Jump to content

Transitioning from F-18 to F-15 Question


A2597

Recommended Posts

So, I primarily fly the F-18, and love it.

I tinker with flying the F-16 and A-10, but the cockpit navigation is so totally different from the F-18, specifically HOTAS functions for the displays that there's always a "Wait, how do I do this in this plane again?" pause because the functions are so totally different. As a dad with two young kids, my flight time is *very* limited, and sometimes a couple weeks go by between flights, so that adds to the mix of "I can barely remember everything in my primary plane, let alone try to train for multiple planes."

Looking at the F-15, another McDonald Duglas plane the cockpit looks VERY familiar,  and HOTAS as well. This has me hoping that the learning curve jumping between planes would be minimal, as many controls would be the same. Does anyone have knowledge of if this would be the case? I'd *love* to have another plane I can hop in one in awhile and use to some affect!

Thanks,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, A2597 said:

So, I primarily fly the F-18, and love it.

I tinker with flying the F-16 and A-10, but the cockpit navigation is so totally different from the F-18, specifically HOTAS functions for the displays that there's always a "Wait, how do I do this in this plane again?" pause because the functions are so totally different. As a dad with two young kids, my flight time is *very* limited, and sometimes a couple weeks go by between flights, so that adds to the mix of "I can barely remember everything in my primary plane, let alone try to train for multiple planes."

Looking at the F-15, another McDonald Duglas plane the cockpit looks VERY familiar,  and HOTAS as well. This has me hoping that the learning curve jumping between planes would be minimal, as many controls would be the same. Does anyone have knowledge of if this would be the case? I'd *love* to have another plane I can hop in one in awhile and use to some affect!

Thanks,

Hi, yes it's another McDonnell Douglas aircraft but from what some F-15E SME's have said on discord the HOTAS is very different to the F-18 or any other jet. Where with the F-18C the HOTAS really feels more like "Hands OFF Throttle And Stick" XD the F-15E is going to be a lot more "Hands ON". There will definitely be a learning curve, especially with symbology, and naming of things MFD pages, etc, but I imagine there will be some similarities too. But I have no doubt a great tutorial series (not Grim Reapers) will pop up on YouTube either before release or shortly after that should help a lot. Until we get closer to release it's still quite speculative unfortunately

  • Like 2

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Bedouin said:

Since the original of both aircraft was made by McDonnell Douglas, maybe the AV-8B is more similar to the F-15E...?

 

I could live with that. And the plane is cool enough so that I'm willing to invest in the learning curve. And the MFDs look big enough and in an open cockpit, so managing them shouldn't be too bad. 

 

On the other hand, how anyone could manage the mega-buttons on the MFDs in the Apache, while flying, is beyond me. I don't have the brains for that.

Some of the planes, but all of the maps!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depending on which seat you are in, lots different, lots similar, and the throttle has more similarities with the A-10C. You can pre program a set of pages for each MFD to be selected on master mode change (NAV/A-A/A-G), as well as cycled through via the castle switch on the stick. The F-15E equivalent of SOI is the "Take Command" function, which involves pressing in on the castle hat (it is a 4 way + center press), then flicking castle in the direction of the display you wish to take command of. 

When the castle switch is used in conjunction with the Throttle Coolie Hat Down command, it controls the "Snap look" direction of the NAV FLIR imagery in the HUD. It also has an effect on the caution messages (not sure exactly what) when used while pressing the master caution light.

The stick also has a three way Auto ACQ switch (forward/aft/down). When TGP is SOI, it is used to cycle through FOV, return to cue point, or change tracking modes.

For the A-G radar and TSD, it controls the patch map window size and rejects back to real beam map mode (TSD returns to present position map if you are in a offset map mode). For A-A radar it has the same auto acquisition modes as the Hornet (Super search, Vertical scan, boresight, long range boresight, etc), and reject back to search. 

For A-G weapons like the AGM-130/AGM-65, it is pressed down to enable TDC slewing, released to lock on target, and when HUD is SOI it cycles between CCIP/CCRP (aka AUTO).

The throttle has the boat switch which serves for target undesignate and missile reject. A weapon select switch for A-A mode is present with selection for MRM, SRM, and Gun mode.

The Coolie on the throttle is for sequence point and A-A track stepping, switching between LCOS/Gun Director in A-A gun mode, missile boresighting/gunsight stiffen and various IFF/EWWS operations.

Finally, it has the laser fire button which is also used to freeze/unfreeze the radar maps, as well as cage/uncage the velocity vector in the HUD.

Something else is that the radar and TGP pages have different modes you can cycle through for TDC designation control. On the radar you can select between patch map window control, target designation, position updates, sensor cue, and mark point (all unique operations). The TGP is pretty much the same, just lacking the patch map window control. 

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, from a software developer POV, it is very hard for me to understand why every single gorram plane has very different UI in the first place! F/A-18C is actually a quite user-friendly environment, given the range of roles and equipment it carries. The A/V-8B has an interesting mix of analogue and digital interface. I think the DCS F-15C is not relevant in this case.

Don't get me started on A-10C ][ and the Soviet irons, they are totally bonkers.

I am a noob so take it with a gain of salt.

VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants -- this is how I fly. We do not fly at treetop height, we fly between trees(TM)

YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCc9BDi-STaqgWsjNiHbW0fA

My simple missions: https://forum.dcs.world/topic/284071-vr-flight-guy-in-pj-pants-simple-missions/

NSRI - National Strategy Research Institution, a fictional organisation based on wordplay of Strategic Naval Research Institution (SNRI), a fictional institution appears in Mobile Suit Gundam UC timeline.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every aircraft has it's own history line as each is born in different circumstances and for that reason only there are vast differences how technology is applied at specific aircraft. 

If DCS were not designed to recreate the authentic 'UI' then it would be called Ace Combat or HAWX, just to name 2 games which share more with arcade than a study level flight simulation game.

 

Most of us would not be here.


Edited by Njinsa
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't get me wrong, I am talking about the planes IRL. I guess the manufacturers simply don't care and the US Military don't mind.

VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants -- this is how I fly. We do not fly at treetop height, we fly between trees(TM)

YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCc9BDi-STaqgWsjNiHbW0fA

My simple missions: https://forum.dcs.world/topic/284071-vr-flight-guy-in-pj-pants-simple-missions/

NSRI - National Strategy Research Institution, a fictional organisation based on wordplay of Strategic Naval Research Institution (SNRI), a fictional institution appears in Mobile Suit Gundam UC timeline.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, VFGiPJP said:

Don't get me wrong, I am talking about the planes IRL. I guess the manufacturers simply don't care and the US Military don't mind.

The controls are unique because the roles and capabilities of the aircraft are unique and having commonality between them isn’t required as the pilots undergo specific training to fly each aircraft.

Also funds available and the timeline of when the HOTAS was integrated into the aircraft has a big role on how seamless it is.

  • Like 3

Proud owner of:

PointCTRL VR : Finger Trackers for VR -- Real Simulator : FSSB R3L Force Sensing Stick. -- Deltasim : Force Sensor WH Slew Upgrade -- Mach3Ti Ring : Real Flown Mach 3 SR-71 Titanium, made into an amazing ring.

 

My Fathers Aviation Memoirs: 50 Years of Flying Fun - From Hunter to Spitfire and back again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, all the planes are for combat, so they must have reasons for what they are. And I guess, again, they do not expect most of the pilots have to switch from plane to plane during their career.

VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants -- this is how I fly. We do not fly at treetop height, we fly between trees(TM)

YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCc9BDi-STaqgWsjNiHbW0fA

My simple missions: https://forum.dcs.world/topic/284071-vr-flight-guy-in-pj-pants-simple-missions/

NSRI - National Strategy Research Institution, a fictional organisation based on wordplay of Strategic Naval Research Institution (SNRI), a fictional institution appears in Mobile Suit Gundam UC timeline.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Its from my observation that the way that aircraft do certain operations depends on what branch its from as with the A10 and F16 the manipulation of the SPI and SOI are very similar but the whole system is entirely different for the F18. To me its feels like you have Navy way of doing this and Airforce way of doing things.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/4/2022 at 5:06 AM, Beirut said:

 

I could live with that. And the plane is cool enough so that I'm willing to invest in the learning curve. And the MFDs look big enough and in an open cockpit, so managing them shouldn't be too bad. 

 

On the other hand, how anyone could manage the mega-buttons on the MFDs in the Apache, while flying, is beyond me. I don't have the brains for that.

I don't think I do either, but I got sucked in and ordered it anyway. Unfortunately I think I'm about to find out I am more of a Hind guy. Turn helicopter on, look at dials, fire rockets, land helocopter. 😆

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Ash Lynx said:

Its from my observation that the way that aircraft do certain operations depends on what branch its from as with the A10 and F16 the manipulation of the SPI and SOI are very similar but the whole system is entirely different for the F18. To me its feels like you have Navy way of doing this and Airforce way of doing things.

While true, the F-15E is completely different from the F-16/A-10. It doesn’t work with the SPI/SOI system like those 2 do.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Ash Lynx said:

Its from my observation that the way that aircraft do certain operations depends on what branch its from as with the A10 and F16 the manipulation of the SPI and SOI are very similar but the whole system is entirely different for the F18. To me its feels like you have Navy way of doing this and Airforce way of doing things.

The Airforce is definitely way more HOTAS orientated. A key difference is the Navy HOTAS is primarily sensor control, whereas Airforce has display management as well as a host of other functions to keep the pilots' hands away from the displays.

16 hours ago, FoxOne007 said:

While true, the F-15E is completely different from the F-16/A-10. It doesn’t work with the SPI/SOI system like those 2 do.

Yes and no. The same idea is actually present in the F-15E, just under different terms, and in a bit of a different way. SOI is performed via the "Take Command" function. You can only be in command of one display at a time (2 if you are the WSO) and whatever sensor is on that display is what your SOI will be. SPI is sort of present but in the sense that it depends on the cursor function you set for that sensor. For A-G radar and FLIR, your options are TGT (close to SPI, essentially is the target designation that all weapons guide to), CUE (also similar to SPI in that it cues other sensors to the in command sensor but doesn't change designated target), UPDT (GPS/INS/Mission Navigator update), and MARK (mark points). A-G radar also has the patch map function so you can do maps without changing the designated target. 

So in the end, SOI is at least present in the form of Take Command, and the functions of SPI are present but more divided, unlike the A-10/F-16 where it is more unified.


Edited by JB3DG
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

The problem is that it depends on both the service and the manufacturer. So you have AF+Boeing way, Army+Boeing way, Navy/USMC+Boeing way, Navy/USMC+MDD way... There are some things in common between Apache and Hornet, of all things, but at the same time, most things, including the damn rocket pipper, work nothing alike. Every US aircraft is more or less unique as a result, although there are some similarities here and there. That's just the way the US does things.

Soviet stuff is actually a bit simpler, surprisingly enough. They were big on part commonality, to simplify both logistics and pilot training. If you flew a Tu-154 in X-plane, you can find familiar instruments in the MiG-21 and the Hind (and many others, as well). There are some implementation issues between DCS modules, but in reality, they all largely work the same, particularly within a design bureau. Yes, there's a few boneheaded design decisions in them, but once you work it out, it's the same boneheaded design in every MiG you'll fly. You can go from MiG-15 to MiG-29 and more than a few things will look familiar, which is more that can be said for, say, P-80 and the Viper. This can be a good or a bad thing, but combined with generally simpler avionics of the Soviet jets it makes them a breeze to learn once you're accustomed to their quirks.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The other really big difference is going to be the lack of integration in air to air roles. HAFUs are not a thing, the radar is its own separate sensor without specific symbology integrating all the SA data like in the Hornet and IFF interrogation results are also not integrated like in the Hornet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
On 1/7/2022 at 5:59 AM, A2597 said:

whow, now that is a detailed post!

Thank you so much! And now I really want my CH Fighterstick to have a push button on the castle hat...lol

Actually, you don't need the push IN on the Castle.  There are two ways of taking command of a display.  The first is as described above:  Castle IN and release and then castle short press towards the screen you want to take command.  The 2nd method is just a LONG press >1 sec towards the desired screen.  Both methods work to do the same thing.  So if your stick doesn't have the IN option, the long press should work just as well.  That's in the FCP only btw.  The WSO take command is simply coolie towards which ever screen you want to take command of for that side.  So for instance if I want to take command of the R MPD, then I would go coolied LEFT on the right HCU.   If I wanted to take command of the R MPCD, then I would go coolie R on the Right HCU.

 

System HW: i9-9900K @5ghz, MSI 11GB RTX-2080-Ti Trio, G-Skill 32GB RAM, Reverb HMD, Steam VR, TM Warthog Hotas Stick & Throttle, TM F/A-18 Stick grip add-on, TM TFRP pedals. SW: 2.5.6 OB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
On 6/4/2022 at 1:54 PM, Notso said:

Actually, you don't need the push IN on the Castle.  There are two ways of taking command of a display.  The first is as described above:  Castle IN and release and then castle short press towards the screen you want to take command.  The 2nd method is just a LONG press >1 sec towards the desired screen.  Both methods work to do the same thing.  So if your stick doesn't have the IN option, the long press should work just as well.  That's in the FCP only btw.  The WSO take command is simply coolie towards which ever screen you want to take command of for that side.  So for instance if I want to take command of the R MPD, then I would go coolied LEFT on the right HCU.   If I wanted to take command of the R MPCD, then I would go coolie R on the Right HCU.

 

I already complimented you on You Tube...but you're doing a fantastic job with the videos. I can already tell that it's going to be the difference between "no time to learn another jet" and feeling like I can take it on. Thank you! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/9/2022 at 12:39 PM, VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants said:

Well, from a software developer POV, it is very hard for me to understand why every single gorram plane has very different UI in the first place! F/A-18C is actually a quite user-friendly environment, given the range of roles and equipment it carries. The A/V-8B has an interesting mix of analogue and digital interface. I think the DCS F-15C is not relevant in this case.

Don't get me started on A-10C ][ and the Soviet irons, they are totally bonkers.

I am a noob so take it with a gain of salt.

range of roles and equipment it carries = user-friendly?

Interesting approach. I would call that very multi-role capable, but the hornet is not very user friendly as I would say it.
I like the Hornet cockpit better, but I think the F-16 has a way better HMI (Human-Machine-Interface), in other words, USER (= human) friendly.
For the reasons above, SPI+SOI idea and DMS switch

  • Like 2

Alias in Discord: Mailman

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
On 1/4/2022 at 11:09 AM, JB3DG said:

The stick also has a three way Auto ACQ switch (forward/aft/down). When TGP is SOI, it is used to cycle through FOV, return to cue point, or change tracking modes.

For A-G weapons like the AGM-130/AGM-65, it is pressed down to enable TDC slewing, released to lock on target, and when HUD is SOI it cycles between CCIP/CCRP (aka AUTO).

 

Way late on this string but the OP really struck a nerve with me trying to figure all this out 
 

By way of evidence, just these 2 sentences . . . Effin hurts my little brain just to read them 😂
 

Auto ACQ, TGP is SOI, FOV, TDC slewing, CCIP/CCPR (aka AUTO)
 

Pray for me 😩

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, plane_crazy242 said:

Way late on this string but the OP really struck a nerve with me trying to figure all this out 
 

By way of evidence, just these 2 sentences . . . Effin hurts my little brain just to read them 😂
 

Auto ACQ, TGP is SOI, FOV, TDC slewing, CCIP/CCPR (aka AUTO)
 

Pray for me 😩

 

Welcome to acronym soup. ACQ should sound self explanatory (Acquire), TGP should also be familiar from other jets (Targeting Pod), as should FOV (Field of View), and CCIP/CCRP aka AUTO are standard terms in the DCS community. Confusing as hell for newcomers tho....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...