F-18A Hornet Question

[snapper 21 767]

Hi everybody

 

Have a question about the F-18A Hornet, which is the most realistic Avionics file for this aircraft? Should the new Avionics70.dll file be saved for when a F-18C is released? Just a question, not a moan or anything like that just wondering what you all think.

 

Cheers

 

Snapper 21

[+Dave 2,318]

I like it the way it is. It doesnt need the .70 file in my opinion. Its a ground attack aircraft so it needs the ground radar etc. It doesnt need to be updated. But thats my 2 cents.

[Papa_K 0]

Does the ground mapping radar, when using the avionics60.dll, provide any practical help for bombing?

Is the PPI ground mapping mode anything more than an aid to finding a target in the game?

 

-If the PPI ground mapping radar could "lock" a ground return - not really a lock, but in the game's terms that's what it could be - having the cursors stabilize on the return, tracking it in, allowing a radar bombing mode, that would be great.

 

Since the F/A-18 is a HUD equipped aircraft, and should have a CCIP mode, I prefer having it. (Having ground mapping available also would be good.) Even though the game's CCIP mode doesn't seem to provide a real "constantly computed impact point", at least not for a wide variety of parameters (What does it really do in the game anyway?), having all the info on the HUD - dive angle, airspeed, flightpath marker, drop line, etc. - can aid bomb delivery. A manual bombing mode with avionics70 would be good too. Can't have both it seems.

 

Anyway... on HUD-equipped aircraft, I do prefer the avionics70 display. (It just seems odd not to have HUD info when it should be there.)

Edited July 7, 2006 by Papa_K

[+Dave 2,318]

It just a ground radar, you can not lock anything with it. I do ue it to find targets though. I do need terrain avoidance radar as I fly nap of the earth alot. So putting the .70 file is not an option for me. The current one has a good HUD and with LGB I dont need CCIP.

 

But I heard TK will have in the naxt patch going both modes using the .70 file do dont panic its coming.

[snapper 21 767]

It just a ground radar, you can not lock anything with it. I do ue it to find targets though. I do need terrain avoidance radar as I fly nap of the earth alot. So putting the .70 file is not an option for me. The current one has a good HUD and with LGB I dont need CCIP.

 

But I heard TK will have in the naxt patch going both modes using the .70 file do dont panic its coming.

 

 

That will be great for aircraft like the F-18 and F15E. Still wish there was a way to mimic the attack radars for the Intruder and F-111. As for the Hornet I just cant decide, CCIP means that I am more accurate with dumb bombs but I like the terrain avoidance radar now if only that could be brought together with the autopilot :)

[Papa_K 0]

If the game's aircraft, using avionics60, would show ground clutter/returns on Search mode, as they should, PPI ground mapping wouldn't be needed here.

 

The real PPI scopes added the cursors that could be slewed, or positioned from system waypoint coordinates, or point to an offset input from a ground return, etc., and then provide steering and various delivery modes using the cursor positioning.

 

Hope that made sense... anyway, if the game's radar Search mode on aircraft could display ground returns as they should, then the PPI mode would become useless in the game (with no PPI-associated deliveries). Other reasons why not to have more realistic radar ground clutter/returns in the game? It would complicate getting a contact/lock on an airborne target - getting him out of the ground clutter... Using a look-up angle vs look-down on the earlier radars was a key over land sometimes - over water lookdown was fine - and clouds were a factor on radar as well back then.

 

Enough - I babbled on long enough there - I hope there is a combined avionics 60/70 - It will make doing the ARNIE F-4E a better possibility. (Need CCIP of avionics70 plus the A/A missile sight display of avionics60 to do it right.)

 

Papa_K

Edited July 7, 2006 by Papa_K

[Papa_K 0]

A little bit OT:

 

This reminded me of something - Babble Alert:

 

We used to keep running bomb scores (a vanilla F-4E squadron at the time), and there was always competition/score-keeping for flights and individuals. One of the categories was a "500 foot level radar delivery." We came up with an alternative to the standard PPI-scope-with-cursors delivery methods.

 

(Cursor placement could throw a radar delivery way off - the WSO would always have to place cursors in the exact same place relative to the ground return and tune the cursor down to as small as possible. A fat cursor placed right on the return vs just in front barely touching the return could throw the bomb off by hundreds of feet. Consistent cursor placement and size could give a good base for corrections, if that aircraft's systems were good, especially its INS. The INS is what kept the cursors tracking where you put them, so any delivery reliant on radar cursors also relied on the INS - not always a good thing then.)

 

For the particular range we went to most often, there was a radar reflector placed a couple hundred feet beyond the radar bombing target, and just a little offset from the run-in heading. We calculated out the slant range required for delivery on the standard run-in heading when locked onto the reflector - you could lock onto ground returns in Search mode. There was a gauge in the back seat that read out slant range from a locked radar target. Just drive in at the target, on altitude and speed, and being right on heading (with an upwind correction) to the target. Then the back seater would count down the slant range, and pickle in Manual mode at the required slant range. It worked well... too well... it was soon deemed as "cheating" for a radar delivery. (I suppose because it wasn't a "system" bomb they had a point there.)

 

Papa_K

Edited July 7, 2006 by Papa_K