volume it’s just too quiet.
I like the Sparrow improvements and the radar seems better with holding an STT. BUT, it seems as though you have to be very gentle with crank maneuvering to make sure it holds the lock.
Shooting 7s or 120s at 40 miles gives a shoot cue but has a low chance of connecting. Seems like any maneuver will defeat both.
Haven’t messed too much with the 9x but it seems they’re already aware of the bug with the search tone.
They introduced flood for the sparrow and visual for the amraam. Gut reaction is they goofed something with the radar as part of that process. I’m pretty sure they’re aware of it
Who needs any of that when I just got a…whatever it is.
In my personal opinion, the Strike Fighters series handled medals for diverse nations the best. Any medal received is mission/campaign dependent, i.e. which service and nation for which you fly in that mission. Not only would the medal be added to your pilot, but you could always go back and read a citation that described the circumstances surrounding the award (e.g. rank and service, historical date of award based on in-game time, what aircraft you were flying and the squadron). More realistically (at least for the US), valor awards were based on individual achievement rather than cumulative body of work.
My Google Translate App translated this to “% u0417% u0430% u0412% u0438% u0439% u0441% u043A% u043E% u0432% u0443% u0421% u043B% u0443% u0436% u0431% u0443%”
Google on-iine translated it to “For Vyiskovu Service” and showed the original Russian as За Выискову Службу…but translates Выискову to Vyiskovu…which isn’t very helpful…if could mean “Idiotic” as in “For Idiotic Service”…which might actually fit.
Bringing tis back around to the F/A-18C topic. It appears that the medals are tied to the pilot vice the aircraft. So picking a USA FA-18C but leaving your active pilot as Ivan Goodsmurf means that any medals he gets will be Russian. Technically the medals received should be from the country the aircraft belongs to (unless you are Clint Eastwood stealing a Foxfire), in this case a Navy Achievement Medal (NAM).
In this case I was flying a Brit Gazelle so I should have receive a “Good Show Mate!” and a hearty slap on the back before heading odd to the O’Club for some G&Ts (the RAF makes the best G&Ts).
Probably not something ED can easily do since you build a pilot profile and the medals go with that profile…would be too confusing to start adding a bunch of other nationality medals to the one nationality profile.
Still think with the introduction of the F/A-18C, USN & USMC should be added to the profile choices. The rank names are different but the medals are the same (USMC is part of Department of the Navy).
A total revamp of the career system first, so it becomes other than just a little spot in the corner for a name. My profile has every single dadgummed medal already, which is ridiculous!
Anyone know if the bug is going to get radio commands for telling wingmen to refuel? Seriously cramping my style to be unable to tell my wingman to get gas on a long trip.
Is it a bug (pardon the pun), or is it me.
Flying around on “through the inferno” U.S. server today and noticed a problem when loading up with all A2A load
Firing the missiles, the stores page shows the correct amount remaining, but looking in external view, i still have most or all of my missiles visually on the rail. Only noticed that today…