Cytarabine

If you want a USAF jet that can sling HARMS get a Viper. It’s what they use to do it, and it has the HTS to do the job properly. RAZBAM are already adding stuff from across the service life of the mudhen with the USAF and that is great. There’s a lot of varied ordinance to carry, and even if you can’t be a HARM shooter there’s more than one way to nail a SAM site.

I understand this entirely. I used to be a 100% VR flyer in DCS (to the point where I didn't even have a monitor facing my setup) however I have recently moved to being perhaps 80% flat screen and 20% VR. For my flat screen flying I use a 49" 5440x1440 panel which I have on a monitor extension arm so it can be quite close to me while I am flying. For me I found increasingly I was spending more time playing with settings when something went too way one way or the other (either putting things too low and struggling to read MFD's or hitting some stuttering mess point) than I was flying and enjoying my time. It's not like my setup is underpowered either (Ryzen 5800X3D, RTX 3080 (though that VRAM limitation ), 32GB of RAM) Over time I've found the 3D illusion of VR to be less convincing (I remember when I first put a VR headset on thinking "wow", now not so much) and with the super ultrawide display my whole FOV is occupied by display rather than restricted view in VR (with a Reverb G2, which I know isn't the best FOV). I've also come to appreciate the comfort of not having a pair of screens plastered to the front of my head for extended periods of time. The main thing I miss is the 1:1 head movements which is great particularly for HMD's, but I've gotten better at using headtracking in 2D. Each way is trade-offs, and right now the trade-offs for using VR just aren't worth it for me, however I totally get why for some it would be and for a long time it was for me.

So by that we can take it there has been no progress worth sharing in 4 months?

I know it will. Which is kind of sad given how long we have been waiting for a completed Hornet. At this stage it seems complete will be perhaps ACLS and a trailer on YouTube to say “out of early access” and then maybe a couple of features trickling in if we are lucky over the next couple of years.

So we’ve had 6 mini-updates on the Viper this year (which is great) but nothing on the Hornet since November. Is it possible we can get an update on what work is happening on the Hornet? When we might see the ACLS implementation?

Yes though even the RAAF default liveries are similarly rusty (and those jets never see the decks of an aircraft carrier). Right now the default Hornet liveries are kind of like when someone is making a plastic model and they go overboard with the weathering effects.

I know it has been raised before but given the Viper is getting it and it exists in the real Hornet any plans?

I don’t know what I am more excited about; - the fact we are getting a phreaking phantom! - the suggestion of more variants (which has to mean a naval variant right? F-4J??) - that Heatblur are the developers

Too bad the GEN-X decoys appear to be off the table currently, because yes they would make engaging SA-10's a much more realistic proposition. Currently my approach if going solo against an SA-10 with SA-15's or SA-19's involves a lot of prayer and low-level flying with firing off my HARMS just before I get within the engagement radius of the close in defences and hoping one slips through to take out the radar. I set myself up a little scenario to practice this on and got reasonably good at it, but it was far from a sure fire thing. This shouldn't shock anyone that an SA-10 properly setup is a tough nut to crack, it is doing exactly what it is designed to do. One of the weaknesses of the current DCS arrangement (in the absence of Skynet of course) is that the radars will stay on the whole time rather than switching off when under attack by a HARM. To be honest the F-16 with the HTS and WCMD's and a HARM is probably going to have an easier time with an SA-10 site than a Hornet is (once it gets the HTS of course).

Just to clarify OLED TV's are great for gaming, however they are not ideal as general purpose monitors (due to their subpixel arrangement and of course burn in issues which are an inherent part of the technology). Some modern TV's are great as monitors, but it's about getting the right one. I use a 49" 32:9 ultrawide and it is great for DCS, the additional horizontal FOV makes looking side to side with track IR feel less janky that it does on a 16:9 screen. My monitor also serves as my workstation when working from home and an OLED TV would not fit the bill for that given there are often static images on the screen for extended periods of time, and a lot of my time is spent reading text which is where the subpixel arrangement on OLEDs is less good. If I was buying a display purely for gaming though it would be harder, an OLED TV is amazing for that. Horses for courses. Personally happy with my choice, it suits me (and has freed me from spending my time tweaking settings to get VR playable).

Yeah with TOO mode and a TGP you basically have a poor mans HTS in the Hornet with its magic TOO mode. Hopefully they make it a little more in line with HAS mode in the Viper in the near future.

Absolutely. The HSD page should do a whole lot more but it doesn’t. My vain hope is that with relatively few weapons systems left to implement (JDAMS, JSOWs, WCMD and finishing off the HARM) the systems in the Viper can get some real attention fast after the Hornet leaves early access. The HSD, HTS pod and the ground and HTS features for JHMCS will hopefully get some much needed love (along with all those missing pages, oh and a DTC (which will further augment the HSD))

Ironically right now with the magic TOO mode in the Hornet and the TPOD symbology it is easier to put a waypoint on a SAM site in the Hornet then the Viper (the TOO mode is almost a poor mans HAD right now).

Initially the SA-10 wasn’t intercepting missiles if they were going supersonic, this has now been fixed so your PB shot is outta luck there. You’re going to have to launch from closer, well within the engagement range of the SA-10 which makes it a lot more challenging. Alternatively you can try and overwhelm it if you have multiple members in your flight.

The Viper should have a CRUS page in the DED which has functionality similar to the FPAS system in the Hornet, just not modelled yet. I really don’t see the substantial avionics advantage the Hornet has, things work differently but they still work. The AZ/EL page is nice, but it’s not a game changer, the HSD page is at least as good as the SA page (and is not fully modelled as yet), and the advantage in the Hornet JHMCS is a feature of development state. The only avionics advantage that might change things is the ASPJ as most air to air Vipers are probably not lugging an ECM pod.

Amazing. Just took my Viper for a spin over the Caucuses map and it is like a whole new map which doesn’t feel so out of place alongside the excellent more recent maps. Great work!

Oh if only we had a -5Mk2 or a -D

To a 9X? Sure. It’s from an entirely different era. Compared to contemporaneous weapons it’s same ballpark. I’ve never found it a particular problem. You can’t just ‘put MICA’s on a 2000C’, it doesn’t carry them. That would require a -5F which is a different aircraft with different avionics. If RAZBAM make one one day I will order it day one, but let’s not end up with a frankenmirage.

Disapointing, particularly the GEN-X decoy and the Mk 77.

So other than the jittering clouds with the shader version @Woona has put together it is performing better than 2.5.6 and looks great. I also repaired my install which seemed to help. Hopefully they fix the clouds at the horizon soon because it is quite distracting.

The only thing I can think of is for air-to-air where you can retain a cheek mounted station for an AMRAAM/Sparrow, but the tradeoff for ground pounding is pretty big given if you want to carry more fuel you are going to have to occupy one of your wing hardpoints. The ATFLIR gives much more flexibility in the strike role (we've become accustomed to the LITENING being on a cheek station as well, but I don't think US Hornets carried the LITENING on cheek stations, only on the centerline hardpoint).

On the block 3 Rhino’s you certainly wouldn’t want to be dropping the centreline pod without a good reason given it contains the IRST hardware.

If I am getting down in the weeds - NVG’s otherwise JHMCS. Will be interesting if ED implement the NAVFLIR in the ATFLIR pod (actually it’s mounting adapter) with the raster HUD rendering. Even less reason to bring along NVG’s.

Why would you drop them? They aren’t in unlimited supply. In truth you would only drop them if you are in a situation where the extra drag or weight would be detrimental (dogfighting, emergency situations etc).

The Hornet has now on a couple of occasions (both over Iraq and Syria) shown how the ability to swing from one role to another mid mission is important so it wouldn’t make sense to not have crews do both as you can’t swap mid sortie. That isn’t to say every pilot does every specialised role.