Hornet and Viper complementing each other

[GoosemanF7]

When planing a big mission including sead,cas,cap (or even more) and having both viper and hornet at your disposal, which one would be assigned to which mission to ensure the best outcome, and why?

 

Tell me all your scenarios/ideas!

 

:pilotfly:

[QuiGon]

Are you talking about the current capabilities that those birds have in DCS right now or are you talking about their projected capabilities once they are feature complete?

[kengou]

Well they have very similar roles that overlap a lot. Eventually, the F-16 will be better for SEAD and Wild Weasel with the HTS pod. Hornet will have more standoff weapons like the SLAM-ER and Harpoon that the Viper can't carry though.

[Cytarabine]

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.

[GoosemanF7]

Are you talking about the current capabilities that those birds have in DCS right now or are you talking about their projected capabilities once they are feature complete?

 

I am talking about when they are complete modules with all their weapons and capabilities.

[Arctander]

Shall we wait for said modules to be completed instead of theorycrafting? There’s no point doing so as we won’t be able to test those ideas for Years yet.

[GoosemanF7]

Shall we wait for said modules to be completed instead of theorycrafting? There’s no point doing so as we won’t be able to test those ideas for Years yet.

 

But till they are finished products all we have is theorycrafting :smilewink:

[Arctander]

Good point, well made. Maybe we should sit in our pits in the hornet and make ‘beep’ noises to simulate the missing systems!

[GoosemanF7]

Good point, well made. Maybe we should sit in our pits in the hornet and make ‘beep’ noises to simulate the missing systems!

 

I am sensing some discontent about unfinished modules :smilewink:

 

In my mind theorizing about the planes in DCS is an important part of a community and the reason for a forum like this.

To talk about shared interests and have fun with it.

[Harlikwin]

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.

 

Minor correction, I'm pretty sure the Viper can carry 3 bags, plus its fuel burn rate with 1 engine is less than the hornet with 2 gas guzzlers. Armament should be the same IIRC with bags 4/2, But yes it should have the better radar.

[gekoiq]

Minor correction, I'm pretty sure the Viper can carry 3 bags, plus its fuel burn rate with 1 engine is less than the hornet with 2 gas guzzlers. Armament should be the same IIRC with bags 4/2, But yes it should have the better radar.

 

With wing bags, the Hornet can carry 6+2. (2 on the fuselage stations 4 and 6, 2each on the outer wing pylons)

[Harlikwin]

With wing bags, the Hornet can carry 6+2. (2 on the fuselage stations 4 and 6, 2each on the outer wing pylons)

 

Yeah, but drag etc. I know DCS uber ace spamraaam tactics involve just shooting your whole wad at some guy, but IRL loadouts vs DCS then to be rather different.... (No offense intended, you are right that it can carry a few more, but I'd say 90% of DCS load-outs I see online aren't even remotely close to reality)

[TheGuardian]

Good point, well made. Maybe we should sit in our pits in the hornet and make ‘beep’ noises to simulate the missing systems!

 

And this is why we can't have nice things. We are simply talking and/or reading about how two systems can complement each other. Why does every topic created in the forums have to boil back to delays, broken promises, can't get what I want when I want it? Why can't people just talk about what they would like to see in DCS or ask how to learn something new without these kinda of overtly negative/adds zero to the discussion comments?

 

I think they two planes will complement each other quite nicely, at least if you have good mission design and competent pilots. Either way it's good fun all around.

[gekoiq]

Yeah, but drag etc. I know DCS uber ace spamraaam tactics involve just shooting your whole wad at some guy, but IRL loadouts vs DCS then to be rather different.... (No offense intended, you are right that it can carry a few more, but I'd say 90% of DCS load-outs I see online aren't even remotely close to reality)

 

Yeah the 10x slammer loadout is dumb and certainly never used operationally, but 6x is perfectly reasonable if the expected threat is high. 4x would probably be the more sensible/common loadout IRL as the air-threat is rarely as high as it is in most DCS servers/missions.

[Harker]

And this is why we can't have nice things. We are simply talking and/or reading about how two systems can complement each other. Why does every topic created in the forums have to boil back to delays, broken promises, can't get what I want when I want it? Why can't people just talk about what they would like to see in DCS or ask how to learn something new without these kinda of overtly negative/adds zero to the discussion comments?

 

I think they two planes will complement each other quite nicely, at least if you have good mission design and competent pilots. Either way it's good fun all around.

True words. No one's happy about some things, but we shouldn't let it derail every single thread. The OP had a nice question, with future mission building in mind.

 

Back to topic, I generally agree with Cytarabine's post, except for the fact that USAF Vipers generally carry only two Mavericks IRL due to certain limitations/concerns, so the Hornet can carry more, if it only takes a centerline tank. Apart from that, the rest of the list is pretty good.

 

I'd still choose Vipers for quick in-and-out CAP flights with Hornets providing CAP. Another thing in favor of the Hornet in A2A roles is MSI and the SA page, providing a better SA picture to the pilot and facilitating engagement decisions. The HSD in the Viper can also display datalink info etc, but not to the same detail as in the Hornet, AFAIK.

[Harlikwin]

Yeah the 10x slammer loadout is dumb and certainly never used operationally, but 6x is perfectly reasonable if the expected threat is high. 4x would probably be the more sensible/common loadout IRL as the air-threat is rarely as high as it is in most DCS servers/missions.

 

Yup... Plus that thing called actual BVR tactics and planning that most of DCS online tends to lack. But I digress :). And having been on the receiving end of a 10spammram salute a few times and having lived to tell about it makes me a bit jaded too.

[Harlikwin]

True words. No one's happy about some things, but we shouldn't let it derail every single thread. The OP had a nice question, with future mission building in mind.

 

Back to topic, I generally agree with Cytarabine's post, except for the fact that USAF Vipers generally carry only two Mavericks IRL due to certain limitations/concerns, so the Hornet can carry more, if it only takes a centerline tank. Apart from that, the rest of the list is pretty good.

 

I'd still choose Vipers for quick in-and-out CAP flights with Hornets providing CAP. Another thing in favor of the Hornet in A2A roles is MSI and the SA page, providing a better SA picture to the pilot and facilitating engagement decisions. The HSD in the Viper can also display datalink info etc, but not to the same detail as in the Hornet, AFAIK.

 

You mean CAS for vipers?

 

I mainly want SEAD/DEAD capability for the Viper, gimme the HTS and some Mavs and I'm happy.

 

And I agree that the hornet is more advanced radar wise/datalink wise as well.

[isotaan]

Regarding SEAD differences between the F-16C and F/A-18C...

 

While the HTS will make the F-16 a better HARM platform in some edge cases, the Hornet will be a better SEAD aircraft overall because it can carry the TALD decoy. Do not underestimate the capability this offers when there's good mission design, even in MP. One Hornet can suck up half of a SAM site's missiles. Two hornets can negate a site's ability to engage targets for a long time as the site has to reload their missiles.

 

The Hornet may also be able to carry more JSOWs than the Falcon, partially offsetting the game preference for murderbots over poor cluster damage modeling (I am not certain about this, but I have yet to see evidence that the F-16C carried BRU-57/As on stations 4 and 6).

[donkeyrider]

And this is why we can't have nice things. We are simply talking and/or reading about how two systems can complement each other. Why does every topic created in the forums have to boil back to delays, broken promises, can't get what I want when I want it? Why can't people just talk about what they would like to see in DCS or ask how to learn something new without these kinda of overtly negative/adds zero to the discussion comments?

 

I think they two planes will complement each other quite nicely, at least if you have good mission design and competent pilots. Either way it's good fun all around.

 

+1

[GoosemanF7]

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.

 

Great summary, thanks!

Actually this is how i would set it up in the editor in a persian gulf conflict:

Hornets for CAP providing cover

Vipers going in first with SEAD/DEAD

Hornets dropping stand-off stuff like JSOW and SLAM-ER

Viper with GBUs as the main strike package

Maybe some sneaky Viggen attacks at supply depots?

 

Now onto the next question: How would a M2000 fit into that?

Additional CAP? As GBU-bombtruck for the F-16?

I love the Mirage, but struggling to find a mission where it is better than the other planes.

Most of the time i fit it in under "realism/lore" aspects. Like there is no other additional plane available.

[QuiGon]

Now onto the next question: How would a M2000 fit into that?

Additional CAP? As GBU-bombtruck for the F-16?

I love the Mirage, but struggling to find a mission where it is better than the other planes.

Most of the time i fit it in under "realism/lore" aspects. Like there is no other additional plane available.

Well, when the Mirage 2000C entered service in the mid 80s, the Hornets only carried Sparrows and Sidewinders and the Vipers where restricted to Sidewinders only. So, yeah a mid 80s platform as the M2000C falls short compared to mid 00s platforms that our Hornet and Viper variants are.

[Cytarabine]

Well, when the Mirage 2000C entered service in the mid 80s, the Hornets only carried Sparrows and Sidewinders and the Vipers where restricted to Sidewinders only. So, yeah a mid 80s platform as the M2000C falls short compared to mid 00s platforms that our Hornet and Viper variants are.

 

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?

[GoosemanF7]

Well, when the Mirage 2000C entered service in the mid 80s, the Hornets only carried Sparrows and Sidewinders and the Vipers where restricted to Sidewinders only. So, yeah a mid 80s platform as the M2000C falls short compared to mid 00s platforms that our Hornet and Viper variants are.

 

Great point!

Never thought about when the Mirage 2000C entered service, because its always talked about being a 4th gen aircraft - so i was comparing it to other 4th gen aircraft which have been updated much more till now.

 

So when creating an 80s scenario the Mirage is a good option for CAP!

In this case JDAMs and JSOWs are unrealistic, but Walleyes make much more sense!

[QuiGon]

Great point!

Never thought about when the Mirage 2000C entered service, because its always talked about being a 4th gen aircraft - so i was comparing it to other 4th gen aircraft which have been updated much more till now.

Well, the Mirage 2000 has also been upgraded IRL (Mirage 2000-5F with MICA missiles), but in DCS we have the old one.

[Rayak]

Great point!

Never thought about when the Mirage 2000C entered service, because its always talked about being a 4th gen aircraft - so i was comparing it to other 4th gen aircraft which have been updated much more till now.

 

So when creating an 80s scenario the Mirage is a good option for CAP!

In this case JDAMs and JSOWs are unrealistic, but Walleyes make much more sense!

 

Well the mirage has been updated too but we don't have those versions in game :smilewink:

 

A 2000-5 with MICA and the RDY radar is still a powerfull A/A platform while the 2000D, even if not the best CAS platform, is at its best when doing low level penetration :pilotfly: