Mover

I'm guessing culture. AUTO and CCRP aren't that much different between the two jets. The CCIP pipper is a lot better in the Viper IMO.

In the real aircraft, most pilots I knew were AUTO bombers. CCIP was rarely used. Which is 180 out from the Viper. Most F-16 guys use CCIP for unguided bombs and CCRP for everything else.

Not according to a few select YouTube commenters. In their eyes, it makes me a F$!@'ing pu**y :lol:

Nope.

I did (in my very first VLOG). Buried in the beginning: Thanks for watching!

The flight gear alone would be overwhelming to someone that's never sat in a jet. But, for the sake of argument, let's say you managed or went without it. You managed to figure out how to put the ladder down and then magically found a way to put the ladder back up after you got in. Or the plane captain was out there and decided to help. You strap yourself in (with no training) and go through all the procedures as you've learned from DCS. You turn the battery switch on and fire up the APU. You get an APU fire light. You have the aircraft. There is a reason we have boldface do EP Sims, NATOPS checks, etc. It's not because the jet is hard to fly - it's because the jet is hard to fly when things are going wrong. And not even considering the minor things that go wrong (BLINs, BIT fails, hyd leaks, etc.) My airline has a distance learning software course for the 737 that you use before you show up to ground school on day one. It has cockpit mockups that you can click around to help familiarize yourself with the aircraft and then early on in training, you use touch screens. Going from touch screens and an iPad screen to real switches was eye opening and slightly overwhelming. It is worlds apart when you're actually sitting in the cockpit and you have to physically find switches and interface with systems. Is it impossible for someone from DCS with zero seat time to be able to start, taxi, takeoff, and land a Hornet without morting themselves? No. Do I think there's a better than average chance they'd never make it out of the chocks? Absolutely. DCS is as real as it gets in today's market. But it's still not real.

You could just raise the nose, typically. Put the velocity vector (Flight path marker? whichever it's called in this jet) just below the horizon line and hold it.

While I appreciate the shout out, I don't think the OP is referring to my channel. https://www.youtube.com/user/cwlemoine/ Mine's not deleted at the moment. ;)

Depth perception (lack thereof), being unable to move my head and fly at the same time (since I wasn't using TrackIR that time and had no VR), unable to assess closure rates... general buffoonery on my part. Also, I mentioned it in the video about switchology. The speedbrake being mapped backwards completely threw my off and made it unusable. Absolutely. And when I was flying the Viper (works in the hornet too, actually), I learned a trick from a T-bird pilot. With a digital flight control system, you can "stir the pot" as you get closer. It doesn't appear to do much from the outside, because the FCS compensates, but you're actually moving flight controls and causing drag, helping you to slow down.

It wasn't official. I never claimed any association with Eagle Dynamics, because I have none. No excuse here. It was always going to be a two part video. The fact that you don't approve of it doesn't change that. Correct. I never received a dime, and if you look at my original video, I started the contributions. In fact, the VLOG had already raised $5.5k before I offered to play DCS in order to bump it to $7500. I'll humor it. Pretend part one doesn't exist. What would have been your ideal video?

False. I had zero contact with Wags or Eagle Dynamics before offering to play the game. I had seen hundreds of comments asking me to play. So, I made a deal with the fans of my channel. Wags saw that and offered to help, and he did by posting the video. That's as far as his involvement went. He had no official position in this. Bananimal was incredibly generous in opening up his home to allow me to fly his setup. Yes, it was my first time playing DCS. Perspective is important, and it's my fault for choosing to show the most entertaining part of the 6+ hours of testing we did. I'll take the hit on that. By the time we got to multiplayer with Carl, I had already flown the sim quite a bit with TrackIR and tried out various parts of the sim. I didn't even know we were going to do multiplayer because I had mentioned that I just wanted to test it out in basic flying. The multiplayer was a pleasant bonus. Carl was a GREAT sport. He's a good dude and that's what made it fun and funny. This was not a parody. It was lighthearted and fun. I'm sorry you feel that way. If only it were clear that this is a two part video...

I think the dynamic of the Marine Hornet squadron change a lot after you left as well. Gonky (from my other videos) thought he might know you because he had crossed paths with a bunch of Marine boat guys during your timeframe. When I was in the Navy (2012-2016) it was becoming increasingly rare for Marine squadrons to go to the boat. Most were doing UDPs. Probably had something to do with traps and extending the life of the jet since the F-35 was delayed and they had no supers.

Top Gun lore. I have never, in my entire career flying in both services, hung out in a locker room with other fighter pilots. :lol: All the trash talk is in the squadron bar or ready room, service dependent.

It would just be an "auto" call with the ball call. I forget the rules, but I think after your initial CQ, you could use it. It worked great in tactical. "350 in the box" and you could usually match lead and do other things while the automation held heading, airspeed, and altitude. Trim it up to 8.1, put the "thing on the thing" and adjust as necessary.

Because the flight lead (section lead in Navy speak) does all the comm for the formation to outside agencies.

As Gonky was quick to point out to me after watching these videos, those might be more Air Force-centric than Navy. Although, typically the wingman doesn't talk to departure or take the lead from -1 in the Navy either, Air Force training is much more of a stickler for wingman discipline.... e.g. - clearing the wingman to a position vs Navy, they're just expected to go there on their own. The BFM comms that you'll see tomorrow are from the Navy (AF would be 1's ready, 2's ready, etc.).

I used it all the time. When our squadron went to the boat, lots of guys were auto fliers. ATC is great as a flight lead (holding TAS) or wingman (stationkeeping) and perfect for cross countries. EDIT: I never used it for landing though unless I just wanted to try it.

Yes. It's a very serious and dangerous emergency. My squadron lost a jet that way a few years before I showed up. Thankfully the pilot made it out okay. 8.1 is on speed AOA.

Couple of reasons. 1) Habit patterns. 2) This jet is prone to planing link issues. Flaring makes you more susceptible and can be harder to control should the planing link fail. Otherwise, it's a great jet to flare. I flared all the time as an adversary pilot that didn't go to the boat. Easiest airplane to land smoothly I've ever flown.

Enid, America. 2007. AF trained. Flew Vipers for four years before flying the Hornet for 6. Now back in the AF.

I will try to do a better job of comparing what I experienced to the real jet in part two.

I'm not sure what this even means. In 2005, the A-10C wasn't IOC. DCS didn't exist. No squadrons used it for IFFCC or Suite 3 PE. In 2011, when I was hired by the 47th, pilots used the actual simulator. I never heard anyone mention DCS as a fam tool. Wags and I have been and are in touch.

That was never within the scope of this video, as I've made clear many times. Unlikely. That is false. We did have Track IR. And we did all of that. In fact, prior to the footage in part one, I had flown for about three hours. But, again, a detailed analysis was never in the cards. I never promised any such thing. Bananimal was a gracious host. He did everything possible to make it enjoyable, and he too was disappointed when I chose to use the multiplayer footage over the initial stuff. So, that's on me if you guys don't like the outcome. He did nothing wrong. There's a part two. It's more in depth. It's not a detailed analysis, a tutorial, or an instructional video. As you may notice, my channel is not a gaming channel. I am a fighter pilot. I am not a gamer. I did this video because so many people were asking about me flying DCS in the comments of my other videos, and I saw an opportunity to support a very worthy cause. It worked. I flew DCS as promised. I will give my final thoughts in part two, as promised. That's as far as it will go. I'm sorry for any misunderstandings.

Nope. All in good fun. I had a great time. I never expected anything else. Flying with Carl was the best part.

It may be a bit longer of a video. I'll try to give a bit more of a detailed comparison in my final thoughts. I'm also looking at comparing it to some actual hornet footage I have in editing. I know you guys take this seriously, and I appreciate that. But to me, it was just a fun time.