As stated by NSIAD 96-98 “F/A-18E/F will Provide Marginal Operational Improvement at High Cost” Legacy hornet with -402 engines should have 19.2 deg/s, with loadout of 2 AIM-120, 2 AIM-9, 60% fuel.
In game currently it barely can reach 17/deg/s.
Can somebody make proper report for that(i cant, not with PC rn), please?
6 Likes
you need to bug report it
2 Likes
Sadly - im unable to report it. Thats reason why im asking smbd to do it on forum
1 Like
Gaijins F-18C late has worse maneuverability but better acceleration 0 to 1 mach at sea level than the F-15C, Mig-29 9-12 and F-16 block 50 and also a better rate of climb to 10.000 meters. You don’t understand, according to Gaijin’s idea, the F-18 is not a carrier capable fighter-attack aircraft, but the best American interceptor after F-15E!), also on the dev server F/A-18A have better accelerations and climb rate than IAF F-16C Block 40 now.
The developers from Gaijin, as always, have it the other way around. And the F-18A can carry 6 AIM7 instead of 4 in real life.
I can also add that the F-18, even without any target pods, has an image from the camera on the central MFD.
Come on. F/A-18 series definitely needs many corrections.
Therefore, if you create a bug report, then it should be a general one, for all Hornet problems.
Next, the Hornet does not have any maneuver mode. There is a “paddle switch” that allows you to go beyond 7.5 G at high speeds.
But! The Hornet itself can go to an angle of attack of 55 degrees and the pilot does not need to press this “paddle switch” for this. In IRL this is essentially a standard flight mode. Just reduce the speed to 170 knots, set throttles to idle and pull the stick full back to you and you get 55-60 AOA… That’s how it works.
In War Thunder, the Hornet now flies constantly with the “paddle switch” on, which gives 10+ G loads and, in addition, in gaijin’s “maneuver mode” it can give a 90 degree angle of attack, which is nonsense.
Yes, it has a “spin recovery switch”, But even it does not allow you to move to an angle of attack greater than 55-60 degrees…
What the gaijin did with this Hornet’s “maneuver mode” now does not correspond to reality at all.
2 Likes
And let’s not forget the lack of more 60 countermeasures on the F/A-18C late, that can be easily proved by the presence of 4 AN/ALE-47 dispensers (which loads 30 countermeasures each) under its air intakes
I have sources that say other wise.
We can see the uprated F-18 we can also see that these figures where “optimistic” meaning the data could likely be less.
yes it was not designed for extra maneuvering and never will be, nor does it reflect the full maneuverability of the aircraft
Are the first 3 different EF Typhoons?
They where prototypes so not typhoons technically
I see that the comparison is given with a full internal fuel load, and the topic starter indicated a 60% of fuel load.
This is where the difference between 18.3 g/sec in your document and 19.2 that the topic starter mentioned in the first message.
It was more meant in a way of saying this is what I have found.
Full internal fuel 4 missiles.
19.2 degrees per second of the sustained turn rate with 60% internal fuel load is a realistic figure. It is worse than the F-16 block 30 or the Su-27 with same afterburner time.
What is your source.
Source about what? About 19.2 degrees per second STR for F18? It is indicated in the first message
Yes where did you get that number lol
Page 30
Thats 60 percent fuel 2xaim9 and 2xaim120 for your report.
Both our reports match up very well actually.
That’s what I indicated above. What was your question originally about?
Nothing I just misunderstood your message originally. My apologies.
The data I provided might come in very helpful to get the F-18 modeled correctly.