F-16 or F-18?

[jimblue74]

In your opinion, is it easier to learn the F-16 or F-18 form? Obviously the issue of landing on an aircraft carrier is separate.

[jimblue74]

In your opinion, is it easier to learn the F-16 or F-18 form? Obviously the issue of landing on an aircraft carrier is separate.

[Hulkbust44]

The Hornet across the board is so much more forgiving. On the systems side the complexity of using it is the same, but the Hornet systems have much more capabilities/options.

The Hornet systems have a lot more functions, but are all more easily accessible/intuitive compared to the F-16s way of doing things.

Sent from my moto g stylus 5G (2022) using Tapatalk

[buceador]

2 minutes ago, Hulkbust44 said:

The Hornet systems have a lot more functions, but are all more easily accessible/intuitive compared to the F-16s way of doing things.

My 2c - @Hulkbust44 it sounds like you came to the Hornet first?  For me it has been the opposite, I found the Hornet workflow and systems initially more challenging.  With the many recent updates to the F-16s functionality, especially A2G I prefer the F-16.  Obviously the Hornet will give another layer of functionality as it is carrier capable. Try them both and see what you think 

[Hulkbust44]

My 2c - @Hulkbust44 it sounds like you came to the Hornet first?  For me it has been the opposite, I found the Hornet workflow and systems initially more challenging.  With the many recent updates to the F-16s functionality, especially A2G I prefer the F-16.  Obviously the Hornet will give another layer of functionality as it is carrier capable. Try them both and see what you think 

Yes, coming from the Hornet the Viper is a pain in the ass. Basic Functions are hidden deep in menu's and context. The A/G system logic is by far the worst of any aircraft, nothing fits together or makes sense. Like seriously, the mission computer limits employment modes based on the loaded weapons? In the 16, for things to work you must do things in this exact convoluted way...the Hornet is so much more flexible and allows you to get creative with the systems.

The fact that Weapon (WPN) Stores (SMS) and Inventory (INV)are all separate pages in the Viper is all you really need to know.

Sent from my moto g stylus 5G (2022) using Tapatalk

[GrEaSeLiTeNiN]

F16 is easier and more intuitive.  F18 is more complex but if you master it, it is supposed to give you better SA.

[buceador]

Classic Horses for courses!

[Hulkbust44]

F16 is easier and more intuitive.  F18 is more complex but if you master it, it is supposed to give you better SA.

Is it really though? I think the lack of data on the Viper displays is tricking people into saying it's more intuitive.

The basic use level of every system is more complex and hidden in the Viper.

Radios

Navigation

Flight data (correct me if I'm wrong but there still isn't an advisory system for anything below a master caution)

A/A radar targeting

The list goes on. A/G is especially bad.


Want to change your preset radio freq? Guess you have to dobber back 5 menus to the CNI page. Or just press the Comm 1 push button, dobber down to select the freq field, label the preset, then to use it you then press increment/decrement rocker.

In the Hornet you rotate the respective comm knob.

Set TACAN? Hope you're on CNI, if not spam dobber left, press 1, dobber down, enter channel.

Or, in the Hornet you just press the big old TACAN (TCN) button and punch in the numbers no matter what you're doing.

A/A targeting? For any hit/track you must slew the cursor over and TMS up. Either to STT, designate, or add the track to a file. Need to do that for each target, after that you can then cycle through them with TMS right. Oh, but make sure you press TMS left to interrogate the tracks. Note that there are no correlated returns.

In the Hornet every hit is automatically ranked and has a trackfile. At any time, you press NWS to cycle between the tracks you want to target. Also, they are automatically interrogated and that return is correlated.

The list goes on.

I know both aircraft very well and the notion that the Viper is simpler and more intuitive is just a fallacy.

On top of these functions being easier, the Hornet has way more systems and data to reference in the first place. Don't try to understand what every single display number is when you're learning the basic operations, they will be there when you want to advance your understanding later.

The only point the 16 gets on the systems side is the HTS+HAD.

Sent from my moto g stylus 5G (2022) using Tapatalk

[GrEaSeLiTeNiN]

1 hour ago, Hulkbust44 said:

Is it really though? I think the lack of data on the Viper displays is tricking people into saying it's more intuitive.

The basic use level of every system is more complex and hidden in the Viper.

Radios

Navigation

Flight data (correct me if I'm wrong but there still isn't an advisory system for anything below a master caution)

A/A radar targeting

The list goes on. A/G is especially bad.


Want to change your preset radio freq? Guess you have to dobber back 5 menus to the CNI page. Or just press the Comm 1 push button, dobber down to select the freq field, label the preset, then to use it you then press increment/decrement rocker.

In the Hornet you rotate the respective comm knob.

Set TACAN? Hope you're on CNI, if not spam dobber left, press 1, dobber down, enter channel.

Or, in the Hornet you just press the big old TACAN (TCN) button and punch in the numbers no matter what you're doing.

A/A targeting? For any hit/track you must slew the cursor over and TMS up. Either to STT, designate, or add the track to a file. Need to do that for each target, after that you can then cycle through them with TMS right. Oh, but make sure you press TMS left to interrogate the tracks. Note that there are no correlated returns.

In the Hornet every hit is automatically ranked and has a trackfile. At any time, you press NWS to cycle between the tracks you want to target. Also, they are automatically interrogated and that return is correlated.

The list goes on.

I know both aircraft very well and the notion that the Viper is simpler and more intuitive is just a fallacy.

On top of these functions being easier, the Hornet has way more systems and data to reference in the first place. Don't try to understand what every single display number is when you're learning the basic operations, they will be there when you want to advance your understanding later.

The only point the 16 gets on the systems side is the HTS+HAD.

Sent from my moto g stylus 5G (2022) using Tapatalk
 

I started with that other sim. So I guess the F16 for me felt more natural. Yeah I agree about the DED part being a hassle. The OP was asking which is easier to learn. For me the F18 requires more revision when I've been away from both compared to the F16.   

Edited July 18, 2024 by GrEaSeLiTeNiN

[Exorcet]

The F-18 Pros:

More screens

Great low speed handling

Less performance loss from heavy payloads

More powerful radar and slightly better SA overall

F-16 Pros:

Better cockpit layout, screen displays, and HOTAS functions

Easier to refuel

More performance which aids positioning in air combat

 

Overall I'd say the F-16 is more intuitive mostly because of the better cockpit, but if you can learn one you should be able to learn the other.

[Foka]

For me Hornet is waaay easier to refuel. Yes, Viper refuels quicker, but you have to stay in 2x2x2m box a whole time, whil in Hornet, after connecting to the basket, you may have an epilepsy attack and still stay connected.

[SmirkingGerbil]

Phantom

[sirrah]

In term of avionics/weapon systems, pretty much the same learning curve I'd say.

 

When it comes to flying:

Both are super easy, as in; you'll hardly ever manage to get them into uncontrollable flight (or you're doing something really strange)

Personally I find AAR in the Hornet much MUCH more easy then the Viper. But then again, I have made much more hours in the Hornet.

[n0pe]

have both, the 16 is easier to start and get airborne. Less weapons so again, easier. I wouldn't say either are difficult. I just find the 18 horrendously dull. Which is a very odd thing to say I know as its a fecking fighter jet! But, for me its a snore fest. Sure, it has naval capabilities, can fly longer and carry a larger and more varied payload..but zzzzz

Buy the module on the plane you love, then you will want to learn and fly it. 

[Tenkom]

Viper is easier. I know them both. 

Better HOTAS means less need to take hands off. 

The DED + ICP system in viper is more efficient and intuitive in use, once you bind the keys to the keyboard. Take entering a waypoint as an example.

Especially Air to Air the viper much more intuitive. Hornet radar has way to many MFD buttons you need to press and options you don't need. Although the Hornet radar is much better once you master it.

[ASW]

The HOTAS F-16 is similar to the A-10C, the F-18 is similar to the Harrier.

[Caveman655]

I would say the F-18 is easier to learn personally. There is also the fact that while there are other aircraft that can do most jobs better then the F-18 can(i.e. A-10 for CAS, F-15E for strike, F-16 for SEAD, etc), but there is no jet out there that can do everything as well as the F-18. 

[Dawgboy]

Viper, IMO.  I think its avionics/HOTAS are much more intuitive.  However, I would say it depends on which aircraft you cut your teeth and get used to...meaning you must overcome what has become second nature to then rewire your brain, hands, and cockpit scan for the other aircraft.  So, it's hard to be unbiased, at least for me, with my answer.  

[Keith Briscoe]

I have both, but have studied and learned F16.  Started to learn F18.  

Viper is easier.  Switches / buttons / avionics / weapons:  the process for getting ready to shoot a missile or drop a bomb requires fewer steps in most cases.  So, fewer steps with buttons / switchology that are less spread out equals easier to me.

I'm sure that once I 'learn more' about managing the Hornet, I will like it too.

[Schmafuzius]

3 minutes ago, Keith Briscoe said:

I have both, but have studied and learned F16.  Started to learn F18.  

Viper is easier.  Switches / buttons / avionics / weapons:  the process for getting ready to shoot a missile or drop a bomb requires fewer steps in most cases.  So, fewer steps with buttons / switchology that are less spread out equals easier to me.

I'm sure that once I 'learn more' about managing the Hornet, I will like it too.

For me it's the other way around... I would assume it depends on the hours you spent in each model... I spent most of my time in the FA-18 and even if I have a break of couple weeks I still find (most) of the things I need in the Hornet pretty quick... 

With the Viper it takes longer but I would assume that it would be change as soon as I spend more hours in it... 

Bottom Line - Both birds have a learning curve to master and then it depends on the hours spent - I don't think there is a big difference in the complexity - maybe only that the FA-18 has more weapon systems to learn... 

[Crashdown2]

For me it depends on the mission and the mood. Fly both.

[Hobel]

vor 8 Stunden schrieb jimblue74:

In your opinion, is it easier to learn the F-16 or F-18 form? Obviously the issue of landing on an aircraft carrier is separate.

I started with the F18 and then with the F16 and realised that the F16 is much lighter.

 

Just the fact that F16 saves the pages and doesn't reset them every time...

 

 

It's also much clearer and simpler a/a a/g.

 

With their F18, sometimes double or triple the amount of input is necessary to trigger an action compared to the F16

[Hobel]

vor 8 Stunden schrieb GrEaSeLiTeNiN:

but if you master it, it is supposed to give you better SA.

Serious question in what way, the fact that not all contacts have an alt display, the SA goes away...and every time I select a contact I have to press the mfd button for AUTO or when searching, back to MAN...horrible 

[Exorcet]

6 hours ago, Foka said:

For me Hornet is waaay easier to refuel. Yes, Viper refuels quicker, but you have to stay in 2x2x2m box a whole time, whil in Hornet, after connecting to the basket, you may have an epilepsy attack and still stay connected.

There is some divided opinion for sure, but for me the F-16 flies itself on the tanker more or less. You have the best canopy, you can see everything. You will disconnect if you move too far but the same goes for the refueling from the S-3 or MPRS, I just find it much easier to get out of position with those since you're not flying dead center, have to deal with turbulence, and don't have a clear reference like the tanker lights.

  

13 minutes ago, Hobel said:

Serious question in what way, the fact that not all contacts have an alt display, the SA goes away...and every time I select a contact I have to press the mfd button for AUTO or when searching, back to MAN...horrible 

Longer range radar with wider azimuth is pretty significant. The Hornet also displays more on the helmet sight. Though I agree that the F-18 has some serious weaknesses. The lack of altitude display for all contacts is a major one. It seems like many F-18 pilots like to use AZ/EL to compensate, but I've always seen it as a waste of a MFD screen (but to be fair, the Hornet has more screens). The workload to get the radar to display relevant information on the Hornet is much more, bordering on the point of being distracting, and it's easy to forget to store your settings per weapons. The symbology on the Hornet is harder to read as well, at least for me. The F-16 has sharp images and makes good use of color. FCR + HSD are essentially the perfect SA layout.

[ASW]

I have all the planes that I'm interested in, except the F-18. I flew the F-18 for 2 weeks "for hire". Now my wife wants a new iPhone, so the purchase of the F-18 and CH-47 is postponed until September.)