Considering a multi role fighter, long term planning: Bombcat v Strike Eagle v Hornet

[Voyager]

Not sure if this is the right sub forum for this type of question, but I'm thinking about dipping my toes back into modern era fighters for a while and debating which one I want to start looking at, and I thunk, for me at least, it boils down to the F-14, F-15C/E and the Hornet/Super Hornet, and I'm trying to understand the pros and cons of each.

 

The F-14 has the advantage of being available and, apparently being exceptionally well done, and having activity in the Persian Gulf, as well as being carrier capable. What I find myself wondering is how capable is it in multi role combat? How broad is the expected attack papas expected to be? Also, how Diego able is in the more contemporary air defense environments? I recall hearing its counter measures were behind the curve by the time it retired.

 

In the hornet option, while I'm more interested in the Super Hornet version, and I expect it may be sometime before anyone starts one, I'm given to understand that the legacy Hornet is very similar and one can easily transfer to the rhino from a basis in the standard. As near as I can tell, the DCS Hornet has an impressive and growing array of capabilities, but it doesn't call to me the way the F-14 does.

 

The final option is the Strike Eagle. While it doesn't exist yet, I gather that it is in work, and the F-15C is readily available and I gather a large chunk of the A2A systems are similar between the two, and the array of international users of the Strike Eagle would mean a wide range of possible scenarios.

 

Overall, how do the capabilities and viable time periods of these aircraft stack up to each other? It's going to be a while before I can dedicate real time to this, so I'm not in a huge rush to pick one, but I do want to understand what the trades are.

 

Thank you,

 

Harry Voyager

[SVgamer72]

..... it doesn't call to me the way the F-14 does...

 

I think you might already have your answer.

 

The F/A-18C is going to be the most capable due to all the systems it will ultimately have implemented (it is no slouch today, and is A2A, A2G, and SEAD/DEAD capable right now).

 

At the end of the day, you are the one sitting behind the controls. So go with your gut. The module you want to fly is going to provide the most value for the time you invest.

[Voyager]

True, but just because it looks cool and has an epic history doesn't mean it can survive a modern SAM environment. I guess before I take that plunge, I want to understand what I would be giving up.

[probad]

you're gonna get both of them, dont fool yourself

[Canada_Moose]

I have F14 and F18.

 

 

Always loved the 14 for various reasons but honestly, I find myself back in the 18 on DCS for the most part.

 

 

 

It maybe because I'm more comfortable in the 18 with more hours but for single pilot operation (Jester is not quite there yet and I don't do multiplayer) I find it much more user friendly.

 

 

Both great addons but at the moment, If I had to pick one, it would be the F-18C

[Baco]

Well the F 18 is more flexible. Can blind the SAMs, defend itself and put iron on target.

 

The Tomcat has some AG capability but its not a true multi role.

 

The Strike Eagle is THE multi role aircraft but I believe its years away... and it can´t land on carriers.

 

Then again to me its like some navy pilots say, the Hornet is a nice minivan, the Cat is a sports car.

[Voyager]

Of course, now I'm all wondering if anyone has an F-4 on the horizon....

[Buzzles]

Of course, now I'm all wondering if anyone has an F-4 on the horizon....

 

ED do. But it's going to be at least 2+ years before they start on it properly as they said it's been pushed back behind the Mi-24, which was pushed back itself.

 

With regard to your question, buy both? One now, one later.

 

If you really can't pick, then IMO: F-14 is for flying. F-18 is for having fun with all the toys.

[hornblower793]

Agree with Buzzles:thumbup: - the F-14 is definitely a hands-on aircraft but it is a delight to fly.

 

 

Hornet is next gen

[LC34]

The F-16 is coming down the line as well, something to consider I guess.

[javelina1]

would agree, you'll end up with both at some point down the road. :-)

[Kev2go]

I have both the tomcat and the Hornet, and i find myself going back to the Hornet alot.

 

AS others have said for single player jester isnt quite there, and for me , the real tomcat that i think i would have enjoyed the most would have been the F14D, not the F14B which feels antiquated compared to the systems of a 21st century era Hornet, but very fitting for cold war server is suppose since it was advanced airplane of its time.

 

TBH apart from its long range radar, and ability to lob Phoenix missiles for removing enemies at unmatched ranges, i would otherwise prefer using the Hornet for just almost every other situation.

Edited March 31, 2019 by Kev2go

[Scofflaw]

TBH apart from lobbing Phoenix missiles and removing enemies at unmatched ranges, i would otherwise prefer using the Hornet for just almost every other situation.

 

 

Same here. If it wasn't for the phoenix, I would rarely fly the tomcat. I just feel much more comfortable in the Hornet.

[kontiuka]

The F-15C is not multi-role and the one in DCS is only Flaming Cliffs level so you can scratch that off your list.

[NineGzuz]

Easy. The F14 isn't a true multirole plane. And the F15e is years away.

 

The F/A 18 is available now. So this is the only real option.its the best parts of both the 14 and 15e rolled into one. You also don't need a second person to fly it properly.

 

 

Plus if the F15e or F16 ever come out I think the transistion will be easy from the f/a18 since it's dropping the same weapons.

[UrgentSiesta]

TL;DR:

1. don't wait for/choose anything that isn't released (so, strike the F-15)

a. don't hold your breath for a Super Hornet, either.

3. the Tomcat is OLD - it's actually a 3rd gen fighter. Don't expect it to be generally competitive in DCS (until the D model hopefully comes along)

a. it is also an *interceptor*, not a dog fighter

 

Based on what you've shared, I think the Hornet is the best *objective* choice for you. It is top-dog all-around.

 

BUT, since you like the Tomcat (and older planes in general), the Tomcat is a capable interceptor that can ocassionally do a decent job dropping bombs.

As long as you don't expect it to come out on top of Hornets and Flankers, its a great choice.

[Zius]

Of all existing modules, only the Hornet and the Mirage 2000 are truly modern(ish) fighters.

 

 

I think it doesn't make sense to wait for the Strike Eagle. The Super Hornet is not even on the horizon.

 

 

Later this year the JF-17 is scheduled to come out.

The F-16 is scheduled for late 2019 - 2020.

The F-15E might come in 2020 or later.

 

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=116893

[Fracture]

You can toss-bomb at high speed with the 'Cat.

Hornet can't hit M1 unless you're clean and going straight down<-----Just kidding the Hornet guys :)

[Kev2go]

Of all existing modules, only the Hornet and the Mirage 2000 are truly modern(ish) fighters.

 

 

I think it doesn't make sense to wait for the Strike Eagle. The Super Hornet is not even on the horizon.

 

 

Later this year the JF-17 is scheduled to come out.

The F-16 is scheduled for late 2019 - 2020.

The F-15E might come in 2020 or later.

 

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=116893

 

i woundn't consider the M2000C a modern contemporary ( even if its still in service in similar configuration ) at least not when compared to the F18, because it lacks a lot of comparable features that are common in more modernized and or more modern produced aircraft

 

It lacks Glass cockpits, using purely INS based navigation instead of EGI, no moving map, no datalink , No MICA ( which would be am active radar missile contemporary to Aim120) , no ability to self designate guided munitions. no off boresight helmet sight.

Edited March 31, 2019 by Kev2go

[Zius]

i woundn't consider the M2000C a modern contemporary ( even if its still in service in similar configuration ) at least not when compared to the F18, because it lacks a lot of comparable features that are common in more modernized and or more modern produced aircraft

 

It lacks Glass cockpits, using purely INS based navigation instead of EGI, no moving map, no datalink , No MICA ( which would be am active radar missile contemporary to Aim120) , no ability to self designate guided munitions. no off boresight helmet sight.

 

 

Both the M2000 and the F-18 had their first flight in 1978. F-14 by comparison in 1970.

 

 

 

But the M2k that we have is more or less the basic version, while the F-18 is an updated one...

[Kev2go]

Both the M2000 and the F-18 had their first flight in 1978. F-14 by comparison in 1970.

 

 

 

But the M2k that we have is more or less the basic version, while the F-18 is an updated one...

 

 

Yes FA18C version in DCS is an 1998 production model ( lot 20) utilizing updated post production features from post Y2K, thats the point... hence its a a "modern" ( and multi-role) fighter, and M2000C and F14A/B variants. Raw radar range superiority and Phoenix capability for extra standoff BVR doesn't make it so.

 

However it should be noted that even the F/A18A when it entered service in 1983 was already in some ways more advanced then the m2000c as in comparison was already form day 1 equipped with "Glass cockpit" configuration , along with sporting a superior radar to early production M2000C( AN/APG65 > RDM ) ONly 1987+ did mirages get the RDI radar which also enabled them to use more modern Super 530D, a Aim7M contemporary. But most importantly the hornet already a "multirole" aircraft whilst the M2000C was predominately a lightweight fighter interceptor with secondary ground attack ability.

Besides unguided munitions F/A18A were already compatible with the Nitehawk TGP. and could make use of AGM88 hARM, and AGM84's for anti shipping as well as being able to carry larger quantity of A2A missiles for air combat missions.

 

and first DOF isnt really the point here. , as the "antiquated" tech ( relative to a post Cold war Hornet) i speak of applies to the F14A/B which only ever had incremental updates vs major overhauls, with funding to upgrade them eventually cut. My point earlier was that the F14D regardless if the earlier models first DOI which was actually a major overhaul of the Tomcat platform. It would be more on par with its updated electronics to whats seen in a F/A18C Hornet, and also have better A/G attack capabilities to its "bombcat" predecessor. IT would basically be a USN contemporary to the F15E, although it would still lack Aim120 unfortunately.

 

 

 

 

So back to the original post to answer OP question

 

Currently only truly "modern multirole" fighter is the F/A18C, and will remain as such until ED next project post Hornet gets finished : The F16C block 50 with CCIP upgrades and 3rd party developer Dekka Ironworks JF17 thunder ( Chinese/pakistani export fighter) The only other consideration in the longer term will be Razbam's F15E.

Edited April 1, 2019 by Kev2go

[kengou]

The F/A-18 is more capable at multirole and A2G than the F-14, and will only get more and more so as the targeting pod and A2G radar become available (eventually). A2A is also terrific with the high alpha controllability and modern radar. It's a delight to fly and very well done.

 

 

The F-14 is also a delight to fly and more hands-on than the Hornet. Also multi-crew capable and has a backseater AI, making it a very unique module to learn and fly. A2A is seriously fun in this bird. I heartily recommend it.

 

 

The Strike Eagle is at least a year or more away from early access so I wouldn't waste time waiting around for it. And the F-15C is not worth considering, even in order to 'prepare' for the Strike Eagle, because it's a simpler FC3 level module and systems are very much restricted and simplified. It's still fun for A2A though on its own merits.

 

 

For true multirole with tons of mission capabilities, the F/A-18 is your best bet, followed by the upcoming F-16.