Simba11

great response well researched. one thing to note. lookout years of service for mover and which block F-16 he flew and which years and which block F-18 he flew. the F-16 he few and references performance wise was accurate and his account for comparison is insightful. The F-18's he were flying and the upgrades he hints too why comparing the two aircraft is not always apples to oranges. as I stated before I don't know what year version of the F-18 this thing is being modeled after. some one said 2004. If you compare a 2004 F-18 legacy to a 2007 bock 50 you will find researching the topic becomes a lot more difficult. but its nice to see that the file for the an/apg 66 radar was cited as a solution. hahahaha but I am done with the topic. I achieved my goal and that was for people (forum posters) to actually look more in-depth as to what they were talking about and just just googling the best version of the F-18 legacy and trying to actually figure out what the specs of year and version represented in the game. Cheers to all and happy gemming

Dear ED i dont know who told you that you will get a hung start if you don't stable lize a 20% before going to idle but that's actually not a thing.

none hahahaha. but dont worrie about me just im sure if you poke around dcs enough you might come across something the will allude to why i might think i know what im talking about. but i will leave it at that. I have tried to explain it the best way i can. people need to stop googling the best possible version of the f-18 and actually look for the version they have. thats all i can say and i am fine if people want to say im an idot and i dont know what im talking about lol in all seriousness its probably better that way

No the F-15E has an entirely different design of radar in it. and is not affected the same. the F-18 radar system was designed to preform air to sea functions at a higher accuracy. as it performs anti shipping roles. the F-18 radar was not designed to launch 120's and the radar was never tested for such air to air specifications prior to it being installed on the aircraft. if you google about the navy looking to update the F-18's radar you'll see it was never a strong performing air to air fadar. people are confusing the super hornets radar with the legacy one. and i just found out our DCS F-18 is modeled off a 2004-2005 version of the F-18 with some 2011 bits sprinkled in linke HMD. with that information i can assure you that the Legacy F-18 radar was not as powerful as the F-16 radar that the game is trying to mimic. i know F-18 fans dont want to here it but thats just what it is.

so Mobius im actualy quite comfortable with my qualifications and knowledge of these systems and very much these systems specially. The fact that i did not cite references for you was done on purpose. you could do away with the insults in the future but please feel free to contact me directly.

Sorry to burst bubbles but you are comparing apples to oranges and the f-16 radar and the F-18 radar are different. (duh we knew that) Is the F-18 radar under performing. Maybe but we will come back to that. Is the F-16 reader over performing. In short No actually the opposite could be argued. (whhhuuut, your just and F-16 fanboy). So let look at a few important factors. Mission purpose of the F-16 vs the F-18, Navy procurement vs Airforce procurement, and what time frame version the modules are replicating. The F-16 was a platform designed for air to air enguagements with adaptability to perform air to ground. (ok following) using the radar to track and lock ground targets was not the primary function of the f-16 radar and a lower value of performance in this aspect taken into account when designing it. (ok ok but we are talking air to air) This meant focus of design and out come performance were aimed at the air to air side. Insert F-18 into the discussion here. Mission of the F-18 was Fleet defense. The F-1 4 which was still very much in service at the time of F-18 procurement was the Air superiority intercepter with an extremely powerful air to air radar. The navy's focus was more multirole anti shipping capabilities. (ok ok we are following) So the ability for target solutions using the radar into air to ground and air to sea were given a much greater performance focus in development due to the Navy's needs. This intern affected its top end air2air performance. (ok this makes little sense but im not sold) Ok so now we have navy doctrine and airforce doctrine vaguely covered and giving a little context as to why different radar packages (68 vs 73) would be developed for different aircraft and not just its a the airplane look different. So what year time frame is ED developing the F-18 to mimic. This is relevant on two points. Is it under performing and is the f-16 radar better at air to air. Ok so you might be already thinking this dude already said the F-16 radar had more of an Air2Air focus than the F-18 radar he is bias and going to F-16 fan boy again. stay with me please. the F-16 is being modeled on the 2006/2007 post upgrade information. This is greatly argued on what capabilities the F-16 should receive in the F-16 forums. (your in the F-18 forum fanboy get to the point) Ok so during this time the F-16 was already upgraded using the version 5 (v5) upgraded radar. Part of that 2006/2007 over all aircraft upgrade the radar was upgraded to the version 9 (v9). This means the F-16 radar in dcs is actually under performing if they were trying to be time specific to the F-16. (booo its already OP be happy with what you have garden snake boy). So I use this to give context to why the radars are performing a different values. Now your probably like ok thats the F-16 now get back to the F-18 because im sure it has been upgraded too. If you don't address this than your just being a Bias fan boy. I say fair point. So 2010 is relevant to the Navy an navy aircraft procurement and sustainability. The navy had already been procuring Super hornets by this time. The navy needed to decide on where it wanted to put its money and the long term future of the legacy hornets. (after all the aircraft still had a lot of life left on its expected service life ) The Super hornet already came with vastly more powerful and upgraded radars and other capailities so the navy was debating two key factors. First do we spend money on buying more super hornets and just phase out the legacy hornets earlier that originally planned. number two and this is the sad truth for the F-18 fans. in 2010 the navy acknowledge that if they were going to sustain flying the F-18c legacies they needed to upgrade the aircraft and actually referenced the fact that the airforce upgraded its f-16 radars at a far more frequent rate and if they were keep the legacy that they needed to to upgrade. The navy did end up upgrading some of its fleet as the plan was that as they phased out the legacys from the navy they would be transferred to the Marines to continue flying in effort to get the most bang for the buck out of the plane they already owned. ( Damn it fanboy I don't like what your saying but you might be making some points here) So in short is the F-18 radar under performing in air to air. yeah possibly but with out knowing what information ED is using what time frame they are aiming to replicate I couldn't give you the definitive F-18's radar needs to perform better. But the F-16 air to air radar when compared to the F18 air to air radar has always been superior because the airforce upgraded more often and put more designs requirements on the manufacturer than the navy did. This isn't saying the navy made bad decision. the navy's performance requirements and mission requirements and rolls are different and the Navy wasn't buying an air superiority aircraft it was being a multirole fleet defense aircraft. I hope this helps some of you realize that the radars are different, they always were. they had different designs and upgrade requirements. The f-16 radar has always been better in air to air. not a fanboy perspective just a reality based on they serve different purposes. cheers I hope this helps

LOL, sorry but that just a picture of poor maintenance. The upper right wingtip light is burnt out. if you look on the outboard side of the GBU in the photo you can see the reflection of the lower light working. and the dummy that installed the upper left wing tip lens didn't install the red bulb lens cover thats why it looks like an old mag light hue to the light bulb hahahah. the AAR lights are tied to the AAR door system. they come on day or night.

so those prop planes have to take off gradualy, almost letting time get off the ground on their own. you'll need little right rudder and slight right aileron roll as your going up. don't use full throttle as that torque only increases the airplanes desire to roll left. you let the tail get off the ground first then just give it little black right stick with little right rudder and you should get off the ground just fine. the bf-109 is a plane that really tries to torque roll you hard. you just have to practice and have patience. its not like a modern fighter that you can just pull 10-15 degrees AOA and you'll be fine. the warbirds are closer to 3-5 degrees AOA until you have enough airspeed.

Where is this version of the mod from. the last version to release did not have the targeting pod ball on the belly.

I appreciate the work this team is putting in to audio mods. Having 20 years experience listening to these jets basicly daily all around the world i would like to remind people one thing. The audio recording these guys are working off of as high quality audio as they may be and as close as they can make it. This is limited to the environment in which they recorded it. when you have a heavy over cast with a low cloud cover every thing echos and is amplified. when you are at higher altitude with thinner air the sound is different than it is at sea level. they are always close and similar but they are different. So these guys are doing great at getting the sounds to be as close as they can but base on where some of you live and the weather conditions present when you might have watched and airshow well "experiences may very"

An F-16 did it back in 2003 Codeone magazine did an article on it but I can't find it anywhere. kinda of before online magazines really existed lol

there is no sound in the real plane

I use the new Virpil CM3 and the virpil software. My throttle doesn't register the cut off area. i have a virtual button that actuates from 1-2% range that is tied to move the throttle from cut off to idle. when i program that axis travel it only registers from the idle stop to full burner as the 0-100% travel. for all U.S. aircraft this lines up perfect with the burner detents. the only axis curve i tweek is on the Russian planes but after about 2 or 3 mins on the first set up they too are gtg. But i do understand what you are saying. That is what make the Virpil worth it to me. i can do all of that in the Virpil Software and the game recognizes it.