Top speed. The F-18 is regular traffic speed compared to the speed demon Tomcat.
The radar as well, detection & targeting range.
AWG-9 was the most powerful radar in US inventory until the F-22 Raptor’s AN/APG-77. The F-14 was the paired with the only long-Range Air to Air missiles in US service. The Aim-54.
The F-14 had a strategic capability of shutting down airspace farther than any F-18 can ever dream of. Hence why it is a class of Strategic fighters. F-18 is not. There is a reason Iranians barely bought inferior Chinese fighters and the Tomcat is still the pride and face of the Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force. EVEN after all these years.
Oh really? Do you know the launch speed threshold of the Aim-54? Did you know the F-14 is the only aircraft in the world capable of pulling 7Gs at Mach 2?
Did you know Mach 2 was a requirement for the Raptor and other 5 gen air superiority fighters? They do not call it the Mach 2 Club for no reason. Going Mach 2 can enable you to…
Get to the area of operation faster
Extend the combat range of any fighter.
The F-14 is retired. LMFAO you think upgrades would have stopped had it stayed in service?
The F-14B was already fully upgraded to digital flight controls.
Additional evidence this guy is making up stuff.
The AWG-9 was the biggest radar ever placed in an American fighter ever.
F-14D was upgraded to AN/APG-71 radar. Other systems included the Airborne Self Protection Jammer (ASPJ), Joint Tactical Information Distribution System (JTIDS), SJU-17(V) and Infrared search and track (IRST)
Let’s not forget the sheer number of radar filtering processors the F-14D had that produced the clearest target pictures until the F-22 Raptor. Power and range were not its only strong suit, precision and the ability to mask its Aim-54 attack. Soviet bombers have extremely sensitive and many RWRs sensors. They literally have a guy sitting in the Tupolev Tu-95 monitoring the RWR the entire time.
The Hornet series suffer from a very small nose with a small radar that is jammed next to a high mounted M61 and cannot even mount an internal IRST.
The Mirage 2000 has ~15 deg/s sustained turn rate. The F/A-18s is almost equal to the MiG-29’s at 19.2 deg/s sea level. The difference is that the F/A-18 has much better low speed control, high AoA control, and stability. The Hornet will absolutely dominate dogfights until delta canards with HOBS missiles show up or aircraft with TVC.
no doubt the hornet is better than a m2k at rate fight, m2k is one of the worse in this area anyway, it’s not a secret.
On the 1 circle performances, however it isn’t so clear, i’ll read that doc to see what’s what
Mirage 2000 is limited to some ~30 degrees AoA +/- 2 degrees. The F/A-18 is free to perform AoA excursions >60+ degrees and maintains a high level of stability for making shots at 40 degrees AoA. It will beat the Mirage 2000 in turn radius, nose authority, sustained turn rate, gun laying, and it comes equipped with a better radar, better missiles (currently)… the advantages of the Mirage 2000 are in top speed and acceleration in level flight.
the documentation you linked in the mig29’s topic mentionned a 54kts/s speed decrease for an instantanious turn at sea level for the f18. The speed at the start of the test is sadly not mentionned. 1 circle is all about being slow, and considering mirage is a delta, i very much doubt a f18 could break faster.
As for the missiles, i think early f18 were only equipped with aim7, and mica is ahead of aim120A or B (but i note that you said “current mirage”, so nvm that)
What’s the acceleration difference? I always see that the F-18 is stated as slow and had “bad” acceleration, how does it compare to, for example, Mig-29, Mirage 2000, F-16 or something similar?
That’s not considering the aero braking and lowering throttle… Although positioning to start with is more important. The only trick the M2K has is slowing down to cut inside or force overshoot. F/A-18 has many more tricks.
Even the F/A-18 was later equipped with AMRAAM. Even without that, AIM-7P with datalink and lofting, superior ECCM is worthwhile and superior to the super 530D.
The Mirage will get through transonic regions in nearly half the time. The F/A-18 is just draggy. Has high lift for good sustained turn but bad sweep angle and such for acceleration and high speed flight.
(It better suited modern air combat).
Airbrakes on mirage work really well, you slow down super quickly
As for the “many more tricks” well if you can’t get slow enough, in a 1 circle you lose, it’s simple as that really. If the f18 has a slower stall speed than mirage, then maybe it can beat it, but considering the mirage is a delta, i very much doubt it, the thing basically never stalls, you can just sit in the air at 90 knots.
F18 can only get the upper hand if the m2k enters too quickly or at the first turn, then it will get more complicated.
Not to mention it has to go around mach 0.75 to obtain its maximum rate, which rarely happens in game, becomes of mouse control and Fox2 becoming more and more maneuverable.
At close ranges it isn’t, the 530D acceleration saved me many times against AIM7s of all sorts.
Not to mention at high ranges, the draggy nature of the f18 won’t help it to get high and fast, therefore limiting the capabilities of the missiles carried.
It is. Above mach 1 and +20kft isn’t its arena. A legacy f18 with 2SW+2SP at 60% fuel will take 4.15 minutes to reach Mach 1.45 from Mach 0.82 at 40k ft. A 220 eagle at 55% fuel 4SP+4SW+ Centerline pylon will take 1.87minutes. The max speed of the eagle in this config is 2.2Mach, the F18 is 1.56. And the superhornet is worse. 2SP+2amraam at 60% will take 5.7 minutes and has same max speed of the legacy hornet but will take 12 minutes to reach it.
There are benefits and drawbacks. The benefits being that the AIM-7P should be able to guide on HPRF waveform, receive mid-course updates and track better from side and rear aspect where the Super 530D is currently much more vulnerable to chaff and such.
As you said, the F/A-18 has very high drag in comparison. I also very much doubt the Mirage’s airbrakes will compete with this monster.
fair enough.
I never use the 530D with the 2000-5F, only on the 2000C, which is a HDN only, so i don’t have much problem with the radar.
2000-5F still misses the TWS in PD mode, so i carry the 4x magics (and with the HMD and recent buffs, it’s easy to use)
Someone tried different airbrakes in DCS, and the M2K’s airbrake was the one which would slow the plane down the fastest. I’d have to find the video back and link it if i can. Then again DCS is DCS, not reality, but when it comes to airbrake, bigger != better, especially considering m2k are smaller, but there is 4 surfaces.
The same game where the Mirage 2000 out-rates everything else in the game and has a completely made up FM? The only module where the devs can’t point to a single document showing the “datapoints” they claim to match it up against?
In spite of multiple sources showing similar performance for the plane (Russian, British, American) they claim it has some extraordinarily high performance for a conventional delta modified with relaxed stability.
I also forgot the Legacy Hornet uses the rudders pointed inward as airbrakes as well as the airbrake itself.
.
.
.
Oh and
The F/A-18’s stall speed on maximum thrust is around 65-70 knots.
