APKWS Rockets

[Valkyrien]

The Hornet feels super under powered right now against light to no armor units, all of our current options are either unguided or heavy, super limited AP monsters that are massively overkill. It seems the systems were integrated enough for the charlie to carry and run APKWS so bringing it in is both realistic and would fill an operational hole we have right now.

Proof they could be run: https://www.baesystems.com/en-us/multimedia/an-f-a-18c-hornet-fires-an-apkws-laser-guided-rocket-

[Tholozor]

Not happening: 

 

[JG54_NF2]

[Bunny Clark]

2 hours ago, Valkyrien said:

Proof they could be run: https://www.baesystems.com/en-us/multimedia/an-f-a-18c-hornet-fires-an-apkws-laser-guided-rocket-

Pretty sure that's concept art. 

 

As far as I know USN Legacy Hornet's never carried APKWS. USMC Hornets did, but not until a decade after the time frame for our Hornet. 

[Alpiinoo]

Will be nice.

Edited March 17, 2021 by Alpiinoo

[G.J.S]

21 minutes ago, Alpiinoo said:

Will be nice.

 

Not happening bud. 

[Fri13]

On 3/12/2021 at 4:36 AM, Bunny Clark said:

Pretty sure that's concept art. 

 

As far as I know USN Legacy Hornet's never carried APKWS. USMC Hornets did, but not until a decade after the time frame for our Hornet. 

And decade later same hornets are still flying with APKWS II DCS has. The Lot 20 didn't start and end to 2005. But it doesn't matter as ED is considering their modules stuck to one day in the history, and not agree that variants fly years without any changes to them....

 

All the modules in DCS should come out with information officially that what date did the first variant roll out of the factory, and what date was the last Day when the variant was in service or existed as such.

 

Example, Mi-24P is still same for decades. Limiting it to very specific date would be wrong, just to make a point that it shouldn't receive any changes either side of that date.

 

 

Edited March 17, 2021 by Fri13

[BarTzi]

16 hours ago, Fri13 said:

 

All the modules in DCS should come out with information officially that what date did the first variant roll out of the factory, and what date was the last Day when the variant was in service or existed as such.

ED posted a list of weapons and sensors planned for the Hornet when it was first released. Why should they post dates, if they already said what is going to be included?

Edited March 18, 2021 by BarTzi

[Fri13]

34 minutes ago, BarTzi said:

ED posted a list of weapons and sensors planned for the Hornet when it was first released. Why should they post dates, if they already said what is going to be included?

 

You didn't understand.

 

All aircraft are in service X years without any changes. Example, our Hornet has been in the service from at least 2005 to 2021 "as is". No updates, no changes, nothing. 

Did I make that clear?

The F/A-18C Lot 20 Hornet that is in DCS World is not only existed in 2005. It has not only existed 2005-2006 or 2004-2006. 

It is in operational service even today, in the condition it was 2005 that DCS World selected it to be modeled. It has received various new weapons to carry for "as-is condition" from 2005.

 

It is important that module developer will include this information in the store page that from what date to what it has been in service in such variant/modification. It will help everyone to find more information when officially it is known the years etc. It doesn't help so much that such information is "hidden" in the manual history part.

 

"The F404-GE402 turbofan engine was incorporated in 1992, adding 10% more static thrust. In 1993, Hornets began equipping the AN/AAS-38A laser target designator/ranger (LTD/R), giving it the ability to target its own laser-guided munitions. A year later the avionics received another bump, swapping the venerable AN/APG-65 for the powerful and precise AN/APG-73 attack radar. Production of the F/A-18C and D Hornets ended in August 2000. The last C model was assembled in Finland for the Finnish Air Force. Hornets continued to serve the US for the next two decades. The C model’s last cruise was aboard the USS Carl Vinson, which ended in April of 2018, whereupon the Navy announced that the C models would be retired from combat duty in February 2019. The aircraft was honored with a retirement ceremony, but a few Cmodel Hornets continued to fly in training duty as aggressor aircraft, or in the service of the Blue Angels. The final flight of an F/A-18C for the US Navy was on October 2, 2019. In all, nearly one thousand C and D model Hornets were produced, and C models served in the armed forces of eight countries. Though the United States has retired the C-model Hornets, the model still serves in the Royal Canadian Air Force, the Finnish Air Force, the Kuwait Air Force, and the Swiss Air Force."

 

Did Eagle Dynamics started to model the Hornet when? 2005? So have they been developing Hornet now 16 years? Or did they access to it closer to this date like 5-6 years ago, so around 2014-2015? The last flight in 2nd Oct. 2019 is fairly long time with additional new weapons that were not in use at 2000 or 2005.

 

But hey, if history doesn't matter just ignore it. 

[Northstar98]

ED are supposed to be giving us an aircraft that represents a USN Hornet as it was, circa mid 2000s - this predates APKWS even existing by about a decade.

 

All very clear here.

 

Edited March 20, 2021 by Northstar98

[Fri13]

7 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

ED are supposed to be giving us an aircraft that represents a USN Hornet as it was, circa mid 2000s - this predates APKWS even existing by about a decade.

 

All very clear here.

 

Yes, that aircraft is still in operational in 2021 as is. Nothing has changed in it.

It is very clear that ED just wants to stick to the very specific date (like 27th of May 2005) and they do not want to any missions to be flown out of that date, nor that Hornet would be facing any other aircraft that is not modeled circa that date.

 

It is very clear that ED has a dilemma, either they should model the aircraft accurately in the technical specifications they have chosen, or they can go for a fantasy model that only flies in the specific year they just finds it to be fitting.

 

When ED started to develop their Hornet, they didn't know that their modeled Hornet is receiving in the future the APKWS rockets. So all they can do is just try to have double standards to avoid making Hornet a realistically capable as it is by claiming "but it didn't fly in the future but in 2005 only as is". Adding APKWS II to Hornet would undermine A-10C, and they don't want that.  Razbam at least was smart in this case that they added APKWS II rockets to AV-8B N/A because technically it is capable to do so, and does so. Just like any aircraft that can launch any 2.75" rockets. If the APKWS II would be requiring additional changes and would have only been implemented to example F/A-18E, then it would be technically impossible use them in C.

 

Either a technical capabilities matter, or then double standards are used. It is very clear later is chosen for the Hornet.

End of discussion.

 

 

[Northstar98]

1 hour ago, Fri13 said:

Yes, that aircraft is still in operational in 2021 as is. Nothing has changed in it.

 

And a Hornet that's supposed to represent how it was in the mid 2000s isn't going to represent one as it is in 2021...

 

We've had this argument so many times now, and it's perfectly clear what the situation is.

 

Quote

It is very clear that ED just wants to stick to the very specific date (like 27th of May 2005) and they do not want to any missions to be flown out of that date, nor that Hornet would be facing any other aircraft that is not modeled circa that date.

 

Mission creation is completely up to you, DCS' gives you realistic building blocks that are supposed to be accurate as feasibly possible to their real-world counterparts, what you do with those building blocks is totally up to you.

 

Ultimately if you take our current mid 2000s Hornet into the 1980s, it's still a mid 2000s Hornet; similarly if you take it into the late 2010s - the aircraft is representative of a mid 2000s Hornet. Nothing has changed, even if you do weapons restrict - you've just got a time travelling aircraft, that it.

 

Given how incoherent the eras of assets in DCS are, it's really difficult to make missions that are set at a particular point in time, with historical, accurate contemporaries among peer-to-peer forces - you either make something pretty sparse and limited, take liberties with some time travelling/using approximations/stand-ins or don't do it at all.  

 

If we had assets that were coherent and fit each other this wouldn't be a problem - this was part of a wider issue, discussed here, though unfortunately the ship has very much sailed.

 

Quote

It is very clear that ED has a dilemma, either they should model the aircraft accurately in the technical specifications they have chosen, or they can go for a fantasy model that only flies in the specific year they just finds it to be fitting.

 

It's not a fantasy model, it's just intended to represent an aircraft as it was at that point in time.

 

What ED (and other developers) should do is be consistent about the rules. If they're going to deliver something that's explicitly stated to be x, then it should be x.

 

If our Hornet is supposed to be an accurate representation of an F/A-18C lot 20 as used by the USN circa mid 2000s, the module should be an accurate representation of a USN F/A-18C lot 20, circa mid 2000s.

 

Quote

So all they can do is just try to have double standards to avoid making Hornet a realistically capable as it is by claiming "but it didn't fly in the future but in 2005 only as is". Adding APKWS II to Hornet would undermine A-10C, and they don't want that.  Razbam at least was smart in this case that they added APKWS II rockets to AV-8B N/A because technically it is capable to do so, and does so. Just like any aircraft that can launch any 2.75" rockets. If the APKWS II would be requiring additional changes and would have only been implemented to example F/A-18E, then it would be technically impossible use them in C.

 

It's not a double standard, they're merely providing an aircraft that's supposed to be an accurate representation of a USN Hornet, as it was in the mid 2000s - this predates APKWS development and integration, so it doesn't have it available. It hasn't got much to do with the aircraft technical capability at all.

 

The loadout simply isn't representative for the aircraft being modelled, for the timeframe it's supposed to be a representation of.

 

The A-10C II module was supposed to represent an A-10C of the USAF/ANG circa ~2017 (AFAIK), so I'm all in favour of that module getting APKWS and GBU-54 etc, because that is accurate for that aircraft. It is not accurate for our existing A-10C - as that is supposed to represent a USAF/ANG aircraft ~ mid 2000s (AFAIK) - so it doesn't have APKWS and GBU-54 available.

 

I've no idea what RAZBAM are doing with their Harrier, or what era it's supposed to represent, if any. 

 

Quote

Either a technical capabilities matter, or then double standards are used. It is very clear later is chosen for the Hornet.

 

No it wasn't, it was merely "we're planning to deliver x, so we're delivering x" super simple. Where x is an F/A-18C lot 20, as operated by the USN circa mid 2000s - again, this predates APKWS development and integration by roughly a decade, so it doesn't have it available, as that isn't representative of an F/A-18C lot 20, as operated by the USN circa mid 2000s - it's as easy as that.

Edited March 20, 2021 by Northstar98

[AvroLanc]

Gents, at the end of the day shouldn't you be putting all efforts into arguing for weapons and features that should be actually present for a 2005 Hornet??

 

I'd much rather have MK-77, Seamines, MK-83 Ballutes, proper Harpoon flight profile, finished JDAMS etc etc than another APKWS platform. I can play with those toys on Harrier and A10C II....tbh there're not that wonderful anyway....at least not for any 'neer peer' scenario.

[Swift.]

1 hour ago, Fri13 said:

 

Yes, that aircraft is still in operational in 2021 as is. Nothing has changed in it.

It is very clear that ED just wants to stick to the very specific date (like 27th of May 2005) and they do not want to any missions to be flown out of that date, nor that Hornet would be facing any other aircraft that is not modeled circa that date.

 

It is very clear that ED has a dilemma, either they should model the aircraft accurately in the technical specifications they have chosen, or they can go for a fantasy model that only flies in the specific year they just finds it to be fitting.

 

When ED started to develop their Hornet, they didn't know that their modeled Hornet is receiving in the future the APKWS rockets. So all they can do is just try to have double standards to avoid making Hornet a realistically capable as it is by claiming "but it didn't fly in the future but in 2005 only as is". Adding APKWS II to Hornet would undermine A-10C, and they don't want that.  Razbam at least was smart in this case that they added APKWS II rockets to AV-8B N/A because technically it is capable to do so, and does so. Just like any aircraft that can launch any 2.75" rockets. If the APKWS II would be requiring additional changes and would have only been implemented to example F/A-18E, then it would be technically impossible use them in C.

 

Either a technical capabilities matter, or then double standards are used. It is very clear later is chosen for the Hornet.

End of discussion.

 

 

Nothing has changed, where are you getting your info from? Because that sounds to me like you are saying that there were no more OFPs after 2005? What about GBU-54, AARGM, etc etc.

 

Also quick note, FA-18E cant carry rockets. APKWS in general did require a software update afaik for the aiming and targeting of said weapon.

[Northstar98]

16 minutes ago, AvroLanc said:

Gents, at the end of the day shouldn't you be putting all efforts into arguing for weapons and features that should be actually present for a 2005 Hornet??

 

I'd much rather have MK-77, Seamines, MK-83 Ballutes, proper Harpoon flight profile, finished JDAMS etc etc than another APKWS platform. I can play with those toys on Harrier and A10C II....tbh there're not that wonderful anyway....at least not for any 'neer peer' scenario.

 

Abso-freaking-lutely!

[BIGNEWY]

APKWS is not planned for our hornet. 

[Northstar98]

1 hour ago, Swiftwin9s said:

Nothing has changed, where are you getting your info from? Because that sounds to me like you are saying that there were no more OFPs after 2005? What about GBU-54, AARGM, etc etc.

 

Also quick note, FA-18E cant carry rockets. APKWS in general did require a software update afaik for the aiming and targeting of said weapon.

 

That's what I thought - APKWS has different ballistics, and for full integration wouldn't a software update be required to have the parameters there to properly calculate CCIP delivery? Even if the munition is guided you still want to optimise the release and know where it's roughly going to go.

 

The GBU-12 is much the same - it's compatible with any pylon capable of employing a Mk82 (clearance permitting), but the aircraft still has a software update to fully integrate the weapon - even if the weapon is guided and if you don't technically need them to drop the bomb.

 

The Hornet has the same thing for the M50 and PGU series gun rounds, both are fully compatible with Hornet's M61 gun system with absolutely no modifications whatsoever. But, in order to integrate the rounds with the aircraft, the aircraft would've been updated to have their various ballistics parameters entered, so the aircraft can calculate an accurate firing solution. Even if we don't technically need said solution to fire the gun.

Edited March 20, 2021 by Northstar98

[Furiz]

On 3/12/2021 at 12:40 AM, Valkyrien said:

Proof they could be run: https://www.baesystems.com/en-us/multimedia/an-f-a-18c-hornet-fires-an-apkws-laser-guided-rocket-

 

That's your proof ;DDDDDDD

 

I hope you never get in court on something, presenting stuff like this would get you a free tour of the jailhouse for disrespecting the court.

[BarTzi]

Fri13, it looks like you don't understand how projects like the Hornet are designed. 

 

ED's development team made a list of available features, sensors and weapons (available information, time and project cost can affect this list). They are sticking with the list. This is responsible project management, which helps avoiding feature creep.

 

You can't expect them to go back and add every new weapon to all of their modules as it becomes available in real life. That's not realistic... 

Edited March 20, 2021 by BarTzi

[Furiz]

Hornet in 2007 (which is represented here) didn't use those, I don't think it would be ok to get such weapon then, either hornet or the viper. Can't find which year is A10CII from, Harrier looks like a mix of different years.

Edited March 21, 2021 by Furiz

[BIGNEWY]

Hi all, 

 

this thread is done, APKWS is not planned for our Hornet. 

 

thanks