Should the F-15C Get JHMCS

[frixon28]

Can I ask for a DASH and Python-5's for my F-5 now? It only carries two and I'm not asking for upgraded radar or anything.

 

So you think that the F-5's current weapons or not good enough to take on the MiG-21? I disagree heavily, especially since it's far easier to argue that the F-5, even with less weapons, still has an advantage over the MiG-21 due to superior weapon systems.

 

How this relates to the F-15 conservation makes no sense to me either...

[Sweep]

How this relates to the F-15 conservation makes no sense to me either...

 

He's making fun of your JHMCS request. Mainly the reasoning behind it, I believe. :D

 

And if I may go off topic for a second, his request would be interesting given that the F-5E is and was an Aggressor/Adversary jet. F-5E+R-73 pls!. Actually, by the same logic the Eagle should have Russian weapons (I have a mod for it lol).

 

Back on topic, though, if you're a vEagle Driver and getting pale at the thought of a Hornet with AIM-9X+HMD, that's going to force you to fight differently. No more 3 bags and chill. You gotta drag, blowthrough, get high and fast, and do basically everything you've always been capable of doing if you want to win. It's gonna be good fun. The Bug may have sensors, but we have speed and sufficient SA. Same story with Flanker/Fulcrum guys...Especially Fulcrums when the new FM comes out. High and fast, collapse the Bug's 9X/120C DLZs and make him fight your fight.

Edited April 19, 2017 by Sweep
adding my $0.02 for the 100th time.

[lemoen]

Nicely said Sweep. Lol@ 3 bags and chill.

 

The F15C is an Air Superiority *Fighter* not Air Superiority *Receiver*.

[mvsgas]

The R-73 is a high off-boresight missile with a helmet mounted sight. So why the new concern with the AIM-9X/JHMCS? I know the upcoming Aim-9X may have some capabilities over the in game R-73, but maybe they will update the R-73 as well. Instead of the F-15 with those features, it would be extremely cool to see a Mig-29 with improved flight model and avionics.

Edited April 19, 2017 by mvsgas

[IASGATG]

The R-73 is a high off-boresight missile with a helmet mounted sight. So why the new concern with the AIM-9X/JHMCS? I know the upcoming Aim-9X may have some capabilities over the in game R-73, but maybe they will update the R-73 as well. Instead of the F-15 with those features, it would be extremely cool to see a Mig-29 with improved flight model and avionics.

 

 

 

The concern I think for people is that the "some capabilities" are that its seeker is immune to flares. The 73 you can defeat pretty with a good flare dump, the 9X you'll have no joy. That and the 9X has a higher g tolerance to the 73 and is smaller so can turn tighter still. Mostly the only way to defeat the Xray is to not get shot by it or to be so close and off aspect that it cannot make the turn.

[OnlyforDCS]

Just a quick question. Why is everyone so sure that ED will model the AIM9X to be the "all-seeing missile of death"? I mean, the missiles modeled by ED in DCS so far are nowhere near their real world counterparts in aerodynamic, guidance, or CM rejection performance.

[GGTharos]

The heaters are modeled just fine in most cases thanks to having fairly short operating times and ranges - in other words they don't need additional guidance algorithms beyond PN, and their drag is, well, consistent given that speed-time diagrams are available for the 9L and the 9M takes after that graph in-game.

 

So if they don't model the 9X as the 'all seeing missile of death', it's wrong ... and it's quite easy to make it ignore CMs.

 

Note: The peeps who employ these FPA seekers may have developed CMs against them IRL. But so far all the conventional CMs we know of, these seekers just don't care. If your initial lock is good, it's publicly demonstrated that the 9X just ignores the CMs (that would include the 25Ts IR jammer) and ED takes that into account, like it or not.

Edited April 19, 2017 by GGTharos

[OnlyforDCS]

Well thats good to know GGTharos. :)

[IASGATG]

My favourite was the footage of the Xray chasing an QF-4 that put out somewhere in the region of 200 flares in about 10 seconds and the Xray just laughed all the way into the drone.

[Vampyre]

Nonsensical, within the context of this discussion. Not having these things would be a distinct disadvantage against a force that does. The best assumption a pilot can make going in to the air is that the other guy is at least equally trained as them. Technology is then used to give an edge above that. Otherwise, you might as well consider Jet engines a crutch (maybe true for ME-262 pilots). The P-51D is all we ever needed. There is simply a point where no amount of raw skill can make up for platform deficiencies. Something like JHMCS is a thing because A: its needed to maximize the capability of the AIM-9X, and B: contemporary opponents have this capability. It makes up for something the platform could not do. If a Flanker can both turn better and fire HOBS weapons, and you can't, its best not to merge in the first place. Since various factors could force one to happen, having the right tools as an option can go a long way.

 

All technology can be considered a crutch. Just like it can be considered a force multiplier. The JHMCS/HOBS is a fairly recent development for the F-15. The MiG-29 and Su-27 had these capabilities in the 80's. Why do you suppose the Soviets decided to include this feature on the MiG-29 and Su-27? Was it a crutch or a force multiplier or both? It took almost 30 years to get it on the premiere air superiority fighter in the world partly because it was not considered a required tool for the mission. Now it is a required tool due to the advent of near peer 5th generation threats and poor decision making of politicians that limited production of its replacement, which also did not have JHMCS/HOBS for the first 10-12 years of its service even though the technology was available. To further refine my statement, In the context of this discussion, this technology would mainly be a crutch because, in DCS, the only new threat is the F/A-18C. The JHMCS is needed to make The F/A-18C somewhat competitive in the game due to its poorer flight performance in the air to air arena. It is not needed for the F-15C. This is why I chose the word crutch vice force multiplier.

[Sweep]

My favourite was the footage of the Xray chasing an QF-4 that put out somewhere in the region of 200 flares in about 10 seconds and the Xray just laughed all the way into the drone.

 

Hopefully they'll redo the AIM-9X seeker texture and put a troll face on it.

[GGTharos]

They should have done that with the ET.

 

Back in the old days, when the ET was about to explode the graphics card would just freeze fora split second before processing this, so you see this huge ET in your canopy for just a moment and then boom :D

Edited April 19, 2017 by GGTharos

[wilbur81]

Change the Title

 

Let's change the title of this poll to:

 

"Who would like to see the DCS F-15C get JHMCS with Aim 9x capability?

[IASGATG]

I mean there is nothing stopping the F-15C from getting AIM-9X, which I'd be more than happy with. I'd fly 8 9X's if I could.

[Sweep]

They should have done that with the ET.

 

Back in the old days, when the ET was about to explode the graphics card would just freeze fora split second before processing this, so you see this huge ET in your canopy for just a moment and then boom :D

 

LOL.

[Schmidtfire]

With the capabilities of the AIM-9X I see little to no advantage carrying AIM-120s around in DCS. Since AIM-120s pose a real threat around 10nm, you can use the AIM-9X instead. No missile launch warning and probably a lot harder to defeat at that range.

[Sweep]

With the capabilities of the AIM-9X I see little to no advantage carrying AIM-120s around in DCS. Since AIM-120s pose a real threat around 10nm, you can use the AIM-9X instead. No missile launch warning and probably a lot harder to defeat at that range.

 

It's a heater with heater drag. Defeat it like you'd defeat an AIM-120...Just don't try that within 5nmi or so. :D

[GGTharos]

It's a heater with less heater drag than an AIM-9M heater and the possibility of fly to predicted intercept point capability (not that any missile has this in DCS) ... just saying ... properly implemented it may have the same range as an AIM-120C has in-game today :D

Edited April 19, 2017 by GGTharos

[Sweep]

Okay it's a heater with DCS AMRAAM drag. :D

[IASGATG]

Mmm or giving the 27ET dcs heater drag... ;)

[frixon28]

All technology can be considered a crutch. Just like it can be considered a force multiplier. The JHMCS/HOBS is a fairly recent development for the F-15. The MiG-29 and Su-27 had these capabilities in the 80's. Why do you suppose the Soviets decided to include this feature on the MiG-29 and Su-27? Was it a crutch or a force multiplier or both? It took almost 30 years to get it on the premiere air superiority fighter in the world partly because it was not considered a required tool for the mission. Now it is a required tool due to the advent of near peer 5th generation threats and poor decision making of politicians that limited production of its replacement, which also did not have JHMCS/HOBS for the first 10-12 years of its service even though the technology was available. To further refine my statement, In the context of this discussion, this technology would mainly be a crutch because, in DCS, the only new threat is the F/A-18C. The JHMCS is needed to make The F/A-18C somewhat competitive in the game due to its poorer flight performance in the air to air arena. It is not needed for the F-15C. This is why I chose the word crutch vice force multiplier.

 

This, this makes sense. Do you think ED would allow the Hornet to have the 9x but not the Eagle? Not a rhetorical question.

[blkspade]

Okay it's a heater with DCS AMRAAM drag. :D

 

Dude, the current AIM-9M can kill a non maneuvering afterburning target up to 12nm. A less draggy more maneuverable version of that will be BA.

[blkspade]

This, this makes sense. Do you think ED would allow the Hornet to have the 9x but not the Eagle? Not a rhetorical question.

 

Considering the AIM-9X went into service for both the USAF (F-15) and USN in 2003, and the supposedly AIM-120C-5 we have in game was purchased after that, it would make sense that they enable the F-15 to use it.

[GGTharos]

Deliveries of the C5 began in the middle of 2000.

[blkspade]

They should have done that with the ET.

 

Back in the old days, when the ET was about to explode the graphics card would just freeze fora split second before processing this, so you see this huge ET in your canopy for just a moment and then boom :D

 

LOL, yeah. So often I would be turning my head one way or the scanning my surroundings just to turn back in just enough time to see that ET smacking me in the face.