or VMFA-314 “Black Knights” squadron camoflage that intecepted aliens in Independence Day movie :p
2 Likes
I could see that being the stock grey camo
Another Hornet scheme I’d love to see for the early A (if we get it): BuNo 161926 from VFA-203
(If we got the A-4M with the two-tone green and grey scheme used on BuNo 158171, they’d match perfectly)
3 Likes
Bug report :
APG-65 missing GMTI, GMTT, SSS, SST modes:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/S3GdbskAvub3
3 Likes
I hope more radars get A2G modes, along with (god I pray for Kh-41) AShMs to be added in mass with the F/A-18 and Su-33/MiG-29K update (senseless delusion)
1 Like
Due to this (figure 28) and the FF5 report we can safely say that the STR of the F-18C with the -400 engines is between 16.8 to 17.2 degrees per second, without pylons, and with missile on wingtip and fuselage stations. When fuel is set to 60% internal.
We can see in this configuration, it has less STR (~12.5-12.8 dps) than the 1976 MiG-23ML(at 45) (5000 ft vs 1000m), due to it’s greater weight.
The F-18C, using the EPE engines and AIM-120 + AIM-9 in same configuration, won’t exceed 19.2 DPS STR. Based on the 1991 report posted, this is above the G limit. For a small radius turn, it will be more like 18.5 dps at mach 0.6, which is much inferior to F-16C.
Additionally, navy hornets still used many AIM-9L in Gulf War, so it is quite appropriate for an F-18C, but not the EPE Hornet.
The peak rating speeds are at mach 0.6 and 0.8, which correspond to information in FF5.
The peak sustained turn rate of the F-18C w/ GE-402 motors peaks at 19.2 deg/s according to GAO report of course.
1 Like
Aren’t those the public PSYOP numbers? :)
2 Likes
No, and that’s not what I claimed earlier either. If you don’t have anything to add to the discussion please refrain from trying to incite a flame war.
2 Likes
So they won’t put the real weight for AMRAAM in public documents, but they put the real turn rate and acceleration figures for F/A-18 in public documents? How does that work?
1 Like
Hence why manuals were posted to the internet with other data falsified, though the GAO report had good reason for publicizing data of a fighter that is already widely exported and in search of a replacement fighter that focuses less on flight performance anyway.
Nah, in a heavier config F-18A does the ≈17°/s. 19.2 is probably correct.
1 Like
All I can gather is the Hornet should be at least a decent turner, no matter the model or engines
Yes, so much yes
1 Like
It should be one of the weakest fighters in “4th” according to maneuverability. A “3.5th”, unable to compare with F-15 or F-16C, except in ITR.
Well, the current counterparts aren’t a whole lot better
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/126rvgs9iRGxtL9DsbI0SSDMHXMr3uDf-hSeFkZVvk1Y/
1 Like
What are you talking about? The F-18 is a monster in a turn fight in both sustained and instant turn rate. The F-18C with the GE-402 engines has higher peak sustained turn rate than the F-16C in-game when similar fuel loads and armament are carried.
So how again is it “weak”?
1 Like
19.2 DPS is at mach 0.8, it’s closer to 18.5 DPS at mach 0.6, and this is the best.
It has no advantage in peak rate.
Acceleration from 800-1100 is slower than 29 going 600 - 1300 km/h
If the FM is correct, a fully armed MiG-29 with 1500 kg internal has comparable STR at 1 kilometer altitude.
19.2 deg/s sustained turn (if at 0.8 mach) is still for an F-18C loaded with 2,958 kg fuel (60% internal), 2x AIM-120 and 2x AIM-9.
A “fully loaded” MiG-29 with 1500kg internal fuel is looking at maybe 10-12 minutes on mil power or less than 4-5 minutes in a dogfight with the burner on. The F-18 with equally little fuel load is going to mop the floor with a MiG-29 or Su-27. It smokes them both in one circle engagements and keeps up quite neatly in the sustained turns especially at lower airspeeds where it can sustain a higher AoA much more comfortably than either of the Soviet offerings.
1 Like
How you may conclude “if”?
m0.6, 16.8 dps with regular engines
15% more power, is a 14.3% increase in sustained rate?
Reducing weight 10%, you assume you will bridge a 15% divide in maximum STR? And a 21% divide in ITR?
So if I reduce the weight of a MiG-23M by 2 tons (15%) should I gain 22.5% STR (from 16 ASL), and become an F-16?
And this is the real high AOA, which DCS has entirely sanitized.