Btw, Litening restricted from carrier ops due catapult or what?
Marines are literally Navy.
It’s the same F-18Cs.
Nope. The USMC is an independent branch and have their own budget. They serve under the navy but are not part of it.
Probably just a matter of cost in getting it certified for safe use on carriers.
The USMC installation on the centreline would be a hazard for striking the deck in heavy landings. Australian ones are wired for the Litening pod on the cheek stations but USMC ones don’t seem to carry it there.
Not too big a deal. I can prove that the LITENING-AT would also have access to also has A2A capabilities, and since the wiring is intrinsic to the airframe, performance should be similar.
“A/A superior tracking and detection schemes”
2 Likes
F/A-18A and F/A-18C early currently have same FM, despite A version lacks aerodynamics enchantments like LERX fences on 3d model. Should it be this way, or FM should be changed to show this difference?
The F/A-18’s LEX fence serves to prevent cracks in the vertical tail section, by altering the airflow around it to reduce vibration. There is no direct correlation to maneuverability.
5 Likes
Funny how the turn tables lol
1 Like
Guys, can someone explain to me why our Hornet’s engines shows no loss of thrust, while the F-16С blk50, F-15C and MiG-29s had losses.
It turns out to be a paradoxical situation where even the basic GE400 has more thrust than Klimov’s RD-33 from MiG-29. Which is not true.
Because if we take the same reference point that is taken for the GE400 in the game, then the RD-33 has 8300 kg of force vs 16000lbs (7260kgf).
As a result, our Hornet (late) have better dynamic (0-1 Mach acceleration at SL) and has a higher rate of climb than the F-15C and F-16C Block 50. Is this a joke from the developers?
1 Like
In this case, the quality of the air intakes f-15 and f-16 is no better) becouse their have similar losses in the game
1 Like
F15 should have some best intakes as it moves to catch air
2 Likes
Has anyone actually tested the performance of the F-18C with GE-402 engines against the known data yet?
1 Like
I don’t know how you reached that conclusion, but both the F-15 and F-16 comfortably outclimb and out-accelerate the F-18A or C, except at slow speed where the F-18 has an edge.
You can’t just use the TWR and call it a day, you have to account drag too.
2 Likes
@Acroute Maybe you have already done some reports on the F-18? Seems it may be underperforming after some initial testing.
Whats the current STR of the F18C late in game? I thought it was pretty decent but im curious as to how much its underperforming.
I had a hard time maintaining 0.6 mach but seems close to 15 deg/s at 5000 feet. Sea level is maybe 18 deg/s, both around 1-2 deg/s short of the figures given above by rough estimation. If I manage to make some full turns with low SEP and maintain relatively correct speed & altitude I’ll be able to give more ‘correct’ figures but right now I’d say it is +/- 1 deg/s off the real in-game values.
It’s a hard plane to maintain a perfectly steady turn in.
I agree i did find it a bit unsteady at times. Seems the Finnish F18 is the only one ive had a bit better STR but its also more lightweight from having all the A2G computers and arrestor hook and mounted ripped out. Though would be nice to get a buff to my US late model.
I tested. In war thunder F-18 Late accelerates from 0.8 to 1.08 at alt 5000ft = 17-18 sec with same weapon/fuel load against 21 sec from your docs
after the dev server the dynamics of the F18 did not change
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/dXPwQHEFMERe
But the community manager said that there is a error in the GAO document )))
Again. I said about F-18 with 402 engines.
Acceleration
0-1mach
F-18C 402 = 36 sec
F-18A = 40 sec
F-15C = 37 sec
F-16C blk50 = 37 sec
Mig-29A = 38 sec
If we go straight up from Sea Level flight at 1 mach to max alt with full speed loss (85 degree of pitch):
F-15C = 13800 meters
F-16C = 13200 meters
F-18C late = 13900 meters
F-18A = 13100 meters
Mig-29A = 12900 meters
All aircraft are clean with 5.30 minutes afterburner time
1 Like