Hawk vs. C101EB/CC Vs. L-39?

[ricktoberfest]

I'm going to officially submit an application to Guinness World Records for the post that has been misread the most number of times.

 

Hawk/C-101/L-39 can CAS/COIN

 

A-10 can CAS/COIN and so does CAS/COIN in DCS

 

Therefore Hawk/C-101/L-39 can CAS/COIN in DCS.

 

 

Nothing about not needing multiple examples of the same class of plane, saying that would be insane.

 

 

You implied that these aircraft would do CAS as well (or poorly) as the A10. That's why. An a10 can shoot down aircraft- doesn't make it the same as an f22. There's a reason why every time they try to phase it out there's a huge uproar from those who rely on CAS.

 

No one who had options would take a trainer into combat CAS over an a10. Shooting a couple insurgents in the jungle (COIN) is not the same thing at all. I'm not sure but I'd be surprised if these trainers could handle guided munitions at all

[Exorcet]

You implied that these aircraft would do CAS as well (or poorly) as the A10.

Not at all. I said they can fill a similar roll. I then went on to say that they were as useless as that plane (the A-10), the implication being not useless at all (supported by the fact that I was complimenting Outlaw's post - "Not only that").

 

No one who had options would take a trainer into combat CAS over an a10.

That's not really relevant. DCS can contain any situation a mission builder wants to create.

 

Shooting a couple insurgents in the jungle (COIN) is not the same thing at all. I'm not sure but I'd be surprised if these trainers could handle guided munitions at all

You're not limited to shooting infantry in jungles, nor are guided weapons required for CAS.

 

 

 

L-39 and C.101 will be interesting to fight against each other.

 

The Hawk was apparently intended to be used as a support fighter for Tornados by the RAF, sort of like an even smaller F-16, so it could be interesting to fly in a fighter role as well.

Edited March 11, 2015 by Exorcet

[Stratos]

The Hawk was apparently intended to be used as a support fighter for Tornados by the RAF, sort of like an even smaller F-16, so it could be interesting to fly in a fighter role as well.

 

 

The problem I "see" in the Hawk, is that with only two hardpoints is a ery poor choice for any role. the C.101 has 6 of them, and you can carry two IR missiles + A-G ordinance ( the L39 should be able to carry R60 missiles plus two A-G hardpoints too), so I think those are more versatile.

BTW I will really like to see missions designed like the ones here as small wars make every bomb and bullet count on the real outcome:

 

http://www.acig.info/CMS/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=156&Itemid=47

 

Now we only need a flyable Hind and our Caucasus map expanded a bit east...

[Exorcet]

BTW I will really like to see missions designed like the ones here as small wars make every bomb and bullet count on the real outcome:

 

http://www.acig.info/CMS/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=156&Itemid=47

 

Now we only need a flyable Hind and our Caucasus map expanded a bit east...

Smaller wars are very interesting yes. There regardless of the lack of ability of a particular aircraft vs more well known types, necessity overwrites all. Some nations only possess smaller and older weapons.

 

This is a prime way to use these trainers in combat situations along with older aircraft like the F-86 whose operational history overlaps with AIM-120's and SA-10's.

[spiddx]

The problem I "see" in the Hawk, is that with only two hardpoints is a ery poor choice for any role..

They modeled the plane with four pylons.

The actual Hawk only has 2 pylons. We have added in an extra 2 pylons for gameplay so you can carry more ordnance.

But: two additional pylons for "gameplay"? Does the real Hawk T.1A has these two pylons?

Not the UK variant; just the inner ones, but other country variants have all four.

Edited March 11, 2015 by spiddx

[Stratos]

They modeled the plane with four pylons.

 

The released ersion came with 4 pylons? If true, now that's interesting.

[Roadrunner]

hawk has 4 pylons, although ells mentioned that the RAF does use a version with only 2. nevertheless, other countrys use 4 pylon versions.

 

Not the UK variant; just the inner ones, but other country variants have all four.

Edited March 12, 2015 by Roadrunner

[NeilWillis]

The simple answer to the question of which trainer you should buy is that it depends on what aircraft you are training to fly.

 

If it is Russian stuff you'll be flying after your basic training, get the L-39. If it is for the Typhoon, get the Hawk.

 

If of course you are interested in flight for the joy of it, then hey, you're really lucky to be able to have all three.

 

Unlike the past, there are nuances to all the modules that make them individuals with their own characters. Personally, I look forward to the evolution of all these modules, and I think EFM for both the Hawk and C101EB will transform them.

 

I have a feeling the L-39 will be the more complete example initially, but of course that is because ED have been at this for much longer. Both VEAO and Aviodev have produced excellent modules, and the outlook, when they have both fulfilled their potential - mouthwatering!

 

I just don't buy this attitude that if you can't fight a war in it, it's not worth looking at. But, each to their own. As long as I continue to get new stuff to fly, of the standard that we've come to expect, then that's fine with me.

[Stratos]

As I said before there are countries that cannot afford bug air forces, so this kind of trainers are they warhorse. Or you can even simulate a small air force with MiG-21 as top fighter, the L-39 as trainer/ground attack (wondering which will be the biggest bomb those three birds can carry) and Hips and Hinds as choppers.

Or for the Western side, F-5's, C101 and Hueys.