Cytarabine

Exactly this. You CAN fly without the rudder pedals on all of the FBW aircraft with the exception of taxi (which can be worked around with keybinds or binding buttons), however the Hornet really sings at high AoA and there you need a good rudder input. Having said that I would invest in some form of head tracking before getting rudder pedals. The full fidelity modules really demand that you are able to quickly look around the cockpit (and for me trying to do that with an axis on the joystick does not cut it).

Got to agree, the TWS in the Hornet is fantastic. I really like seeing my targets turn too late when the missile goes pitbull on them. I also find that it is much quicker at assigning track files than the Viper. Often in the Viper I won’t have the whole formation as tracks while in the Hornet no such issue. The information on the HUD and radar display is also much more useful than the Viper. Perhaps they have modelled a difference between the AN/APG-73 and the AN/APG-68v5?

Outside of attacking a close formation of bombers I don’t know how practical engaging ten targets at a time would be.

Have you looked to see whether the calibration is out on that axis?

Absolutely. Other than the SLAM-ER most of the weapons are there but need to be completed. Things like sea mines, fuel air explosives and the Paveway III should wait until we have complete versions of the existing weapons (including a fixed AMRAAM).

I suspect this will be more useful when (if) the dynamic campaign becomes a thing where you are going to want to be using them to take out high threat SAM targets and EW assets before you go in up close and personal.

Yep, given his other post is wanting to modify the engines to be more powerful I suspect he would be much happier playing ace combat. Not that there is anything wrong with that! Having to nurse your resources to get you to the target and back isn’t for everyone. (For some reason my quote of ST0RM didn’t appear but of course am referencing his post)

It has more features implemented. If this is completed then that is very disappointing because it is far from bug free or complete in its implementation.

It has a section now.

Yes absolutely. We need to know when Jeff is around.

Anticipation intensifies. I know I asked earlier and you weren’t certain but since the super carrier is apparently getting closer (and the cinematic looked impressive, who knows if it will live up to it) any further thoughts on how it will influence the campaign? Will the JF-17 be sitting in for the experimental super fighter?

Absolutely. Clearly ED know it is cool given they included it in the video so come on!

Great news indeed. If this is what parallel development leads to than I can live with that.

So the answer to that is no with a caveat. If you want full coverage while still generating track files you have LTWS which will generate track files on RWS targets which when you are ready to engage you can select TWS.

Don't get your hopes up too much, they are starting to work on it, whether we see it in December who knows. I am betting early new year before we see anything concrete.

Not how it works - implicitly a target need not have a waypoint, particularly if it is a target which you are not going to go terribly near - for example if you are using a JSOW to strike from beyond SAM range. Equally a waypoint may not be specific enough for a target location. TOO mode is basically taking data from any targeting system (be it the navigation system, TPOD, HUD/JHMCS or ground radar) and forwarding it to the weapon which is then deployed.

Well there is a reason why you have each radar mode. VS for finding targets at the longest range. RWS for identifying targets at range with maximal SA. TWS for engaging a target (or multiple) while maintaining situation awareness. STT to engage a single target with as detailed a track as possible (for fast maneuvering targets or closer ranges). Once you bug a target in either SAM or TWS your scan volume is decreased.

Sounds good. I will believe it when I see it but if they deliver than that will be a good step forward. I suspect there has been a degree of getting the Viper up to speed with the Hornet to allow for parallel development to happen. Perhaps we will see a push on Hornet systems for the time being and some more weapons to the Viper (hopefully after we get the SLAM-ER). If they play it right then in the end this parallel development process could pay off in the end.

Nice missions, despite being the same mission the feel is quite different in the Viper than in the Hornet, particularly mission 3.

That would be a great era for a scenario. The Hornet could do the striking with Walleyes (they are big bombs) while the Viper does SEAD and CAS. CAP duties could be performed by Mirages providing close in CAP with Tomcats providing additional cover perhaps coming up to cover the retreat of the strike package.

So I guess this means the ‘push’ on TWS and the TGP for the Hornet is kicked down the road another week while the Viper gets sorted out?

Yeah as much as I love the Mirage the 2000C we have is a tough fit against the early 21st century fighters. If you compare it to a contemporary Hornet or Viper it holds up quite well, the Magic II is quite a good missile, and the 530D is good for a semi-active radar homing missile. Realistically it would probably be doing CAP in a less active sector, maybe doing HVACAP with an AWACS or tanker?

Assuming this is with 'complete' modules that have all their features; SEAD - Viper - having the HTS pod just makes it that bit more capable in SEAD CAP - Hornet - more missiles means can stay out there longer (likely with a 3 bags, AIM-9X on the wingtips, 2 x AIM-120C on each outer pylon and an AIM-120 on each fuselage mount), better radar (the APG-73 SHOULD be better than the APG-68v5, whether it will be is another question) Interdiction - Hornet, it is faster with an A-G load than the Viper CAS - Viper, more Maverick goodness Anti-shipping - Hornet, no Harpoon, no contest Striking a heavily defended target - Hornet, SLAM-ER complementing the JSOW Ultimately other than anti-shipping where the lack of a dedicated anti-shipping missile is a big factor they are pretty even matches across the spectrum.

There were experiments with prone pilot positions for this reason (and allowing a reduced frontal aspect so reducing drag).

Ummm... Okay. Have you been trying to fly the Viper with the FLCS turned off again? Edit... Oh no I get it, been sniffing the Hydrazine in the EPU... that stuffs nasty!