F/A-18 Hornet (Legacy): History, Performance & Discussion

You wouldn’t consider Pylon ordnance being dragless to be a bug?

Like I said, I think you’re mistaken and it’s just the actual pylons themselves that aren’t modelled, not the ordnance.

Ah I see.

No thank you.

3 Likes

It’s not dragless, you said so yourself. The amount it effects top speed and other factors by altitude is the issue. Though, I was told it isn’t a bug when it was reported for two specific aircraft mentioned as Gaijin doesn’t feel the need to model that at this time.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/IHX39MnphvmJ?comment=xG9kuZnzMaE8c8g2Zx5RxigO

Feel free to be productive towards discussion and less toxic in the future then o7
-edit, not off-topic.

Laser guided bombs have way less drag than their dumb counterparts. Check also PGM-2000, bomb so less aerodynamic than other 2000 LB bombs, but becuase it is guided it has less drag.

Came across a neat pic of an F/A-18A in 1986, fitted with 4x underwing and 2x wingtip sidewinders, 2x fuselage Sparrows, and wing drop tanks

8 Likes

Random thing I just remembered with the Hornet:

One ended up dogfighting an F-20 in the Area 88 Manga lol, so that’s another reason I want to see it in-game:

Spoiler











Does legacy hornet got ALR-67V3 RWR with MMW module?

Isn’t the whole thing with the MiG-23 FM changes that it was set up with the missiles having high drag, then that drag was lowered with the missile drag changes, and they never tweaked the MiG’s flight model to compensate?

No, they over-extrapolated data because they assumed the clean performance charts were with rockets (missiles). When RideR2 tested against other data we were able to show the correct fuel & ordnance for the test and when re-testing discovered a discrepancy.

In any case it is quite annoying that Gaijin is so willing to amend this mistake but not others they’ve made for similar reasons.

I have a feeling they are either looking at the efficiency stats, and adjusting report priorities based on them in some cases to make them better fit assuming documentation can be produced.

1 Like

Or going with tertiary sources because it benefits the sale of the premiums

1 Like

Yes. It was retrofitted to F/A-18C/Ds around 2000.

2 Likes

Good, but it won’t detect pantsir, sad.

found a site that claims it can go up to 40Ghz, though no idea if its accurate

https://man.fas.org/dod-101/sys/ac/equip/an-alr-67.htm

I saw some sources stating the same, but 40GHz is 7.5mm Pantsir radar is 7mm(at least in game).

Russian wave lengts in X-ray are useless, you should look at NATO bands that used in english localization.

1 Like

1)Who decided that showing russian players wavelength, but bands for eng is a good idea and won’t make a lot of confusion?
2) It is K in game. So 67V3 will detect it.

F/A-18A+ (USN) from early 2000’s upgraded avionics, radar and armaments to F/A-18C/D standard but fitted General Electric F404-GE-400 and airframe like F/A-18A ?

Personally, I think F/A-18D (2008) from USMC with AN/APG-73 RUG II radar, IR AAM x6 AIM-9M-8 & AIM-9X sidewinder, x10 ARH BVRAAM AIM-120C-5 & AIM-120C-7 AMRAAM, AN/AAQ-28(V)4 LITENING AT, JHMCS, APKWS II, AGM-154C JSOW, AGM-84E SLAM and AGM-84H/K SLAM-ER

I just want a F18 man

1 Like

image
https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA611440.pdf

It is accurate.

5 Likes

I’m looking forward USN F/A-18A basic coming to USA tech tree someday

3 Likes