AV-8b, F15E or F16C?

[Haz0052]

I have recently been wondering if I should get the Razbam AV-8b or F-15E or maybe the F16C. I have been unable to decide, so could anyone give some suggestions and explain why? I would also be interested if anyone could expand on my current understanding of real life uses of the aircraft my current understanding is:

Harrier - CAS and air interdiction.

Strike Eagle - Strike missions (like the Tornado), offensive counter air

F16C - SEAD/DEAD, perhaps air to air (but I assume F15s, f22s would perform the majority when conditions allow)
 

I should probably also mention that I have a t.16000m, so keybinds might also be a factor. I would probably be inclined to choose the Harrier (it can do naval ops, hover, take off from FARPS, can perform naval ops, can be used in a wide variety of air-ground roles, and is unique), but it lacks a radar, and can’t perform BVR. The f15e can actually self-escort itself, however, is quite a bit more complicated to me (main reason), and lacks link 16 which leads to bad SA (according to others) especially when the radar gets really cluttered. I also don't really like how the radar is displayed (too many green lines. It seems difficult to find targets when they are also a green icon, judging by other videos, compared to say an f16 which has a nice clear display that also isn't monochrome), but  the f15e has a TFR radar, can perform BVR well etc. (I like using etc.). The f16…I don’t know. I seem to have lost quite a bit of my enthusiasm for some reason. It would still be something I would be interested in though.

Edited April 1, 2024 by Haz0052

[schurem]

Por que no los tres?

Start with one, the others will wait. By the sound of it, AV8B for you

[lmp]

Keep in mind that you can try out the AV8B and the F-16 for free for 14 days before you pull the trigger.

My takes:

The F-16 is the jack of all trades. It will give you the most mission variety. I also feel it has the most logical and intuitive HOTAS. It's boring in a good way, like a Toyota Corolla.

The F-15 carries a lot of bombs, a lot of fuel and has the performance and radar to be really scary in BVR as well. It feels a bit more oldschool than the Viper avionics wise. The reduced SA is an issue though I wouldn't overthink the clutter aspect just yet. The Viper and Hornet will get it as well once ED finishes the radar overhaul. It can do fewer missions but it can generally do them better.

The Harrier trades a lot of performance for being a VTOL. It's slow, doesn't take a lot of weapons or fuel and it's very limited in air to air. It's difficult to justify it in terms of capabilities. If you specifically want a Harrier, get it, if you just want a modern western jet, get a different one.

Edited March 31, 2024 by lmp

[Flagrum]

You are looking at the roles and capabilities of the RL aircraft - so I am not sure how relevant this might be for you.

But I would also research a bit the maturity and the available documentation / manuals of these DCS products.

Edited April 1, 2024 by Flagrum

[Mr_sukebe]

To add to the above, my view:

- F15e - a bit lardy, but good at BVR.  Excellent longer range strike

- F16, can do pretty much everything well and easily the best of the 3 for dogfighting

- Harrier.  Not great at dogfighting and no BVR capability.  Can operate from FARPs and ships.  Fairly short legs, unless you get good at AA refuelling, or take low weapon loads. VERY characterful

I have all three and probably use the Harrier the most.  It’s not the best from a capability perspective, but is very fun to fly and is unique in its capabilities within DCS

 

[Gunfreak]

If you think DCS than all planes can do everything. You can strap a bunch of bombs on the F15 and try and to SEAD/DEAD. Not ideal but it can work in DCS. F16 can do anything in DCS and really in real life too.

The Harrier in DCS can also be used for everything. It even has sidearms anti radiation missiles. In real life the Harrier never really was used in SEAD/DEAD. But given how SAMs work in DCS the Harrier is probably a more capable wild weasel in DCS then it is in real life.

 

If you go by what they do in real life.

F15E is supposed to be a mini F111, with self defence capabilites. But has been used for interdiction (scud hunting, seens like every single allied aircraft in the gulf War did scud hunting) and even BVR(patrolling the Baltics.

The F16 has done it all, if we keep to just block 50 or other F16 models of similar capabilites. It's the nr 1 wild weasel aircraft in the world, long range strategic attacks. Close air support both very close with guns or dropping ccip dumb bombs or fancy GPS or laser bombs and BVR. F16s and F15Es are the airforce jets that now are bombing  Hothies. 

 

The Harrier is of course mainly a CAP aircraft. But has done interdiction(again scud hunting) but also attacking enemy infrastructure. As late as 2011 Marine Harriers bombed targets in Libyan cities. The British GR harriers also bombed Baghdad in 99. 

Harriers have even been usd as CAP aircraft. Both Marine and British Harriers flew CAP over Iraq in the 90s.(probably same reason F15E flies CAP over Baltics, its a loth threat area)

[Dragon1-1]

1 hour ago, Gunfreak said:

Harriers have even been usd as CAP aircraft. 

Not the one we have, though. There are versions of the Harrier, particularly the AV-8B Plus, which carried APG-65 radar, same as early Hornets, and the AIM-120 to go with it. The one we have does not have that capability, in fact, it has no radar at all other than the altimeter. The Brits likewise had radars on their Sea Harrier models. The AV-8B NA that we have is primarily a CAS jet, it can do other kinds of bombing missions, but it's slow and doesn't have a whole lot of gas, so it's inferior to others in those roles (of course, if all you have to work with is a small strip of road, then the Harrier is all you have).

The Viper, OTOH, does everything that doesn't require a massive load of gas, and it has some really neat tools for SEAD. The Mudhen is a great all-round ground pounder and in air combat, well, it's not completely helpless, but it's not a particularly good choice (it does have a massive load of gas, though).

[Beirut]

All three are great but I'd skip the Strike Eagle for a first plane, unless of course you have a love affair with it. Even though the Strike Eagle is an excellent module, the Harrier and the Viper are just more fun. 

 

I think I've had more good old fashioned fun flying the Harrier than any other plane. 

[Bremspropeller]

The important missing information is: What modules do you already have? The Harrier is arguably the most different aircraft (read: "the least more of the same") if e.g. you already own the Hornet.

The Harrier can also do SEAD-lite, albeit limited and probably subject to porking in the future (due to the AGM-122 being a bit OP at the moment). The Harrier does have LJDAMs and APKWs, which also sets it apart from the others. It does not have JSOW or the three-digit CBUs, but who needs those anyway. Tactically, flying the Harrier is a bit more about having your pants rolled down to your ankles, as you can't scare people with AMRAAMs (yet, the Harrier II+ is still planned!), which in some way makes the whole experience more involved and more interesting, as you have to think way more thoroughly in terms of SA and your battle plan.

Be prepared to struggle a bit at first due to the less than self-explanantory HOTAS fumbling, but you'll wrap your head around that and it'll become second nature. There are a good deal of tutorial videos online, so the suffering should not take too long.

 

[Jayhawk1971]

Neither. Get the Tomcat!  

[NAM]

Fully agree with Jayhawk.

Get the Tomcat... it can do everything and fly pretty similar to warbird.

Like driving big V8 ford with manual gar vs fully auto lexus (F16/F15E)

[Tenkom]

Tomcat is awesome but I hate flying it because it's multi-crew and me and Jester don't get along.

Have you considered the JF-17? It's like the F16s weaker, quirkier but more intelligent little brother.

[Raisuli]

On 3/31/2024 at 3:18 PM, Haz0052 said:

I have recently been wondering if I should get the Razbam AV-8b or F-15E or maybe the F16C. I have been unable to decide, so could anyone give some suggestions and explain why? I would also be interested if anyone could expand on my current understanding of real life uses of the aircraft my current understanding is:

Harrier - CAS and air interdiction.

Strike Eagle - Strike missions (like the Tornado), offensive counter air

F16C - SEAD/DEAD, perhaps air to air (but I assume F15s, f22s would perform the majority when conditions allow)
 

I should probably also mention that I have a t.16000m, so keybinds might also be a factor. I would probably be inclined to choose the Harrier (it can do naval ops, hover, take off from FARPS, can perform naval ops, can be used in a wide variety of air-ground roles, and is unique), but it lacks a radar, and can’t perform BVR. The f15e can actually self-escort itself, however, is quite a bit more complicated to me (main reason), and lacks link 16 which leads to bad SA (according to others) especially when the radar gets really cluttered. I also don't really like how the radar is displayed (too many green lines. It seems difficult to find targets when they are also a green icon, judging by other videos, compared to say an f16 which has a nice clear display that also isn't monochrome), but  the f15e has a TFR radar, can perform BVR well etc. (I like using etc.). The f16…I don’t know. I seem to have lost quite a bit of my enthusiasm for some reason. It would still be something I would be interested in though.

 

I have all three; if I needed to pick one it would be the F-16 every day of the week and three times on the weekends.

• Does everything you might feel like doing, including carting 10 CBU-97s with a CL tank and 4 AMRAAMS for some precision area effect fun on the ground and still some left over for pesky aircraft.  The only thing it lacks are harpoons and SLAMs; given what it has that's not a bad trade, though.  The air to ground flexibility is really impressive.
• Excellent HOTAS design if you have equipment that can match the switches
• Freaking rocket if it's light; the thing is a jet engine with fuel tanks and just enough room for one small person
• Lands on carriers if you don't mind repairing and taking off a little light.  Oh, and the scorn of the purists out there.  I've been scorned by professionals, so I don't really notice that.

 

AV-8B: The A-10 can carry four of these fully loaded on wing pylons and get them there faster, which should embarrass any Harrier fan.  It's a very niche aircraft, but vertical take off is cool.  Just remember it only takes off vertically if it's light, as in if the pilot weighs more than fifteen pounds or you load actual fuel on board it's not 'light' anymore.

F-15: Bomb truck, great radar, used to be an awesome air superiority fighter until they replaced 800 pounds of fuel with self-loading baggage and slapped eight B-17s worth of bombs on it.  Kidding aside it's a cool aircraft, but not up to F-16 standards.

Bear in mind none of these are going to win the war solo, so it's just which corner you want to get into.  F-16 will get your there first and look way sexier doing it than either of the alternatives you mentioned.  Apart from which you can spend the next couple years mastering it...

 

[Keith Briscoe]

F16. Learn everything it can do. Get good with it. Then decide if you want or need another. It will give you a lot of joy and you can up to speed (pun intended) very quickly.

[falcon_120]

Although is hard to tell you this, right now if might not be the best moment to select the F15e or even the AV8, as there are many questions open about what will happen with Razbam products, if ED&RAZBAM will resolve current litigations, potentially their product could even be taken out from DCS (I hope that never happens). 

I would say go buy the F16.

[Johnny Dioxin]

Remember the Hawk? We were told that ED now make it a condition of 3rd party agreements that if the 3rd party is unable to continue development/updates for their modules, ED are privvy to the code in order to do so themselves. Basically, so that we won't be left without a module that we paid for.

So RAZ disappearing from DCS doesn't necessarily mean the disappearance of their current modules. If that happens at all.

 

*however, I agree - get the F-16

Edited April 5, 2024 by Johnny Dioxin

[Mr_Burns]

F-16, regarding above 2 comments to consider but I the AV8 is a compromise for weapons vs STOVL which is bloody hard and the F-15 is a twin seater with a very small compromise for flying Single Seat but it’s supposed to be flown by 2, so you do the workload.

I own both but the F-15 is a ground pounder or stand off missile truck, you will snap it in AA, the AV8 is fine, no issues but the Vertical Landing is a pig, I gave up (doesn’t mean you will) and the F-16 is ace, although its displays are hard to see if you don’t export and have MFDs in my opinion.

[TOViper]

On 3/31/2024 at 11:18 PM, Haz0052 said:

I have recently been wondering if I should get the Razbam AV-8b or F-15E or maybe the F16C. I have been unable to decide, so could anyone give some suggestions and explain why? I would also be interested if anyone could expand on my current understanding of real life uses of the aircraft my current understanding is:

Harrier - CAS and air interdiction.

Strike Eagle - Strike missions (like the Tornado), offensive counter air

F16C - SEAD/DEAD, perhaps air to air (but I assume F15s, f22s would perform the majority when conditions allow)
 

I should probably also mention that I have a t.16000m, so keybinds might also be a factor. I would probably be inclined to choose the Harrier (it can do naval ops, hover, take off from FARPS, can perform naval ops, can be used in a wide variety of air-ground roles, and is unique), but it lacks a radar, and can’t perform BVR. The f15e can actually self-escort itself, however, is quite a bit more complicated to me (main reason), and lacks link 16 which leads to bad SA (according to others) especially when the radar gets really cluttered. I also don't really like how the radar is displayed (too many green lines. It seems difficult to find targets when they are also a green icon, judging by other videos, compared to say an f16 which has a nice clear display that also isn't monochrome), but  the f15e has a TFR radar, can perform BVR well etc. (I like using etc.). The f16…I don’t know. I seem to have lost quite a bit of my enthusiasm for some reason. It would still be something I would be interested in though.

 

Hello Haz0052!

Regarding your equipment:
I have T.16000 throttle & stick too (on my lower spec rig), and I fly the F-16 here and there.
Basically, it works for me, there are enough coolie hats on stick & throttle to make CMS, DMS, TMS and even TRIM to work.
But I would suggest you to simply try out the F-16, go for a basic introduction with a buddy of yours who is - hopefully - familiar with that plane, and THEN decide.
If you have only the stick, I suggest to buy the additional throttle, its not too expensive IMHO.

[Tenkom]

It seems Razbam made the choice for you since they make both the harrier and strike eagle.
 

 

[Beirut]

6 minutes ago, Tenkom said:

It seems Razbam made the choice for you since they make both the harrier and strike eagle.
 

 

 

That's a shame because the Harrier is a ton of fun.

 

But you're right, at this point the F-16 would be the best choice, and it realty is a great module. 

[Tiger-II]

What kind of flying do you want to do? A bit of everything? F-16 is an awesome jet. Easy to fly, and can do most things well.

I suggest saving for a HOTAS though...you pretty much can't fly any 4th gen. fighter without one. There is just too much stuff you literally need at your fingertips to fly/fight effectively.

A-10C II might even be a great module for you, but again, a HOTAS is HIGHLY recommended. Complexity is up there with the gen. 4 fighters. It's just how it is.

F-5E is often overlooked. Pretty decent for a ground-pounder, and can handle AA very well, too. You'd be able to handle that using the T16000, as well.

Edited April 9, 2024 by Tiger-II

[Mainstay]

F-16 hands down

[Gierasimov]

On 3/31/2024 at 11:18 PM, Haz0052 said:

I have recently been wondering if I should get the Razbam AV-8b or F-15E or maybe the F16C. I have been unable to decide, so could anyone give some suggestions and explain why? I would also be interested if anyone could expand on my current understanding of real life uses of the aircraft my current understanding is:

Harrier - CAS and air interdiction.

Strike Eagle - Strike missions (like the Tornado), offensive counter air

F16C - SEAD/DEAD, perhaps air to air (but I assume F15s, f22s would perform the majority when conditions allow)
 

I should probably also mention that I have a t.16000m, so keybinds might also be a factor. I would probably be inclined to choose the Harrier (it can do naval ops, hover, take off from FARPS, can perform naval ops, can be used in a wide variety of air-ground roles, and is unique), but it lacks a radar, and can’t perform BVR. The f15e can actually self-escort itself, however, is quite a bit more complicated to me (main reason), and lacks link 16 which leads to bad SA (according to others) especially when the radar gets really cluttered. I also don't really like how the radar is displayed (too many green lines. It seems difficult to find targets when they are also a green icon, judging by other videos, compared to say an f16 which has a nice clear display that also isn't monochrome), but  the f15e has a TFR radar, can perform BVR well etc. (I like using etc.). The f16…I don’t know. I seem to have lost quite a bit of my enthusiasm for some reason. It would still be something I would be interested in though.

 

Hello and welcome to the forum. 

F-16 seems in a good shape right now and gets lots of love by the devs, it is also by ED so more guaranteed to be completed one day - in light of recent dispute between interested parties, we might need to wait long before Strike Eagle is updated or progresses. Notso posted current missing features and known bugs for F-15 (in the Razbam discord) and it is a lot. 

I am not sure about the state of Harrier as I never flew it in DCS and since you also have some reservations about it then it leaves Viper as a good choice. 

I love the Hornet - true multirole fighter in a very good development progress too, I flew already over 700 hours in it according to logbook so I might be biased :) 

[Exorcet]

On 3/31/2024 at 5:18 PM, Haz0052 said:

I have recently been wondering if I should get the Razbam AV-8b or F-15E or maybe the F16C. I have been unable to decide, so could anyone give some suggestions and explain why? I would also be interested if anyone could expand on my current understanding of real life uses of the aircraft my current understanding is:

Harrier - CAS and air interdiction.

Strike Eagle - Strike missions (like the Tornado), offensive counter air

F16C - SEAD/DEAD, perhaps air to air (but I assume F15s, f22s would perform the majority when conditions allow)
 

I should probably also mention that I have a t.16000m, so keybinds might also be a factor. I would probably be inclined to choose the Harrier (it can do naval ops, hover, take off from FARPS, can perform naval ops, can be used in a wide variety of air-ground roles, and is unique), but it lacks a radar, and can’t perform BVR. The f15e can actually self-escort itself, however, is quite a bit more complicated to me (main reason), and lacks link 16 which leads to bad SA (according to others) especially when the radar gets really cluttered. I also don't really like how the radar is displayed (too many green lines. It seems difficult to find targets when they are also a green icon, judging by other videos, compared to say an f16 which has a nice clear display that also isn't monochrome), but  the f15e has a TFR radar, can perform BVR well etc. (I like using etc.). The f16…I don’t know. I seem to have lost quite a bit of my enthusiasm for some reason. It would still be something I would be interested in though.

 

The Strike Eagle is technically multirole, but in US service it's a bomber. It has radar performance as good as the C Eagle, the same weapons, and better engines to offset its heavier weight and higher drag. If you want to fight in air combat it might be a good pick if you don't mind stretching its in service use or pretending it's not a US version.

The F-16 is the primary fighter of a few air forces and the most numerous in the USAF. While the F-15C and F-22 would be the primary air superiority fighters, the F-16 was designed for air to air first and will sometimes perform air to air missions. It was actually the first fighter to score an AMRAAM kill. It's a great airframe, the only downside is the lack of space for a big radar.

[Haz0052]

Hello, thanks for everyone that actually replied (I was not expecting so many). Just for some clarification, I have the t.16000m stick, throttle and rudder pedals.

And regarding the Razbam-ED dispute, I’ll just have to wait it out and see what it turns out to be. I think it’ll turn out alright, but I’ll hold from buying any modules from them for a while.

As for the Hornet, I have never really liked it. IMAO (I, not L) it’s overrated (not in capabilities necessarily, but some people seem to think it’s the best in everything), and from some videos it seems like you need to press five buttons that only needs one in another aircraft. But the only other person I know who plays DCS flys the Hornet, and it can do everything relatively well, so I’ve have started to seriously consider it now.

 

Edited April 11, 2024 by Haz0052