Boogieman

Correct :thumbup: Now that's a thought that never occurred to me. I think you may very well be onto something there.

...unless you're one of those guys that likes flying above 40k feet at Mach 1.5+. Then every turn worthy of the name ends up being 9G+ :lol:

In other news, this is going to bring a whole new dimension to the SEAD domain in DCS: Using decoys to draw out GBAD assets like this is a longstanding component of the SEAD/DEAD game that has been entirely absent from flight sims for as long as I can remember. Will be a lot of fun to play with it when ready!

What an interesting chat this has turned out to be - thank you Skatezilla. I find this very curious - I would have expected the centreline station to be the desired spot for it so as to aid FOV and load symmetry. I guess there will be plenty of asymmetric load-outs in my DCS future! :thumbup:

Yes I think I remember this discussion occurring on the forum before. IIRC the USMC Hornets generally switch to the ATLFIR once deployed though. It's interesting because despite my best Google-fu attempts, I cannot for the life of me find any image/evidence of a US Hornet of any persuasion carrying an ATFLIR on the centreline...

Question for the clever people - can the Hornet mount the ATFLIR pod on its centreline station? I was thinking about it the other day and realised I have only ever seen the ATFLIR mounted on the side of the fuselage...

A picture says a thousand words... :eek:

^ Indeed, HARM is not some sort of panacea to dealing with GBAD/IADS threats but nobody is saying that in the first place. Rather, it is one tool among many. However, getting up close and personal with bombs, Mavericks, rockets and cannon is not the default alternative to HARM (!?). I think you'll find modern western doctrine calls for a much more holistic approach to SEAD/DEAD that includes the use of ship/sub/air launched cruise missiles, ISR support, extensive ELINT gathering and EW/EA attack, decoys to elicit responses from genuine SAM sites, JASSM/JSOW and - yes - HARM shooters. For example ( ): While we may never be able to replicate all of the above in DCS, the addition of HARM, L16, JSOW, SLAM/SLAM-ER and TALD to the Hornet (in due course) will certainly help. So while the AI of GBAD systems in DCS is extremely basic, so is the current arsenal of available SEAD technologies and techniques. I for one am very glad to see that this is slowly changing and think it's great that we have people in the community putting effort into scripting etc. that can make things that bit more realistic on the GBAD side too.

When the choice, realistically, is between a brand new F35C and a geriatric legacy Hornet, though, I suspect the 2 engine fighter might not win out quite so much... ;)

Not saying that the second engine is what drove F22 costs up so dramatically (of course not - there were many contributing factors) simply pointing out (as Neofightr has) that a twin engine alternative would probably have been even more costly than the F35C. You're essentially talking about either a Raptor derivative or a clean sheet design with all the inevitable teething issues and cost overruns that would have entailed.

Yeah, but that aircraft more or less exists already - it's called the F22. The second engine adds to the price tag, and we all saw how that one went (hugely capable but also expensive jet, tiny fleet size) :closedeyes:

I don't think anybody said you do, it's just that having a longer range, high speed ARM like AGM-88 will be a really big help when compared to the much shorter ranged and slower weapons Blue team has now. Frogfoot and Hornet approach the problem of SEAD/DEAD differently. It is in many respects an apples and oranges comparison.

GGTharos is correct. Based on publically available information, the imaging IR Focal Plane Array seeker on the AIM9X should give it a significant IRCCM advantage over the DCS R73 (ditto for the AIM9M/P, R60, Magic II etc). I imagine later variants of the Archer may/will feature a similar imaging seekerhead (K74M2 etc?), but not the version modelled in DCS (early R73 or possibly R73M?). Also, AFAIK the off-bore capability of the original R73 was in fact 45 degrees. This was then expanded to 60 deg in the R73M, while the Block I AIM9X we are getting is quoted as capable of 90 deg. This makes sense in that the 9X was developed as a counter to the R73 after all. You would probably need a K74M2 or K-MD/K-30/izdeliye 300 to close the capability gap in the above two areas.

Yes makes sense. Obviously there is a lot that goes into making sure the missile successfully finds and tracks the correct target at all. Still, being able to tinker with the guidance in this way and in turn minimise the amount of time the target (eg. an unalerted one) has to take evasive action would be a nice trick to have up your sleeve... Thanks for the info! PS. Maybe some time in ~2028 ED will bring in the ASRAAM ala RAAF Hornets and I will get my stealth missile after all haha ;) :lol:

Do you know if there is any way for the pilot to modify the range at which the 120 goes active? I can think of a few scenarios where having it go pitbull at ~5nm rather than the default ~10nm (in DCS) could be quite a nasty party trick...

Fair point! :smilewink:

I'm with you mate. The much more important issue is that Russia and the west are at each other's throats in a way we have not seen in decades. I hope this situation de-escalates soon. Playing out these situations online is fun, but I have no interest in seeing a clash between my fellow human beings on either side. The worse it gets, the more we all lose.

I really doubt it. The problem isn't some well kept secret.

Surely a direct response to PLAN/PLAAF anti-access CONOPS in the Pacific. USN CVNs would have to operate from a greater distance nowadays to (somewhat) safely contribute if things went south in the region. The Chinese arsenal of subs and air/land based AShMs is becoming quite formidable. Meanwhile the PLAAF have made it pretty obvious that they would aggressively target high RCS, airliner derived tankers with the likes of VLRAAM, J20 etc...

Those capitalist pigs have defeated themselves once again :lol:

Interesting, thanks for the info. Looks like USMC birds are carrying them nowadays. Anyhoo, back to the topic at hand ;)

EDIT: It seems they've actually reached the Marines already. Cool system - seems to have been well received over Iraq/Syria etc.

Stay calm of course I am joking ;) I am well aware of how new it is but my intended point stands - APKWS and its kin seem to be really changing the game for ~70mm rocket employment. No point getting down and dirty inside MANPAD and trash fire range just to deliver dumb munitions if you can be laser-beam accurate (literally) from well outside of it instead.

Well you can use APKWS for the first one, but as for a show of force... drop a JDAM nearby I guess? Haha.

Yeah, no I don't think the classic Hornet was ever fitted with a MWS. Super Bug may be different?