Cytarabine

Yep disengage TWS. Because the AN/APG-73 is generating track files even when in RWS you can quickly click over to TWS even you have a target to engage and it will have already defined the tracks. It is different to the Viper though I find the Hornet TWS to be better.

The displays aren’t that much of an issue. While the full colour displays of the Viper have their charm and look more ‘modern’ the displays on the Hornet are both more useful in content and clarity (remembering even in the real world LCD is not always better that CRT). The only time the display is a real weakness in with the TGP though even then after using the LANTIRN in the Tomcat it is much better. In terms of MFDs I would argue that only the Jeff currently beats the Hornet. Maybe if they do an early lot super Hornet they could include that down the track (make even more money).

While there are clearly some features which are needing polish (a whole tin of polish for some, TGP I am looking at you) and some missing features (A-G radar being the obvious one but some others) the Hornet is now very capable and complete enough that you won’t find yourself running into placeholders or things which are so partially implemented it is a show stopper. As it stands you can; - do air to air - while the A-A radar is not complete yet it is very good (and personally I find the TWS implementation to be superior to that in the Viper, particularly for multi-target engagements (where often in the Viper I end up having one target not being a system track and thus not being able to bug it the Hornet system is as smooth as silk). - perform SEAD - the HARM lacks pre-planned mode (though if you have a target location you have other options like the JSOW A), sadly it will never have a HTS, so your Viper buddies will have to play chicken with the SAMs to map them out (when it finally gets it) - CAS - TGP, Mavericks, LGBs, JDAMs, Rockets, iron bombs, gun, cluster munitions all there. - Interdiction - yep - Stand-off strike - JSOWs currently, hopefully we see the SLAM-ER early in the new year (this is going to lead to some really interesting possibilities particularly once datalink to other pilots missiles is implemented (see the description of one of the strikes in ‘Declared Hostile’) - Anti-shipping - while we have the Harpoon the lack of sea radar currently is a bit of a downer on that one While there are more complete modules they all have their limitations. The beautiful Tomcat (which Heatblur have done a fantastic job with) even complete is more limited in role (but very capable in the roles it can do), the Viggen and Warthog are really meant to be down in the mud (whether that be while flying slow in a tank or at Mach 1 tree top flying) and the Mirage (which is fantastic as well) is both more limited in air to air (no datalink, no active radar missiles) and air to ground (rockets, dumb bombs or LGBs with someone else lazing). The only comparator is Jeff though it can’t refuel in mid-air as yet, can’t operate on a carrier and has some bugs (which Deka are diligently dealing with by all reports). By the time you master all of that there will be more things to play with.

I think the HUD range queue might be the issue here as I have connected several shots (in SP) where the target has been in range according to the MFD but not according to the HUD which means no time to missile active or time to impact on the HUD.

So the radar can maintain 10 tracks; - 8 of these are just displayed on your radar with no information in the HUD - the DT2 target is in the HUD but has no other info displayed other than an X, it is your second target - the L&S is the target you are currently preparing to fire upon so has a target box and launch parameters so you are receiving launch (L) cues and steering (S) cues. So you can guide a missile to any track, but it has to be the L&S target to fire on it. The DT2 target is one you are keeping an eye on. Perhaps you have launched on it already and want to know where it is to look for the explosion to indicate a hit, or what they are doing so you can keep track while prosecuting one target.

I just noticed the same behavior so would be very interested in what the answer to this is.

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.