Cytarabine

Great news but a bold claim given the air defence currently present in BMS 4.34. If they achieve it SEAD will become all important. Perhaps even a role for electronic warfare aircraft? DCS: SparkVark anyone?

... and as if to give the definitive answer the JSOW scores a mention in the latest newsletter.

Which is why I have my lovely Mirage to fall back on when they break something critical in the Hornet (or the Tomcat... and about to start learning the Harrier.... this game takes far too much time, money, commitment, marital strain!)

Practice is the key. I managed it finally after a lot of practice. Still suck at refuelling in the Tomcat where I don’t have a speed readout in the HUD to balance my speed for the initial approach to the tanker (have taken to loading the TID display as there is a speed readout until I am close enough and then eyeball it).

It would not take long for liveries to get pretty disturbing and I doubt ED would want that flak. Maybe an option would be a community skins pack that was updated on some regular basis so that the chances someone will see the great Asia Minor skin your F-14B is rocking provided it is in the pack. (Which would provide a degree of curation to stop it turning into a series of skins that would get you gaol time in some parts of the world.)

Nice - interesting to see we are getting both the A and C variants (and that it was mentioned recently so seems still on the cards). Thanks both!

I seem to remember reading that the AGM-154 JSOW is in the pipeline? Is that still the case? The ability to reach out with that sort of range could make for some interesting SEAD missions where HARMs don’t quite cut it plus would do more than just knock out the radar. Plus is appropriate for the F-16 as well :pilotfly:

Absolutely a EA-6 would be a welcome addition to the stable. I would love to see electronic ware fare become part of the sim, jamming our SAM sites to support strike packages would add some real depth. It might make missions more likely to include more complex SAM threats to force electronic warfare planes to be used as trying to take them out with SEAD strikes alone.

Well there is the historical aspect of having the A version along with the fact that the Iranians have the A model and that in itself makes it interesting to have the jet in a historical context for typically the red force. As for the D, would be nice, but yeah the B is where it's at, and the mixture of being one of the most capable airframes in all of its verging between analogue and digital world goodness just makes it all the more compelling.

I have only had Jester punch it from a plane I considered flyable (albeit heavily damaged from my own munitions at low altitude) once - the other times were moment before buying the farm so fair enough. While a real human might stick with it longer (for example to get feet wet again and increase your chance of rescue) mostly I think he is ejecting at reasonable times.

That is by design (if using ARIO the jester menu is replaced by voice).

Jester is pretty remarkable for what he does, but there are some holes; - maintaining STT lock - I like the idea of calling for a picture - an option to ask him to change the TCS zoom level - LANTIRN pod usage (come on Jester surely they went over this in RIO school) - sometimes the bandit location calls are way off in BFM Still all in all I find myself missing him whenever I jump into the Hornet now, particularly in a dogfight.

Refuelling is hard, it’s frustrating and for the longest time I chased the bucket bobbing up and down. Then I (after numerous tutorial videos) saw the light, flew in formation with the tanker, sliding the probe in with my peripheral vision, constantly on the throttle. It’s still not easy, but I can refuel now and it feels worth the effort. There is an option to avoid it, either unlimited fuel, land and refuel or nurse your fuel. The maps are not so large that you will need it for most missions. So for single player it is sorted. In multiplayer while I am all for options, should we introduce the option for those who find avoiding bleeding energy too hard to fly a simple flight model if they choose? Perhaps an easy land option because trapping on a carrier is hard? Just practice, watch videos on it, practice again. This is DCS, part of being a simulator includes tasks that are challenging beyond just combat.

I was also intrigued by this but couldn’t find any indication USN Hornets used this system. Sadly we will probably have to wait for the F-16 to get a HTS pod for all our SEAD fun. Right now I will go for having functional HARMs back!

I think the way I look at it is; F-18 has complex systems but the basics of flying are easier thanks to FBW, a modern HUD and glass cockpit. The systems on the F-14 are less complex for the pilot (as the RIO does a lot of that heavy lifting) but she is more complex to fly. For your situation go the Hornet. She is still a lot of fun to fly, has a lot of modern systems and will give an introduction to carrier ops. Then when you want something that is a challenge to fly go the Tomcat. I love both, find myself alternating between the two as to which one I prefer. My Mirage 2K is languishing a bit now, and can’t go back to the FC3 modules.

Can’t decide between F-5, AV-8B, A-10C or Mig-21. So many choices, so little free time.

5 - with perhaps the exception of the FC3 planes each is so different that other than a few standard axes and buttons most are going to be plane specific (e.g. I have wing swing on my HOTAS for the F-14, while I have sensor controls in the same location on the Hornet). It is part of the time taken the learn a module. This is not Ace Combat. I think issue 4 is a common issue that new players will strike. I know I started with fast missions wanting to get into the combat quickly. With time (and with full fidelity modules) I got into flying the whole mission and enjoying that (even sometimes ruining a successful mission with a hard landing).

Ditto cannot wait to see!

I would rather they did an F model Rhino than a D model legacy hornet. While a Growler would be cool I don’t know that the modelling of radar is complex enough in DCS to warrant it (beyond issues of things being classified). Really enjoying DCS’s current naval aviation bent!

I agree. I see no reason why it should be restricted, sometimes you could use another plane as a stand in where the exact plane used by the country in question is not available (I know a Mirage 2000 is very different to a Mirage III but still it is better than nothing!)

Well if you have AWACS saying hostile or another fighter and they fail to respond to IFF that is enough without needing to use NCTR.

*Tongue in cheek* Get a Hornet with some HARMs to come along?

This is going to be good... except all those landings we just stick on the one wire which instead will be “Wave off, wave off”. Also will the new Nimitz replace the Stennis as a drop in to missions or will it require re-inserting into the mission (given the Stennis is a Nimitz class carrier). How will things work in those who buy vs those who do not?

The Hornet was my gateway drug. Was my first fully fledged module and after it I can’t go back to the FC3 planes. This has been followed by the Mirage and the Tomcat, but I still prefer the Hornet as a daily driver (as much as I love both the Mirage and Tomcat)

Have you retracted the launch bar? It is part of the procedure, no idea whether not doing so would stop you from launching at all. Is it only if you start from a cold start or away from the cat, or if you got start on the cat?