wilbur81

Gortex, Thanks for taking the time, bud! Good work. I hope people can see just how massive a difference the Paddle Switch is in the Hornet (if you have to win with the Paddle, you're not good at BFM in the Hornet). Additionally that 82% Viper fuel vs 51% Hornet fuel will make a fairly big performance difference too: That is, flying a lighter Viper with 60% fuel or less makes it even more of a beast. The Hornet (no paddle) owns the slower speed stuff largely because of the straighter, larger wing.

Awesome. Thanks, bud! If you have time, you might go for more realistic flight configurations for both a/c as well.... not just the configs for the E-sports crowd. But I know time is limited. That sounds about right on the "approaching .7M" bit. At 300kts and lower, the Paddle will do very little for the Hornet except bleed it dry. I think what people don't realize is that in the Transonic region (and higher), the DCS Hornet becomes seemingly ridiculous with the Paddle in use...especially with its less realistic pilot G-tolerance model at high g.

I guess we'll never know until Gortex runs the Viper vs Hornet tests without the Paddle with tracks included. What say you, Gortex?

Me: "I have a good number of critiques for the (losing) Hornet flying being done in the two videos posted above." Also me from my earlier post in this thread: https://forum.dcs.world/topic/323031-f16-still-underperforming/?do=findComment&comment=5223285 And finally, regarding the Viper vs Hornet piece of this, Gortex's graph was made with the Hornet's Paddle Switch engaged... in which case, realism bets are definitely off.

Good post and thoughts. Regarding the statement above, "the Hornet is the only jet against which I feel the Viper hasn't a single viable game-plan," are you confident that these experiences for you are against Hornet fliers that are not using the Paddle? Additionally, I have a good number of critiques for the (losing) Hornet flying being done in the two videos posted above. What would your critiques be of how those Hornet flyers lost against the Viper in these 5-6 PvP losses?

Now HERE's a guy in a Hornet getting dominated by a Viper in DCS. ...and another: One can always say, "Well, those Hornet pilots aren't as good as the ones in the server I fly," etc. etc... May be true: Or it might also be true that a DCS Hornet WITHOUT the paddle switch in use (as in these two vids) can get quite reasonably pummeled by the Viper in PvP BFM...if the pilot is solid. I think it is a well-worn, coffee-table-aviation-book myth that ALL versions of the Viper can dominate ALL versions of the Hornet in BFM, 90% of the time, pilot skill being equal. The reality seems to be closer to 50:50 in the WVR arena...at least with late block/lot Vipers and Charlies... and keep in mind: NO real world Hornet pilot is EVER pulling the paddle switch in a training fight against a Viper, or any other airframe.

This is my point: You cannot determine the assertion of this thread, "The F-16 is Still Underperforming" by comparing it to the Hornet's "Cheat-Mode" in DCS even if the whole online world is cheating. And, again, I know of at least one online Hornet pilot who never uses the Paddle switch, and has beaten and lost to Vipers... just like in the real world, where Hornet and Viper pilots beat and lose to each other. I think the Hornet ABSOLULTELY overperforms when the paddle is pulled...much like the Eagle when flown over 10g.... I stand by my point made above. You can make these points in a thread entitled, "The Hornet over-performs with the Paddle Switch," or "Eagle over performs...etc. etc." To put the point another way: You can't say the DCS Viper is "underperforming" when comparing to unrealistic performers (i.e. Paddle-Switched Hornet or Dinosaur-FC3-Flight Modeled-Eagle) in DCS.

Then go back and do the tests with no paddle switch for an accurate accounting of the Hornet's in-game modeling (the FC3 F-15C is pretty exaggeratedly over performing, clearly). There won't be a single Hornet SME out there that will have accurate data on performance of the Hornet under extended G-limiter-override flight; nor will there be any charts available to ED that will give accounts of Charlie Hornet performance with the paddle pulled for full turns, BFM, etc. (Other than the "33% boost of current available G" from the NATOPS). The closest thing out there would be the Finnish performance manuals for their 9G capable Hornets...but that is obviously not the jet ED is simulating.

Nonsense...

You mean like this? (watch the bleed-down in a pylon-less Viper, at full AB, at 600 ft AGL, and 8ish G)

Even in your video, that Viper is not sustaining 9gs (in that aggressive, slick demo config) for more than a second or two. I think ED has this stuff REALLY close. If we're going to nitpik pilot feedback too much, we'll have to give the Hornet less drag as well, according to Gonky here: (I'm mostly playing, Gonky is an AWESOME and humble fighter pilot who might be one of the worst DCS Hornet BFM'ers I've ever seen. ) )

Youtube search "F-16 Hud Demo" or the like and see what you come across, but I've never come across a single HUD video that had the Viper pilot (even in the nice thick air close to the ground, slick, in airshow demo configurations, or otherwise) pulling 9g's for more than a second or two...if at all. Even the slick-jet USAF Viper demos and the T-birds all include the "Big 9 G, tight radius turn" part of their displays... but any HUD footage I've ever seen of this "9G" 360deg turn is usually actually hovering between 6.5 and 7.5 G throughout most of the turn (see one example here and note, assuming he's in burner throughout the turn, how his airspeed seems to bleed throughout this not-really-nine-g-turn: ). This doesn't mean that they can't or don't, of course. I just suspect that the ubiquitous 9g monster jets and pilots aren't doing that stuff as much as is popularly claimed or believed. There's a thread entitled something like "9G sustained is not possible in the new F16 variants?" over at F-16.net might shed some light as well, but it does post charts that aren't acceptable in our forums, so I won't post links here.

My bad... i missed that part. You're right, potential bugs discovered on long flights are nearly impossible to pinpoint in a track.

Tracks, gents, or your concerns are going nowhere.

Nonsense.

Even with the increased TDC speed... I still find the "hover over option and click" method for radar options nearly impossible to do quickly. As has been said, just map it to your HOTAS. Here are the Radar ATTK Page functions I've mapped to mine: Range Mode Data Frame time Set/Reset Azimuth Elevation Manual/Auto (for TWS) etc... I rarely ever touch the DDI buttons when doing A/A.

Indeed... I like this option.

The new change is more realistic in terms of getting the cursor around the display quickly, which is a great improvement. However, as has been said above, the problem now is that the small movements/corrections are quite difficult with the current hardware available to most of us. I have the Winwing Super Taurus throttle...which I love; but the TDC has little bits of movement around the center that do not register as movement in DCS with the Hornet's cursor, (I do not use a dead zone) which is a problem as I need those tiny movements to register. So it is now more difficult to make small, precise moves on the Hornet's radar. I've tried playing with the Axis curves, but haven't yet found something that I like.

I was just about to report this as well. I can also provide tracks if needed... but I too have to press UNDSGNT twice to step from a #1 ranked track-file to subsequent files in TWS.

You will likely not find a single YT HUD tape showing a Viper driver pulling 9g's for more than a few seconds (if at all). There are a fair number of YT videos of real world Vipers (HUD tape footage) performing BFM... you will find very few (I've never found one myself) where the max G exceeds 7g or the airspeed exceed 350 kts. Here's one example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oOa9eWgFllE. Another example from Defensive BFM with telemetry data afterwards: https://youtu.be/nEOnP7zpcXs?t=199. Neither pilot breaks 7g in either engagement. That certainly doesn't mean it doesn't happen, but probably a lot less common than people assume. A person doing 60 seconds of 9g's in a centrifuge is certainly impressive, but they're doing nothing else but sitting there... real world flying is obviously a good deal different.

I ordered my pedals on February 7th and they arrived this week on March 28th.

I just learned something else. I was flying over the Caucasus and noticed that a train in the distance was doing the same 'stop-start' stutter movement until I got close to it. You might rename your thread here to make it a little more descriptive of the issue...

your loss...

This has been a Hornet bug since day one, back in good ole' 2018. I'm sure it will get fixed eventually.

Nonsense.