RAAF’s legacy Hornet (F/A-18) has a notable feature compared with the US legacy Hornet: it is equipped with Saab’s BOL dispenser. So does the real-life RAAF Super Hornet have the same system? I noticed that the RAAF F/A-18F on the dev server doesn’t have any unlockable BOL modification. If the F/A-18F could be given BOL rails/pylons, I think it would be a major improvement.
4 Likes
If you have sources, you should make a bug report!
2 Likes
The issue is the F/A-18E/F relies on ECM (not even ingame yet) where as the BOL upgrade for the legacy hornet was put inplace due to the weaker ECM.
So it doesnt look like the upgrades where carried over to the super (since it wouldnt need it IRL)
1 Like
To my knowledge whilst we have BOL in inventory, they were for our older aircraft. Though we did request them in 2008 and 2016, at which point we were aiming to retire them by 2022. So it would be odd for us not to use them on the F/A-18F given the timeline. At least the chaff packets have a significantly longer shelf life than our timeline for retirement of legacy platforms.
Would have to terrorise a plane person about it for any further information.
Hello
Currently we dont have any evidence to suggest BOL has been fitted to the F/A-18F by the RAAF. But we welcome any evidence via reports that suggest it has been.
Case 1:
equipment X (exists, photo evidence) on vehicle Y (exists, photo evidence) (photo evidence for X and Y together) ✔️
equipment X (exists, photo evidence) on vehicle W (exists, photo evidence, export variant of Y) (no photo evidence for X and Y) ❌
nvm us super hornets don’t get it either my bad
Case 2:
equipment X (exists, photo evidence) on vehicle Y (doesn’t exist, imaginary export made up thing that never happened) (obv no photo evidence for X and Y) ✔️
Case 3:
equipment X (questionable, other variants confirmed to exist, no photo evidence for X) on vehicle Y (questionable, upgrade with non disclosed specs) (obv no photo evidence for X and Y) ✔️
I feel like a drunk sailor in a storm navigating this
Spoiler
Case 1 is super hornets and BOL
Case 2 is F-16AJ and sparrows for example
Case 3 is Kh-38MT and Su-30SM2
1 Like
So when happened to only requiring technical capability for additions? Do we need to go back over the MiG-23M getting access to to the strake dispensers, or the F-5C / F-5A having them when said configurations did not, though they were later developed.
It’s not as if it’s unknown as to if Hornets can use LAU-138. and if needing to have them in inventory was required there’s a number of now erroneous changes that need to be rolled back.
I’m sure BOL has a good chance to magically turn up should the -18F start having issues of course.
3 Likes
for quick reference if someone is unsure about technical capability claims. I’ll add more if I find them
1 Like
You could also add all AH-64E getting DIRCM and JGAM and SU-30MKM getting KH-38
Case 1: We have no information that Super Hornets have / Use BOL. Only legacy Hornets.
Case 2: F-16AJ is a standard Block 10 in game
Case 3: The Su-30 family is compatible with KH-38.
Nothing. Simply we only have evidence for Legacy Hornets. Not the Super Hornet.
If there was evidence of technical compatability, that would be something for consideration.
On that topic, will we see the F-16AJ in game replaced by another F-16A? Maybe a Thai F-16A Blk10/15? If it stays, will it ever receive the underbelly sparrows that it would’ve had in service (had Japan accepted the YF-16A, given that the requirement was 8 missiles total (4x Sparrows, 4x IR))
We have nothing to announce regarding this currently. If we did, it would be communicated more widely as we always do whenever a vehicle is planned to be replaced.
so why does it have a different radar and sparrows compared to the American one?
I was talking about the Kh-38MT specifically since there have been no images of it so it’s very existance is questionable. How can a plane be compatible with something that might not exist?
If the seeker exists, then it would be part of a compatible family of weapons, is presumably the argument. Though not sure about su 30s getting it, as I have not seen them with 38s.
It’s not a good argument, but given some of the ones they’ve presented, it’s also not the worst.
Because it is a different plane in another nation? The fact its base variant is the Block 10 =/= fully the same.
As we have already answered numerous times, there is sufficient evidence of the MT, its seeker and its overal characteristics.
This doesn’t have any relationship to the F/A-18F receiving BOL, so unless you have relevant information to provide, please stop trying to derail the subject.
Right, but where are the BOL pods on the legacy hornets? Only Australians have it, but what about Americans and Finns? Don’t they exist? It’s this double standard that scares me, because if it’s compatible, it’s compatible for everyone.
The issue is the american ones are not compatible, since the upgrades where done by those nations using external companies AFTER purchase. The american Legacy hornets cant just “equipt” them because the upgrades to the software are not in place.
However, they should have been added just for balance sake since the legacy hornets are trash at 14.0 anyway. all the 14.0 F/A-18C/D should have just gotten BOL
I believe so, but following the argument of theoretical compatibility, the BOL pod for the Americans is incorporated into the pods they use for missiles, so (and in the case of filandia, objectively speaking, they use bol pods in the F-18)
They were trialed by US F/A-18s, after all the F-14 uses the LAU-138, and F-15 the ALE-58, which are the US designations for BOL so it’s not as if they didn’t have them in inventory. And the Hornet isn’t alone in things the AV-8B was trialed as well, in as bespoke podded configuration.
1 Like