Not exactly DCS, but perhaps a gateway to DCS. Interesting seeing all of the combat activity going on in XP11 and P3D/FSX.
2 Likes
I’m more than a little dubious considering that hornet looks, acts, and flies nothing like the real deal
2 Likes
Undoubtedly it’s more game than sim. That is until someone creditable sees it as a new market. Maybe VRS or MilViz. My glass is half full view is that there was a time not so long ago when good combat flight simulations were an endangered species. On the civilian side, Microsoft had shut down ACES. Now it’s almost an embarrassment of riches.
I’d like to get that Colimta F/A-18…but the only thing putting me off (even if it doesn’t really fly realistically) is the fact that the pilots within the cockpit appear to be too small…
2 Likes
Hey…one thing that video makes me wonder about (for the DCS Hornet and others) - what are the “bring back” requirements of the Hornet? Do F/A-18s bring back air to ground ordnance like Mk series bombs or do they jettison them prior to trapping? I’m guessing they wouldn’t dump expensive missiles…but curious if they really want 2,000 lb bombs landing on the carrier…
I don’t know max trap weight for a Hornet, but I know when we were in the Gulf in '06, more often than not they were coming back with most, if not all, of the ordnance. As long as the Master Arm is safe, you shouldn’t have too many issues, and as soon as the jet is parked, the AO’s are safing all the ordnance.
As many sorties as were flown that cruise without anything happening, it would’ve gotten crazy expensive really, really fast.
Let me go ask my ordie buddies though, and I’ll get back to you.
8 Likes
My bet is they can bring it all back. It would be really expensive to jettison a load of JSOWs that you didn’t launch because of weather. I’m sure there’s a max landing weight requirement, and possibly jettison requirements for hang-fires, but it’d be silly if a strike aircraft’s design requirements didn’t include returning to base with the same stores load they took off with. Training alone suddenly gets real expensive.
2 Likes
There’s a difference between can do, and will do though. More weapon weight means less fuel available around the carrier, which is less loiter time at the marshalling point and fewer potential opportunities to trap. As a historical example nothing actually prevented an F-14 from landing with Six AIM-54s, but to do so would require cutting into the reserve fuel to an extent the Navy found unacceptable.
LIkewise, and I defer to @Navynuke99 if he has evidence to the contrary, but I can’t think of ever seeing a picture of a Legacy hornet trapping with 2000lb class weapons still on the wings. My impression is the Navy doesn’t load those unless there’s a high expectation they’re going to be expended (i.e. on a Strike). For everything else they seem to be content using Maverick and 500lbers.
LOL, I’m inclined to agree with you.
Leave the midgets alone.
I mean little people.
1 Like