Kev2go

Not that i doubt that fights arent often merged into BFM, but just where did you get the exact 10% statistic?

USN could afford to retire thier legacy Hornets becuase they didn't need them. They were already gradually phasing out legaacies for quite some time. The already had the super hornet for more than a decade by the time the last active duty legacy squadron was retired. Today they now have F35C's entering operational use. With Super Hornets, and now F35's there is no point for the navy to have kept legacy hornet in active duty service. They stopped upgrading after a certain point. An F/A18C from 2018 is no different in avionics from an F/A18C from 2005. ONly things that changed were software updates and some weapons stuff. AS the term "l;egacy" implies. An old platform that is no longer being updated. ANd the USMC has always had a budget problem, and in part this could have been avoided if they like the navy realized the F35 was still far away, and bought Super Hornet for an Interim solution like the Navy did. Alas though this ties in to USMC more limited budget.You also forget that Legacy hornet have been flying for 14 years longer than last tomcat ever did, and that they are expected to fly until at least 2030. Look at Iranian Tomcat in comparison. Ultimately areas of antiquated sustainment processes and procedures, inefficient supply chain management, poor cost data and incomplete cost analyses , limited long-term acquisition and funding strategies, have all been shortcomings of the military complex, since the USN also started having issues with supporting Super Hornets among others.

"sigh" yea pierre sprey is something special alright Sorry to say but you are very wrong in thinking the F35 is a crap plane. You have not taken the liberty of informing yourself adequately of the present day avionics technologies, applications of stealth, or how modern air combat actually works, and what advantages a platform means. Even a Russian defense analyst thought it was going to be good and the bad press was unwarranted, even before it entered operational service IF stealth wasn't an advantageous capability and just a waste of money then other nations outside of USA wouldn't want to be building thier own. Last time i checked no prior generation fighter that USA fields can match the F35 in: 1. Situational awareness 2. Computational power 3. Radar Absorbent Material 4. Lowest RCS Among Fighters (B-2 RCS is very classified, I'm not fit to make a judgement of whether the F-35 is the world's stealthiest, and X-band and Ku Band remain proliferated) 5. Networking capability ( more network centric than past fighters) 6. Cyber warfare capability (If I'm not wrong this is the 1st, at least serial production fighter jet w/ inbuilt cyber warfare abilities. This is crucial as it'll allow the F-35 to contest not only the conventional domain of the air, but the unconventional domain of cyberspace) This is how in reality Air combat actually works, and how it has changed over the years. https://csbaonline.org/uploads/documents/Air-to-Air-Report-.pdf Further expanding on the above Heres exactly why Stealth matters and why the F35 is the best overall fighter in its class. Maybe all this this will help you comprehend how much air warfare has changed, and that the days of dumb bombing and Top gun Esque Gunfights are a thing of hollywood ( and a thing of the past) On top of all that Red flag exercises prove just how F35 blows any other platform out of the water. https://www.f35.com/news/detail/f-35a-records-20-to-1-kill-ratio-at-red-flag-exercise https://www.businessinsider.com/the-f-35-tore-apart-fourth-gen-fighters-in-major-combat-exercise-usaf-2019-2 https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2019/02/20/air-force-chief-defends-f-35a-against-complaints-boasting-kills-at-red-flag/ https://theaviationist.com/2019/02/16/the-first-reports-of-how-the-f-35-strutted-its-stuff-in-dogfights-against-aggressors-at-red-flag-are-starting-to-emerge/ Iff you take off your rose tinted glasses perhaps you might just recall that the all teen fighters had their share of problems in development, They were not perfect in development or first years of operation either. F14 engine flameouts, F16's in testing killed some of their pilots. Logistical issues for the F15A;s, early APG63 had teething issue and was underdeveloped, F/A18 being overdue in IOC adoption, and going through countless trials and tribulations from its first flight to adoption, The realization that F/A18 Airframes would start cracking earlier than expected ( lex fences installation by the late 80s), or perhaps how the F/A18's flight control issues killing the pilots in certain instances ( unrecoverable falling leaf ) was not finally solved until the 2000's, the list goes on. AS much as the F35 was a failure in terms of Cost and time management during development, It is a success in terms of technology developed during the program, and certainly a overall export success given it not only adopted by the 3 branches of the US military but adopted by Nato and countless non partner states. Its current capabilities, and its future potential to further enhance them far outweighs any negatives pertaining to development, or any early life issues that will probably eventually be solved like any prior aircraft before it.

yes it would have been a benefit to any potential enemies knowing they wouldn't have to face anything like it in the skies or have to worry about these penetrating their air defense and destroying targets of high value. THe boondoggle days of development are over. Its now in mass production and operational service, and its capabilities literately are a quantum leap above any last gen aircraft. Its a shame that even after all these time the old meme of "F35 is lemon" still doesn't die. Then again should i be surprised? After all there still are handful of remaining old farts such as Pierre Sprey ranting to this day about how terrible the F15 is and how anything that isn't A10 cant do CAS.

Thank god he wasn't... Otherwise USA, NATO JSF partners, and countless export nations today would be without a very sophisticated lethal multi-mission stealth fighter that is on its way to becoming the mainstay of all these various air-forces. Considering the advancements of anti air systems, and the fact that potential adversaries are now building thier own stealth fighters all these nations would not have a decisive advantage that the F35 offers in event of a war. Could an air campaign still be carried with gen 4/ 4.5 within contested airspace ? Probably but almost certainly at much higher attrition rates. The idea in war is not to have an even playing field but advantage whenever possible over your adversary

Hence why the actually have something to work from....,. WIth spare parts the ones that arent grounded can fly, and they now have more spare parts. The USMC hornet A/C's are already flying longer than their intended air frame hours, since they skipped out on Super Hornet unlike the US navy, and don't have the luxury of retiring them entirely from active duty service like the US navy has. And this is largely a USMC issue. And most of it due to not having the necessary funding . This is not because Hornet is more maintenance intensive nor more costly per hour of flight than than the F14 , be it senior our youth years.

granted av8b /=/ F/A18, but looking looking at Av8B tactics manual from 2002( NWP 3-22.5-AV8B, Vol. I) there is a section on operation of lightening 2 pod. Page 1-399 to 1-400 specifcally include illustrations coupled with paragraphs without a shadow of a doubt presents that the L2 can do so. So yea coupled with all the other evidence the community found demonstrates to the contrary, that in fact these features already exited prior 2005 for the Litening 2 even with Hornet use.

Thanks for the update! Just to ask a quick question, can we expect to see included earlier generation missiles like the AIm9H and Aim7E4? Perhaps not necessarily for the F14B but for the F14A?

IKR just image if we had the F14D, then we would need F22 to have any chance :D Kidding aside the idea isn't that the community needs the EF to counter the F14, but the fact they will invariably meet in multiplayer scenarios.

it seems the aircraft from this list that happens to second most votes will eventually become a reality in DCS :smartass:

To imply legacy hornets ever had the same level the maintenance troubles of the F14 had is quite disingenuous Legacy Hornets ( even the USN F/A18C hand me downs to the USMC) don't require on average 50 hours of maintenance per hour of flight like the F14 did in its last waning years of service. Then again thats why service life extension program was underway for USMC, to keep em flying beyond their initial maximum air-frame lifetime The point was even in its youth the Tomcat never could achieve the high readiness rates, and low downtime needed for maintenance that the hornet could.ITs a more complex aircraft simple as that. The nature sweep wings always meant the the F14 was not only more intensive on maintenance than the F18 but even to the Air forces F15 eagle, which is considered hangar queen relative to the Viper.

semantics?

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=267626 All of the EF manuals are "restricted" with the exception of the EF flight manual confidential supplement ( tactics , EW and exact weapons envelopes i suspect) which is classified confidential the only one that a civilian development are probably not be allowed to get thier hands on. IF this as considered a true classification level rather than an mere ITAR type restriction as seen on US manuals, then the development team wouldn't have access to anything classified, an thus not be able to have the necessary information to model the EF in any shape or form.

so they have to protect warfighters flying legacy hornets, but not those flying vipers? interesting. I dont know but considering the performance charts are " restricted" but not classified, then it seems that if anyone wanted to know how to defeat the Hornet they would have the already gotten their hands on EM diagrams and model in a simulation if they really wanted to anyways.

http://media.heatblur.se/AIM-54.pdf

On topic however its unlikely F14D will happen for the forseeable future. A heatblur dev said there is but missing documentation for weapons related systems. https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3986159&postcount=4 They are still apparently classified, and it seems the leading theory of why they still are is due to " Persian man bad" paranoia. I know its unfortunate. I myself would have preferred an F-14D for the 21st century DCS environment ( when looking at the other teen contemporaries) as well rather than just having the ancient A/B model. In Lieu of a D model cat the next best thing would have been a later model F14B circa late 90s- early 2000s's refitted with DFCS, PTID and EGI. IRRC F14A's did also got DFCS around that time frame minus the other stuff.

Im sure one day they will happen. Apache would be a blockbuster hit for those into rotary aviation. Tornado also pretty relevant for cold war aviation ( Gr1 version)

Oh dear, people need to get over themselves. Dick Cheney alone killed the tomcat ? Heh whatever helps you sleep at night. The only people that were stubborn for more modern tomcats was the tomcat community. The greater navy brass realized the Super Hornet was the more practical and costly efficient platform in a post cold war future where tomcats #1 justification of its existence for the role of fleet defense against Russian bombers disappeared. Not to mention on top of that the AEGIS missile defense system became a thing. The Hornet had already built a good reputation on ease of maintenance, high readiness rates, and being a more affordable rugged workhorse ( even after more than a decade of service) . Super Hornet improved on payload, range and further improved avionics on its predecessor. So the navy was satisfied. The Tomcat was just too expensive to justify keeping when it was a hangar queen from day 1, and by late life a full on maintenance nightmare. People seem to forget that the navy budget need to be able procure and maintain various surface and submarine vessels. Not all of it can go funding a second air force. The Super Hornet was the practical 1 size fits all interim solution for a post cold war era until the next generation of aircraft. The Rising rising costs of "war on terror" coincided with the retirement of the tomcat, the final nail in the coffin.

Was just trying to present a scenario in a humorous way. But Really? get within 15 nautical miles ( since any longer distance aim120 shot is not gonna hit unless your flying high altitudes) before being spotted on radar.? Thats quite optimistic. Due to lack of any complex RCS modelling in DCS and being skeptical of such implications, i guess we will have to see.

Not just good for RAAF and USN fans ;), since the Luftwaffe is deciding to acquire Super Hornets and operate them alongside the Eurofighters. https://theaviationist.com/2020/03/26/germany-set-to-replace-tornado-jets-with-mixed-eurofighter-and-super-hornet-fleet/ Granted these are going to be Block 3 Advanced Super Hornets and not Block 1.

a different dev had also made a EF for that other sim. I don't think it ever really was an unrealistic expectation to have a Block 1 Super Hornet. hence why i started this thread. IF anything i always though the Super Hornets was more feasible to see in DCS than the EF, because so many shared systems with late life legacy hornet.

yea basically this. the F16 and Viper are close matches in a dissimilar way. TBH when flying the Hornet i wish had the T/W ratio and speed of the Viper, When flying the viper id love it even more if it has the high alpha ability of the hornet, whilst retaining viper streghts . IF such an aircraft existed it would dominate both 1 circle and two circle fights. I prefer the Hornet mostly due to "soft" stats. Aspects that arent going to directly impact combat performance, such as having a more advanced navigation suite ( moving map) and additional Multipurpose display to work with, and having overall a more digitally integrated cockpit ( less physical panels , and instead MFD pages.) IE having RWR contacts being able to be displayed via MFD's , the SA page page, or via HUD. Although i do wish the Hornet had a F16 or A10C type Hotas, to keep hands on HOTAS more often. Truth be told i would say say there is no perfect plane, at least not in DCS . At least not until the Eurofighter comes along and starts spanking them both ;)

With the EF eventually coming in, yet another reason to want a Super Hornet. Not that i think that pre AESA model Super Hornet will offer any competitive edge or let alone parity against the Euro fighter would in A2A arena relative to the current DCS Legacy Hornet apart from having bit more advanced EW protective suite due to carrying AN/ALE50 towed decoy internally.

Fair point. But I am wondering if the exact costs are published for the public to actually crunch the numbers to verify once and for all what would have been more cost effective. Typically looking at past examples to this point it has been cheaper to integrate new weapons features ( even more so in the digital era, where all you need is software upgrade for a weapon mode, if the weapon is already compatible with pylon wiring for a data bus of the same mil standard) into an existing air frame than buy a new platform, and the additional costs associated with such a endeavor. I mean look at foreign F16 operators. For users with additional requirements of for missions not in use with the USAF Vipers such as maritime attack capability , they just decided to invest some $$ to integrate the Harpoon instead of buying Hornets to use that same weapon. ( just as an example)

Yet they still manage to be knocking out M1A2 tanks. Then again Arab armies never did have a reputation for military competence.