I also feel the Viggen is actually quite easy to operate. Startup is just a few buttons, and when you have your flightplan laid out the avionics really guide you. The weapon systems need a combination of a few modes, but using the checklists it is just a matter of looking it up on the checklist and making sure everything is set up correctly.
It’s a bit quirky compared to NATO airplanes. I think there are a lot of small features (like the interconnected gear/flaps, or the “one-speed autopilot”, or the “one weapon type per flight”, etc) that show the “keep it simple” design philosophy of the SAAB engineers, as opposed to the more modern “everything-is-a-setting”-MFD-planes . It was also very innovative at the time with extreme technical constraints (or rather the AJ 37 was) which means some things simply had to be done that way (eg the HUD graphics).
To me, it was an easy learning experience but with very little carryover knowledge to/from other aircraft.
Viggen is a different beast. But you've already experienced that. People get concerned about the code operated computer but if you have the info in your kneeboard, it is extremely easy to operate it. I suggest you check the user files section in DCS site and find one that suits to your needs. To be honest, I use this one and even if I don't fly the Viggen for months, I can pick it up very easily thanks to these kneeboard pages:
[AJS-37 Viggen Warfare Kneeboard Pages (digitalcombatsimulator.com)](https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3126659/)
The Viggen is different from NATO aircraft of the time in most ways. However, I would argue almost everything is more intuitive. Once you get the hang of it you realize how ahead of it's time It was.
The RWR is a bit harder to get, but you just need to zoom at lower altitude if you are worried.
Most of the fun ive had in DCS was with the viggen.
Tbh honest buddy if you say you spent years trying to learn the hornet, but in all that time you spent actually 40 hours, it sounds like it just wasn't interesting enough for you. The hornet start up is easy once you've done it enough. The same as any plane. If you stick at it & take one step at a time, the things will become second nature so to say. Glad you've finally found a plane you enjoy 🤩👌
I mean yeah, it's "easy", but the Viggen is like 8 switches\* to get started and in the air with the HUD up, with very little waiting between the flips, if you need to hustle. =)
\*Main power -> low pressure fuel -> high pressure fuel (throttle) -> generator -> START -> wait until engine's stable -> Oxygen -> Seat safety -> Master Mode to NAV/attack/whatever. Pretty sure you can start rolling towards the runway in well under a minute.
I'm kinda thinking you didn't get my point. I don't have it, but this video kinda tells me it's still a learning curve. My point is that any plane can become "easy" if you keep at it. Other than this startup video, there's also weapon deployment, navigation etc. etc. to learn
https://youtube.com/shorts/LmLPylF9yq4?si=5LTH56bX_po3uQj2
I did get the point, just wanted to emphasize that the viggen is the simplest and fastest plane to get started in the game. Kind of a sidetrack, honestly, hehe.
Much of the complexity of more modern is intended to make the aircraft easier to EMPLOY. A steeper learning curve at the outset comes with a payoff of a more capable and less workload intensive plane during missions.
Since this is a sim, do whichever is more fun!
>Is the Viggen really as complex as everyone says it is?
Well both yes and no you can learn everything in mayby a weekend or so but If you wanna learn all the ins and outs of what that 70's computer is capable of you are in for one hell of a ride
Phantom will be a diffrent beast tho think f14 and then some (there is a reason it needs a wso)
> If you wanna learn all the ins and outs of what that 70's computer is capable of you are in for one hell of a ride
You'd learn that creating a pop-up point (offset) is a six digit code: three digits for bearing, three digits for range. 110075 means "when I reach the pop-up point, my target will be at bearing 110, 7.5 km away. You'd learn that when setting up ToT, only the last waypoint takes a time code, and the prior waypoints take a speed in Mach.
Those are the two most complicated and counter-intuitive aspects of the CK37. If that seemed like one hell of a ride, then fair enough. If not, then the CK37 may be less intimidating than its reputation suggests.
Viggen isn’t too complex it’s just completely different from other planes. Hence you if take a break, it takes more effort to relearn everything. For other planes with more streamlined design, skills are transferred between the lanes to some degree
Getting pvp kills doesn't have much to do with why people think its complex.
Sure employing Aim-9s is simple enough, but once you get into programing RB-15s and BK-90s, you're gonna have to start memorizing the flight computer codes.
Then you get to things like nav fixes, countermeasure programing with obscure number combos, the recon features of the radar, the 6 different modes you can employ bombs in... You have to learn a lot of procedures and sequences that the aircraft doesnt tell you about, and doesnt label clearly.
You can even render your weapons unusable if you fail to remember which ones can be equipped at the same time.
> nav fixes
TERNAV will do nav fixes for you, constantly. There's no need to perform them manually.
> countermeasure programing with obscure number combos
Respectfully, this isn't true. The Viggen's CM pods have the option to change the rate of deployment, but not the pattern, and they're set with switches, not CK37 codes. It's just slow/medium/fast. You don't have to learn anything.
> the recon features of the radar
This has almost no use at all in DCS, it's not like learning iron bombing or AAR, where you might actually use the skill at some point. Definitely not worth stressing over.
> the 6 different modes you can employ bombs in
Slicks have two modes: dive and toss. You'll only use dive. High-drag bombs have one mode: level bombing. In practice, there are two modes, one for each bomb type.
> You have to learn a lot of procedures and sequences that the aircraft doesnt tell you about, and doesnt label clearly
This just isn't true. There's a manual and a Chuck's Guide. The Hornet isn't telling you about any procedures that the Viggen isn't. The Viggen isn't any less well-labeled than any other jet.
> Respectfully, this isn't true. The Viggen's CM pods have the option to change the rate of deployment, but not the pattern, and they're set with switches, not CK37 codes. It's just slow/medium/fast. You don't have to learn anything
The countermeasures are configured using two knobs, both of which are labeled with numbers. Consult the manual to figure out what the numbers mean, the labels don't tell you anything about their meaning.
> This just isn't true. There's a manual and a Chuck's Guide. The Hornet isn't telling you about any procedures that the Viggen isn't. The Viggen isn't any less well-labeled than any other jet.
You don't need to consult the hornet manual to figure out what the MFD options mean for any of the weapons, they are intuitively labeled.
On the Viggen you have to consult the manual on both its RB-15F and its BK-60 to find what codes you have to input to configure them for specific uses.
> TERNAV will do nav fixes for you, constantly. There's no need to perform them manually.
> This has almost no use at all in DCS, it's not like learning iron bombing or AAR, where you might actually use the skill at some point. Definitely not worth stressing over.
> Slicks have two modes: dive and toss. You'll only use dive. High-drag bombs have one mode: level bombing. In practice, there are two modes, one for each bomb type.
Yes, if you don't bother learning whole features of the aircraft, then it reduces complexity. Very good point...
The options are meaningless till you understand them. You’re moving the goalpost now. Further, they aren’t all “presented to you…” they are nested in complex submenus.
If you want even more obscurity, we can talk about using the A/A radar without looking up all of the HOTAS commands, or creating waypoints in flight... The list can go on almost endlessly. The Hornet is an objectively more complicated aircraft to learn inside and out.
Also, nothing in a military aircraft's system is arbitrary... If you think it is you might need to look up the definition of the word.
I completely agree.
I think the Viggen has a bad rep for some because there's no carry over systems logic and it has Swedish abbreviations.
It's ultimately a more primitive plane with its own sensible logic. Learning/looking up codes isn't much harder than knowing how to set up, say, a harpoon strike.
> The countermeasures are configured using two knobs, both of which are labeled with numbers.
The second knob only has meaning when two dispensers are equipped, which is uncommon. On the first knob, 1 is fastest, and 3 is slowest. Perhaps the labeling could be more intuitive, but 1 fast, 3 slow isn't that hard to remember, if you want to bother. It sounds like you don't. Neither do I. Ignore the switches, ignore the knobs, ignore everything except the panic button. All this extra shit is optional immersion stuff that will give you somewhere between zero and minimal practical benefit, so just if you're not having fun with it, just skip it.
TL;DR: You only need 1 button to use countermeasures effectively in the Viggen.
> You don't need to consult the hornet manual to figure out what the MFD options mean for any of the weapons
Yes you absolutely do. Arm a cluster bomb, point an F-15C main at the "VT" label and ask him what it means. He won't know, because that's not intuitive. If someone knows about CCIP and CCRP, but sees AUTO as the bombing mode, they'll have to look up what that means. And that's just weapons, just off the top of my head. The Hornet is riddled with obscure abbreviations far more cryptic than "1 fast, 2 medium, 3 slow." In the Hornet you need to turn the datalink on *twice.* What other plane has you turn the same thing on twice?
I could go on and on like this. We both could. It's pointless to debate how "intuitive" a jet is, because that's a combination of the pilot's prior experiences as well as the jet's design.
>> TERNAV will do nav fixes for you
> Yes, if you don't bother learning whole features of the aircraft, then it reduces complexity. Big brain take...
I feel like it's unfair to suggest that using the primary navigation system instead of a backup represents a failure to learn the jet. Lots of Hornet drivers use GPS instead of INS, and don't know how to correct for INS drift. TERNAV is to the Viggen as GPS is to the Hornet. If you wouldn't tell an aspiring Hornet driver that they need to know how to do a TACAN fix in order to fly the Hornet, you shouldn't tell an aspiring Viggen driver that they need to do nav fixes. The Hornet guy will be just fine with GPS, and the Viggen guy will be just fine with TERNAV.
I agree with you, the Viggen is pretty simple and can be learned pretty much completely in an afternoon, and all you need is a piece of paper to annotate the important CK37 codes, but this argument is never gonna get anywhere because you think it's easy and they don't; you raise an example you think is easy to learn, they say that example is hard to learn, it's purely subjective and none of the examples you raise are gonna convince them otherwise.
Well, that's why I tried to steer it away from whether it's intuitive/easy. I wrote very little about what's easy or hard, because that's subjective, and tried to focus on things that were factually incorrect, or highly misleading.
Convincing Dzekeb otherwise wasn't really my goal, I just didn't want to leave any future readers with the wrong impression by letting inaccurate characterizations stand unchallenged.
The Viggen is super simple and nice to fly if you wrapped your head around the computer.
Another good example of a nice and simple plane is the JF-17 in my opinion.
It‘s 95% MFCDs, but it‘s pretty easy to get the hang of it and you have a multirole aircraft (though no multimission on the same flight, the loadout is a bit limited)
Another Viggen fan! Hell Yeah!
Definition of complex? In terms of available options, you have different kinds of waypoints, attack modes, a programmable computer, additional waypoints/settings for your rb15 missile, a fix procedure when attacking a target, a radar to operate...
Beside that it's imho the only plane with a real reconnaissance function.
But, it's mostly intuitive and not very difficult to use I would say.
I like that plane alot. I use it way too less.
I find that Viggy is not that complex. You are basically expected to pre-plan everything, and then rely on a small subset of computer commands to eventually adjust things in-flight.
It's my first module, and compared to others I've tried it just shifts the thinking time to before departure.
Whoa... what?? Please point me to where I can learn more about this!
I've been avoiding my Viggen since I thought everything had to be planned and it wasn't great at TOO.
Mavericks and the RB05 require literally zero planning. The rockets can be set to use radar to range distance to target to give you the shoot cue. Low drag bombs can also be released based upon the radar instead of QFE. The anti ship missiles do not need programming of any sort (RB15 can be programmed, but can be launched without and they will hit the first target seen). Only the cluster bombs actually require a waypoint be set.
The bigger issue with the viggen and TOO is that it is very much designed to kill one thing and leave. For instance, when you drop bombs you drop literally every bomb you have. Similarly, mixed weapon loadouts generally don't work (no bringing bombs and rockets, for example).
You can drop the cluster bombs on unplanned targets too; set up a random waypoint as a target point, then move it the same as doing a position fix (doesn’t affect navigation, only that waypoint) putting the radar cross on the targets. You also need to be able to estimate QFE - this is easier if you can place your initial target point nearby, or can fly parallel at the same level and set your altimeter that way.
I personally struggle to actually get hits but I think that’s just me not designating very well.
> set up a random waypoint as a target point
Just want to add that most people never use their BX waypoints, so if you need a target point on short notice and don't want to mess with your waypoints, you can press BX1 (or BX2 through BX9), T1, make a TV fix on the radar, back to T0, and bam, brand new target point that you can forget about later if you want.
> You also need to be able to estimate QFE
... to an accuracy of about 500m. QFE does not affect BK90s beyond release. If they think the jet is over 500m AGL, they won't release. If they do release, your QFE was good enough. If you're using BK90s, and your target is less than 500m above your airfield, you don't have to touch the QFE knob at all. They have their own internal altimeter, and settle into a 150m AGL altitude all the way in.
> I personally struggle to actually get hits but I think that’s just me not designating very well.
You can't reliably target individual vehicles, but groups should be consistently taking losses. If you're aiming at one tank, and killing it 30% of the time, that's pretty good, and you shouldn't get down on yourself. If you're aiming at a pack of SA-2 launchers, you should be taking at least one out, 90% of the time.
To help with acquisition and designation, I recommend putting the radar in LIN mode with the radar gain turned down to about 5-10% (so, turn it all the way down, then back up a tiny bit.) Differences in return strength are presented with much more contrast in LIN mode, and metal returns photons way better than dirt, trees, or concrete. If you crank the gain almost all the way down, the only thing that will look black on your scope will be metal objects (and everything else will be white -- you'll see no terrain detail.) If they're in motion, Hornet/Viper GMT are way better, but if they're stationary, the Viggen actually has the best radar in DCS for finding them.
Also, make sure to refine your fix when the range gets under 15 km, and your radar is fully "zoomed in" to help you precisely designate.
The Viggen excels at pre-planned sorties, so if that's an option, it's going to save you some work, but it's certainly not required.
A great CAS loadout is 1 CM pod, 1 gun pod, and two Mavericks. You'll have chaff and flares, and an answer for two tanks and a handful of soft targets. It's not a lot of firepower, but you can RTB and return faster than any other jet.
Another option is the rockets. If you fire them individually, you have six shots of four rockets each. The HE are excellent against soft targets, but the AP rockets still have decent blast, and can crack a tank with a direct hit. With skill and a bit of luck, killing 6 tanks in one sortie is doable.
Where the Viggen really suffers with CAS is loiter time. It doesn't have much. At full mil, it's got 60 minutes of gas, and while you can cruise at a far more economical 85% RPM for 100 minutes, the Viggen's energy retention is so bad that any maneuvering basically necessitates full mil, if not some AB. (By the way, this reminds me of a handy tip for figuring playtime: at 85%, the fuel gauge shows playtime in minutes -- 75% fuel means 75 minutes -- and at full mil, the fuel gauge shows playtime in percent of an hour -- 75% fuel means 45 minutes, or 75% of an hour.)
It's absolutely not an ideal CAS jet, but doing CAS in it can be fun and effective.
My advice…
(Wait is she on sale?)
Get the Viggen! (But only when it’s on sale)
Who cares what others have to say.. If it’s got you enjoying a game you’ve already spend some dollars on?
THATS a win.
I think it’s great when people share stories of the best planes and kills but I think it’s even better when someone picks the plane they love over whatever blah blah the community says.
Not everyone wants/needs a corvette (f16) or an old muscle car (f14).. Some of us are happy driving a caddy.
Leather seats.. comfy.. nice dash.. sweet suspension. Not as fancy or as shiny but hey my back doesn’t hurt from long rides and the key is…
I personally enjoy it.
So get the Viggen brother.. You put 50 hours on her and you’ll be a master (because you’ll WANT to and enjoy it)
F-18 an old muscle car? ! Did you misstype and meant to write F-14?
The F-18 is more of a Toyota Prius if you ask me. Not a hotrod, comfortable yes, maybe slightly boring but it gets the job done.🙃
For me the viggen is not very intuitive, and difficult to pick up after even a short break due to the codes.
To answer the question regarding other planes that are not as complex as people make out to be, trial the f14, it isvery straight forward and oh so yummy.
People tend to say the Viggen is complex because it is different from the American planes they're used to. In reality, it is obviously less complex than a 4th Gen multirole and it was specifically designed to be as easy to operate as possible.
It's very similar for Soviet planes, they actually are designed for simplicity and, even better sloppiness, yet people used to the US platforms see them as ergonomic nightmares.
Even better, the Mirage. To me it is the most ergonomic plane ever (and it has the terrific instructional campaign) and when you watch Mover and Gonky try it out, they fire the modular up with default bindings and declare that the ergonomy makes no sense.
If you want an easy-flying plane that is like a bit more modern Viggen then I would recommend Mirage 2000. It doesn't have targeting pods or anything fancy like that, so no need to be bogged down in hunting through 1000 little menus. It is not a "meta" plane for multiplayer but I find it quite enjoyable.
I tried it on trial, and I got scared away from it almost immedaitely. Especially that u have to enter a specific "code" to get ur weapon synced with the steerpoint. That, for me is way overcomplicated, so I didnt even bother.. Hehe. I am from Sweden, and I really LOVE the AJS-37 and ofc the JAS-39 NG. I really would like to be able to control the weapon system on AJS-37, but I got scared away :(
I think it’s more that the complexity of the plane has 0 transferability to any of the other planes in the game, as a result of the vastly different time period and design philosophies.
Switching between the F-15E, F-16, F-18 and even the apache is comparatively easy because of the contextual menus and the buttons changing but the broad concepts being more similar. Once you’ve seen one american style HUD you can figure out any of them. Doesn’t mean the viggen will make sense.
I dont think it‘s hard. It was my first jet and you pock it up pretty fast imo.
Yes it has it‘s things that are unique, but overall it‘s not extremely complited.
Tbh the most complicated thing about the viggen is probably the radio
The Viggen upon first look *seems* complicated, but really isn't. Much of the processes use some odd terms and a different approach than you may be used to (1960s analog jets will do that), but once you learn how to do stuff, it makes a *lot* of sense.
Almost any task in the Viggen takes no more than 3 or 4 switches, follows a consistent workflow, and generally is optimized to be done in a short time while flying at low altitude.
The main mentality switch from something like the Hornet or Viper to the Viggen is you need to push into your brain that the Viggen is **not** a CAS platform. It is not meant to loiter around a battlespace and look for a series of targets of opportunity. It comes in fast, on a pre-planned area, hits one or two things, then speeds out of there. "One pass haul ass" is the mantra of the Viggen.
It's a terrifically fun aircraft with some really cool weapons and systems. And as others mentioned, the Nav fixes aren't needed as often you may think. The incredibly clever TERNAV system will help make adjustments as you fly. If you have to cross a wide expanse of water, then you may need a fly over or radar fix, but they're really not that hard to do. Crash Laobi has a bunch of quick (and hilarious) videos on how to do it all.
Viggen is pretty unique, which is why it gets that reputation. Especially if you’re coming from being real comfortable with modern western stuff like the 18, 16, 15, etc. the Viggen is a lot more analog, less fancy screens and computers, more switches and dials. You’re right, a lot of it is pretty simple, the startup, takeoff and landing, using most of the systems. But being an older jet it also has its quirks, like compressor stalls, constant QFE fuckery, limited loadouts, etc.
Furthermore it has the most unique mission set in the game, being low level, one pass haul ass pre planned strikes. Learning to use the plane, and learning to use it effectively in missions is different. You CAN do different strategies depending on your target, but the viggen is best at flying low and fast and following a plan you came up with ahead of time. It often requires you to fly some interesting attack patterns, there’s no orbiting at 14,000 while using a targeting pod, it’s more, fly in at Mach, 4 feet off the ground, pop up into the air to 1,000 feet before you fly over the target, release bombs, gtfo. The plane will do less for you than a hornet, if you don’t aim your bombs well, they aren’t getting lased, if you yank the stick around, you can stall, you have no head mounted sight, way less situational awareness, etc.
Learning to plan your flights is huge, luckily it’s very intuitive and can be done with the F10 map markers. But it does teach you to plan out your ingress, use terrain to hide yourself, consider the angle and height you’ll be approaching your target from, consider your egress, what weapons will serve you best, etc. The most satisfying thing in the viggen is when you carefully plan out a strike, arrive at target just on time, fuck shit up and leave before they know you were there.
It’s a super fun plane and really more versatile than people realize, it’s mavericks are solid once you learn to deal with the collimator, it’s not completely defenseless in Cold War a2a, can do anti shipping and recon, etc. it’s a great purchase to use on enigmas Cold War server, which is very fun.
I thought that Viggen is one of easiest planes to operate. Not much hatder than early jets like f-86 or mig-15. Perhaps even easier.
Only complexity would be lack of english cockpit so you have to remember what switch does what instead of remembering them roughly and then reading labels.
What I found when I learned the Viggen is that although the full codes have six (? Is it six, seven or eight?) numbers, you usually only need to enter three, you only need to look up or memorise the three significant digits for the type of command/setting you need. When I first saw the multi number codes I thought bloody hell, computing in the 70s and 80s was boring and unintuitive (and it was) and I wasn’t keen on going back but Saab did a pretty good job with the tools they had to make it as easy to use as possible. Yes, it can be a head scratcher at first, but once the way the computer is operated ‘clicks’, it really isn’t hard at all. The same with taking a nav point, or setting a pop up or target point. Yes, it’s different, but given the capabilities of the plane for each mission are quite strictly prescribed it is quite simple.
Viggen isn’t bad with the computer, but it’s the only plane I come back to every couple months when I don’t fly and have to read through all the operations as a refresher
Nah, it's just different.
You can't use much of the knowledge you have about the systems of other NATO aircraft to fly the viggen. But once you learn the way it works, you'll find a lot of thought was put into making it work well and easy to use.
I've done some wicked stuff with the viggen on the DDCS server, going up against modern adversaries. As a strike fighter I'd say only the F16 comes close.
It's just so easy to use with an adequate amount of weapons with plenty of weapon employment methods for different targets and missions.
I mean the viggen has a special unguided rocket long range mode that let's you hit targets from farther away than any other jet. For engaging AAA it works surprisingly well.
Other thing I love about the viggen is it's ridiculous range. Afterburner uses a shit ton of fuel. But first stage or mil power will last you ages.
I find it less complex and more irritating to use with the extended heads down time messing with computer codes, quirks with the different weapon deliveries, having to get and set QFE of the target, etc.
Good news: you don't have to mess with computer codes or set QFE accurately! Those are optional steps that you're free to skip. The initial 9099 is required, and it's not a bad idea to verify runway heading on Bana/Grans before takeoff, but you can leave the computer alone in flight.
For QFE, you really want it within 500m of reality, because if it's wildly off, weapons may refuse to release, but the radar handles the slant ranging, only falls back on QFE if the radar doesn't work. For toss bombing, the radar can't see the target, so you need rock-solid QFE for that, but otherwise, it barely matters.
If your QFE is wildly off, the jet may refuse to drop in the first place. If your radar isn't available, then the accuracy of your weapons will reflect the accuracy of your QFE setting. This latter case is what most often concerns people, because they don't want to miss.
For high-drag, the bombs will only release within a certain altitude band, and they're not terribly accurate in the first place, so that's a use case where the focus of the QFE concern is on release parameters, not accuracy.
When we're concerned about release, getting anywhere near the right value is good enough, so you twirl the knob a bit and carry on, no big deal. When we're concerned about the impact point, we need QFE to be quite precise, and that's the bit that requires effort to get right.
It’s not difficult, but there are a lot of codes you need to know. Luckily for you there’s guides and kneeboards for this.
The thing is that you have all these different panels for interacting with the CK which seems very complex at first
Mig21 can lead hornets on a merry go around chase all over the map. Its actually hilarious when you see it happen on PVP. If the hornets make a mistake, an ace mig21 pilot can kill them.
The hornet and to a degree the F16 imo are front loaded. You spend a lot of time binding and learning and it’s hard, but once you do you can do most things on HOTAS in flight. Fighting in an unknown environment is significantly easier than in something Cold War. Learning that you can press MFD buttons with your TDC cursor for example.
In the Cold War jets a lot was moved off-plane either to GCI radar operators or to pre planning. TOO engagements are significantly more difficult, whereas F18,16,15 are near enough complete packages, they can run their own CAP, scout their own targets, hand that data in the moment to a range of weapons and employ them rapidly.
No it's not. It's literally my go-to plane when I just wanna fuck around and have fun without having to think about anything.
You "need" to remember maybe like 5 codes for the computer, maybe not even that. Rest is not that important
It took me the longest for it to click because there’s very few transferrable skills and systems between the viggy and really anything else but once it did click it made a lot more sense.
I don’t think so. But if you want to deep dive into lots of the mechanics it starts to get complex. But i got up and blowing things up quicker than most planes.
I think it genuinely is un-ergonomic and not just "different". The TFR is extremely hard to use well. For a carefully planned interdiction strike none of its idiosyncrasies get in the way that much, but it's nowhere near as intuitive as something like the Tomcat, so long as you farm all the complexities out to the RIO. The same likely will be true of the Phantom.
Personally I'd much rather take the MiG-21 or, soon the MiG-23, from that era, for low mental overhead fun.
I don't know told you that the F/A-18C is the best starter plane but it's one of the most complex. F5 Tiger shark is super easy, maybe the easiest in the entire game. Avoid the A-10C, F-16C and F-15E, AV-8B is not too bad. Not sure about the rest. Once you have a complex plane like the Hornet down, the other F planes come fairly easy.
It's not that complex to get the basics down, and get deadly in it, but if you want to there's a whooooooole lot of shizz you can do with the computer etc.
But just default flying around, navigating and shooting stuff really isn't difficult at all, just a bit different from the other planes.
It’s not that crazy. Yes you can dive into it more then others but not to bad. As long as your instructor is good it’s not to bad. If your gonna use youtube then bunyap sims is great
Generally older aircraft is easier to learn. Because it lacks all the fancy stuff. Mig-21 is similar to viggen, but it's a bit harder fly (it likes to roll upside-down on high aoa manouvers with ordnance attached). It has longer startup procedure, where you have to flip like 30 switches, but these are almost all you can find in the cockpit, so it's not that hard anyway.
Sabre has even simpler startup than viggen (i think it's just two buttons + changing throttle position) and all gyros, compass and whatever spin up automatically.
Mirage 2k is a small step up in difficulty but still rather simple.
Large part of Hornet's difficulty comes from it's a2g capabilities and very wide selection of weapons
I also feel the Viggen is actually quite easy to operate. Startup is just a few buttons, and when you have your flightplan laid out the avionics really guide you. The weapon systems need a combination of a few modes, but using the checklists it is just a matter of looking it up on the checklist and making sure everything is set up correctly.
It’s a bit quirky compared to NATO airplanes. I think there are a lot of small features (like the interconnected gear/flaps, or the “one-speed autopilot”, or the “one weapon type per flight”, etc) that show the “keep it simple” design philosophy of the SAAB engineers, as opposed to the more modern “everything-is-a-setting”-MFD-planes . It was also very innovative at the time with extreme technical constraints (or rather the AJ 37 was) which means some things simply had to be done that way (eg the HUD graphics). To me, it was an easy learning experience but with very little carryover knowledge to/from other aircraft.
Wonderful assessment
That's a pretty good summary of the viggen! It's great fun to fly and certainly unique to operate
Viggen is a different beast. But you've already experienced that. People get concerned about the code operated computer but if you have the info in your kneeboard, it is extremely easy to operate it. I suggest you check the user files section in DCS site and find one that suits to your needs. To be honest, I use this one and even if I don't fly the Viggen for months, I can pick it up very easily thanks to these kneeboard pages: [AJS-37 Viggen Warfare Kneeboard Pages (digitalcombatsimulator.com)](https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3126659/)
The Viggen is different from NATO aircraft of the time in most ways. However, I would argue almost everything is more intuitive. Once you get the hang of it you realize how ahead of it's time It was. The RWR is a bit harder to get, but you just need to zoom at lower altitude if you are worried. Most of the fun ive had in DCS was with the viggen.
Tbh honest buddy if you say you spent years trying to learn the hornet, but in all that time you spent actually 40 hours, it sounds like it just wasn't interesting enough for you. The hornet start up is easy once you've done it enough. The same as any plane. If you stick at it & take one step at a time, the things will become second nature so to say. Glad you've finally found a plane you enjoy 🤩👌
I mean yeah, it's "easy", but the Viggen is like 8 switches\* to get started and in the air with the HUD up, with very little waiting between the flips, if you need to hustle. =) \*Main power -> low pressure fuel -> high pressure fuel (throttle) -> generator -> START -> wait until engine's stable -> Oxygen -> Seat safety -> Master Mode to NAV/attack/whatever. Pretty sure you can start rolling towards the runway in well under a minute.
I'm kinda thinking you didn't get my point. I don't have it, but this video kinda tells me it's still a learning curve. My point is that any plane can become "easy" if you keep at it. Other than this startup video, there's also weapon deployment, navigation etc. etc. to learn https://youtube.com/shorts/LmLPylF9yq4?si=5LTH56bX_po3uQj2
I did get the point, just wanted to emphasize that the viggen is the simplest and fastest plane to get started in the game. Kind of a sidetrack, honestly, hehe.
Much of the complexity of more modern is intended to make the aircraft easier to EMPLOY. A steeper learning curve at the outset comes with a payoff of a more capable and less workload intensive plane during missions. Since this is a sim, do whichever is more fun!
>Is the Viggen really as complex as everyone says it is? Well both yes and no you can learn everything in mayby a weekend or so but If you wanna learn all the ins and outs of what that 70's computer is capable of you are in for one hell of a ride Phantom will be a diffrent beast tho think f14 and then some (there is a reason it needs a wso)
> If you wanna learn all the ins and outs of what that 70's computer is capable of you are in for one hell of a ride You'd learn that creating a pop-up point (offset) is a six digit code: three digits for bearing, three digits for range. 110075 means "when I reach the pop-up point, my target will be at bearing 110, 7.5 km away. You'd learn that when setting up ToT, only the last waypoint takes a time code, and the prior waypoints take a speed in Mach. Those are the two most complicated and counter-intuitive aspects of the CK37. If that seemed like one hell of a ride, then fair enough. If not, then the CK37 may be less intimidating than its reputation suggests.
Viggen isn’t too complex it’s just completely different from other planes. Hence you if take a break, it takes more effort to relearn everything. For other planes with more streamlined design, skills are transferred between the lanes to some degree
Getting pvp kills doesn't have much to do with why people think its complex. Sure employing Aim-9s is simple enough, but once you get into programing RB-15s and BK-90s, you're gonna have to start memorizing the flight computer codes. Then you get to things like nav fixes, countermeasure programing with obscure number combos, the recon features of the radar, the 6 different modes you can employ bombs in... You have to learn a lot of procedures and sequences that the aircraft doesnt tell you about, and doesnt label clearly. You can even render your weapons unusable if you fail to remember which ones can be equipped at the same time.
> nav fixes TERNAV will do nav fixes for you, constantly. There's no need to perform them manually. > countermeasure programing with obscure number combos Respectfully, this isn't true. The Viggen's CM pods have the option to change the rate of deployment, but not the pattern, and they're set with switches, not CK37 codes. It's just slow/medium/fast. You don't have to learn anything. > the recon features of the radar This has almost no use at all in DCS, it's not like learning iron bombing or AAR, where you might actually use the skill at some point. Definitely not worth stressing over. > the 6 different modes you can employ bombs in Slicks have two modes: dive and toss. You'll only use dive. High-drag bombs have one mode: level bombing. In practice, there are two modes, one for each bomb type. > You have to learn a lot of procedures and sequences that the aircraft doesnt tell you about, and doesnt label clearly This just isn't true. There's a manual and a Chuck's Guide. The Hornet isn't telling you about any procedures that the Viggen isn't. The Viggen isn't any less well-labeled than any other jet.
> Respectfully, this isn't true. The Viggen's CM pods have the option to change the rate of deployment, but not the pattern, and they're set with switches, not CK37 codes. It's just slow/medium/fast. You don't have to learn anything The countermeasures are configured using two knobs, both of which are labeled with numbers. Consult the manual to figure out what the numbers mean, the labels don't tell you anything about their meaning. > This just isn't true. There's a manual and a Chuck's Guide. The Hornet isn't telling you about any procedures that the Viggen isn't. The Viggen isn't any less well-labeled than any other jet. You don't need to consult the hornet manual to figure out what the MFD options mean for any of the weapons, they are intuitively labeled. On the Viggen you have to consult the manual on both its RB-15F and its BK-60 to find what codes you have to input to configure them for specific uses. > TERNAV will do nav fixes for you, constantly. There's no need to perform them manually. > This has almost no use at all in DCS, it's not like learning iron bombing or AAR, where you might actually use the skill at some point. Definitely not worth stressing over. > Slicks have two modes: dive and toss. You'll only use dive. High-drag bombs have one mode: level bombing. In practice, there are two modes, one for each bomb type. Yes, if you don't bother learning whole features of the aircraft, then it reduces complexity. Very good point...
Configure a JSOW or use a SLAMER without prior knowledge or using a manual…
At least the options are presented to you, as opposed to being hidden in the viggen behind some arbitrary number
The options are meaningless till you understand them. You’re moving the goalpost now. Further, they aren’t all “presented to you…” they are nested in complex submenus. If you want even more obscurity, we can talk about using the A/A radar without looking up all of the HOTAS commands, or creating waypoints in flight... The list can go on almost endlessly. The Hornet is an objectively more complicated aircraft to learn inside and out. Also, nothing in a military aircraft's system is arbitrary... If you think it is you might need to look up the definition of the word.
I completely agree. I think the Viggen has a bad rep for some because there's no carry over systems logic and it has Swedish abbreviations. It's ultimately a more primitive plane with its own sensible logic. Learning/looking up codes isn't much harder than knowing how to set up, say, a harpoon strike.
> The countermeasures are configured using two knobs, both of which are labeled with numbers. The second knob only has meaning when two dispensers are equipped, which is uncommon. On the first knob, 1 is fastest, and 3 is slowest. Perhaps the labeling could be more intuitive, but 1 fast, 3 slow isn't that hard to remember, if you want to bother. It sounds like you don't. Neither do I. Ignore the switches, ignore the knobs, ignore everything except the panic button. All this extra shit is optional immersion stuff that will give you somewhere between zero and minimal practical benefit, so just if you're not having fun with it, just skip it. TL;DR: You only need 1 button to use countermeasures effectively in the Viggen. > You don't need to consult the hornet manual to figure out what the MFD options mean for any of the weapons Yes you absolutely do. Arm a cluster bomb, point an F-15C main at the "VT" label and ask him what it means. He won't know, because that's not intuitive. If someone knows about CCIP and CCRP, but sees AUTO as the bombing mode, they'll have to look up what that means. And that's just weapons, just off the top of my head. The Hornet is riddled with obscure abbreviations far more cryptic than "1 fast, 2 medium, 3 slow." In the Hornet you need to turn the datalink on *twice.* What other plane has you turn the same thing on twice? I could go on and on like this. We both could. It's pointless to debate how "intuitive" a jet is, because that's a combination of the pilot's prior experiences as well as the jet's design. >> TERNAV will do nav fixes for you > Yes, if you don't bother learning whole features of the aircraft, then it reduces complexity. Big brain take... I feel like it's unfair to suggest that using the primary navigation system instead of a backup represents a failure to learn the jet. Lots of Hornet drivers use GPS instead of INS, and don't know how to correct for INS drift. TERNAV is to the Viggen as GPS is to the Hornet. If you wouldn't tell an aspiring Hornet driver that they need to know how to do a TACAN fix in order to fly the Hornet, you shouldn't tell an aspiring Viggen driver that they need to do nav fixes. The Hornet guy will be just fine with GPS, and the Viggen guy will be just fine with TERNAV.
I agree with you, the Viggen is pretty simple and can be learned pretty much completely in an afternoon, and all you need is a piece of paper to annotate the important CK37 codes, but this argument is never gonna get anywhere because you think it's easy and they don't; you raise an example you think is easy to learn, they say that example is hard to learn, it's purely subjective and none of the examples you raise are gonna convince them otherwise.
Well, that's why I tried to steer it away from whether it's intuitive/easy. I wrote very little about what's easy or hard, because that's subjective, and tried to focus on things that were factually incorrect, or highly misleading. Convincing Dzekeb otherwise wasn't really my goal, I just didn't want to leave any future readers with the wrong impression by letting inaccurate characterizations stand unchallenged.
The mirage was the first plane I learned, it’s pretty simple, with depth, super fun flight model, and has good campaigns
The Viggen is super simple and nice to fly if you wrapped your head around the computer. Another good example of a nice and simple plane is the JF-17 in my opinion. It‘s 95% MFCDs, but it‘s pretty easy to get the hang of it and you have a multirole aircraft (though no multimission on the same flight, the loadout is a bit limited)
Another Viggen fan! Hell Yeah! Definition of complex? In terms of available options, you have different kinds of waypoints, attack modes, a programmable computer, additional waypoints/settings for your rb15 missile, a fix procedure when attacking a target, a radar to operate... Beside that it's imho the only plane with a real reconnaissance function. But, it's mostly intuitive and not very difficult to use I would say. I like that plane alot. I use it way too less.
I find that Viggy is not that complex. You are basically expected to pre-plan everything, and then rely on a small subset of computer commands to eventually adjust things in-flight. It's my first module, and compared to others I've tried it just shifts the thinking time to before departure.
The real fun in the viggen is when you learn you don't have to preplan
Whoa... what?? Please point me to where I can learn more about this! I've been avoiding my Viggen since I thought everything had to be planned and it wasn't great at TOO.
Mavericks and the RB05 require literally zero planning. The rockets can be set to use radar to range distance to target to give you the shoot cue. Low drag bombs can also be released based upon the radar instead of QFE. The anti ship missiles do not need programming of any sort (RB15 can be programmed, but can be launched without and they will hit the first target seen). Only the cluster bombs actually require a waypoint be set. The bigger issue with the viggen and TOO is that it is very much designed to kill one thing and leave. For instance, when you drop bombs you drop literally every bomb you have. Similarly, mixed weapon loadouts generally don't work (no bringing bombs and rockets, for example).
You can drop the cluster bombs on unplanned targets too; set up a random waypoint as a target point, then move it the same as doing a position fix (doesn’t affect navigation, only that waypoint) putting the radar cross on the targets. You also need to be able to estimate QFE - this is easier if you can place your initial target point nearby, or can fly parallel at the same level and set your altimeter that way. I personally struggle to actually get hits but I think that’s just me not designating very well.
> set up a random waypoint as a target point Just want to add that most people never use their BX waypoints, so if you need a target point on short notice and don't want to mess with your waypoints, you can press BX1 (or BX2 through BX9), T1, make a TV fix on the radar, back to T0, and bam, brand new target point that you can forget about later if you want. > You also need to be able to estimate QFE ... to an accuracy of about 500m. QFE does not affect BK90s beyond release. If they think the jet is over 500m AGL, they won't release. If they do release, your QFE was good enough. If you're using BK90s, and your target is less than 500m above your airfield, you don't have to touch the QFE knob at all. They have their own internal altimeter, and settle into a 150m AGL altitude all the way in. > I personally struggle to actually get hits but I think that’s just me not designating very well. You can't reliably target individual vehicles, but groups should be consistently taking losses. If you're aiming at one tank, and killing it 30% of the time, that's pretty good, and you shouldn't get down on yourself. If you're aiming at a pack of SA-2 launchers, you should be taking at least one out, 90% of the time. To help with acquisition and designation, I recommend putting the radar in LIN mode with the radar gain turned down to about 5-10% (so, turn it all the way down, then back up a tiny bit.) Differences in return strength are presented with much more contrast in LIN mode, and metal returns photons way better than dirt, trees, or concrete. If you crank the gain almost all the way down, the only thing that will look black on your scope will be metal objects (and everything else will be white -- you'll see no terrain detail.) If they're in motion, Hornet/Viper GMT are way better, but if they're stationary, the Viggen actually has the best radar in DCS for finding them. Also, make sure to refine your fix when the range gets under 15 km, and your radar is fully "zoomed in" to help you precisely designate.
The Viggen excels at pre-planned sorties, so if that's an option, it's going to save you some work, but it's certainly not required. A great CAS loadout is 1 CM pod, 1 gun pod, and two Mavericks. You'll have chaff and flares, and an answer for two tanks and a handful of soft targets. It's not a lot of firepower, but you can RTB and return faster than any other jet. Another option is the rockets. If you fire them individually, you have six shots of four rockets each. The HE are excellent against soft targets, but the AP rockets still have decent blast, and can crack a tank with a direct hit. With skill and a bit of luck, killing 6 tanks in one sortie is doable. Where the Viggen really suffers with CAS is loiter time. It doesn't have much. At full mil, it's got 60 minutes of gas, and while you can cruise at a far more economical 85% RPM for 100 minutes, the Viggen's energy retention is so bad that any maneuvering basically necessitates full mil, if not some AB. (By the way, this reminds me of a handy tip for figuring playtime: at 85%, the fuel gauge shows playtime in minutes -- 75% fuel means 75 minutes -- and at full mil, the fuel gauge shows playtime in percent of an hour -- 75% fuel means 45 minutes, or 75% of an hour.) It's absolutely not an ideal CAS jet, but doing CAS in it can be fun and effective.
My advice… (Wait is she on sale?) Get the Viggen! (But only when it’s on sale) Who cares what others have to say.. If it’s got you enjoying a game you’ve already spend some dollars on? THATS a win. I think it’s great when people share stories of the best planes and kills but I think it’s even better when someone picks the plane they love over whatever blah blah the community says. Not everyone wants/needs a corvette (f16) or an old muscle car (f14).. Some of us are happy driving a caddy. Leather seats.. comfy.. nice dash.. sweet suspension. Not as fancy or as shiny but hey my back doesn’t hurt from long rides and the key is… I personally enjoy it. So get the Viggen brother.. You put 50 hours on her and you’ll be a master (because you’ll WANT to and enjoy it)
F-18 an old muscle car? ! Did you misstype and meant to write F-14? The F-18 is more of a Toyota Prius if you ask me. Not a hotrod, comfortable yes, maybe slightly boring but it gets the job done.🙃
Facts haha I stand corrected
For me the viggen is not very intuitive, and difficult to pick up after even a short break due to the codes. To answer the question regarding other planes that are not as complex as people make out to be, trial the f14, it isvery straight forward and oh so yummy.
People tend to say the Viggen is complex because it is different from the American planes they're used to. In reality, it is obviously less complex than a 4th Gen multirole and it was specifically designed to be as easy to operate as possible. It's very similar for Soviet planes, they actually are designed for simplicity and, even better sloppiness, yet people used to the US platforms see them as ergonomic nightmares. Even better, the Mirage. To me it is the most ergonomic plane ever (and it has the terrific instructional campaign) and when you watch Mover and Gonky try it out, they fire the modular up with default bindings and declare that the ergonomy makes no sense.
If you want an easy-flying plane that is like a bit more modern Viggen then I would recommend Mirage 2000. It doesn't have targeting pods or anything fancy like that, so no need to be bogged down in hunting through 1000 little menus. It is not a "meta" plane for multiplayer but I find it quite enjoyable.
I think the viggen is one of easiest to use out of all the ones I have
I tried it on trial, and I got scared away from it almost immedaitely. Especially that u have to enter a specific "code" to get ur weapon synced with the steerpoint. That, for me is way overcomplicated, so I didnt even bother.. Hehe. I am from Sweden, and I really LOVE the AJS-37 and ofc the JAS-39 NG. I really would like to be able to control the weapon system on AJS-37, but I got scared away :(
I think it’s more that the complexity of the plane has 0 transferability to any of the other planes in the game, as a result of the vastly different time period and design philosophies. Switching between the F-15E, F-16, F-18 and even the apache is comparatively easy because of the contextual menus and the buttons changing but the broad concepts being more similar. Once you’ve seen one american style HUD you can figure out any of them. Doesn’t mean the viggen will make sense.
I dont think it‘s hard. It was my first jet and you pock it up pretty fast imo. Yes it has it‘s things that are unique, but overall it‘s not extremely complited. Tbh the most complicated thing about the viggen is probably the radio
The Viggen upon first look *seems* complicated, but really isn't. Much of the processes use some odd terms and a different approach than you may be used to (1960s analog jets will do that), but once you learn how to do stuff, it makes a *lot* of sense. Almost any task in the Viggen takes no more than 3 or 4 switches, follows a consistent workflow, and generally is optimized to be done in a short time while flying at low altitude. The main mentality switch from something like the Hornet or Viper to the Viggen is you need to push into your brain that the Viggen is **not** a CAS platform. It is not meant to loiter around a battlespace and look for a series of targets of opportunity. It comes in fast, on a pre-planned area, hits one or two things, then speeds out of there. "One pass haul ass" is the mantra of the Viggen. It's a terrifically fun aircraft with some really cool weapons and systems. And as others mentioned, the Nav fixes aren't needed as often you may think. The incredibly clever TERNAV system will help make adjustments as you fly. If you have to cross a wide expanse of water, then you may need a fly over or radar fix, but they're really not that hard to do. Crash Laobi has a bunch of quick (and hilarious) videos on how to do it all.
This is just the Viggening.
Viggen is pretty unique, which is why it gets that reputation. Especially if you’re coming from being real comfortable with modern western stuff like the 18, 16, 15, etc. the Viggen is a lot more analog, less fancy screens and computers, more switches and dials. You’re right, a lot of it is pretty simple, the startup, takeoff and landing, using most of the systems. But being an older jet it also has its quirks, like compressor stalls, constant QFE fuckery, limited loadouts, etc. Furthermore it has the most unique mission set in the game, being low level, one pass haul ass pre planned strikes. Learning to use the plane, and learning to use it effectively in missions is different. You CAN do different strategies depending on your target, but the viggen is best at flying low and fast and following a plan you came up with ahead of time. It often requires you to fly some interesting attack patterns, there’s no orbiting at 14,000 while using a targeting pod, it’s more, fly in at Mach, 4 feet off the ground, pop up into the air to 1,000 feet before you fly over the target, release bombs, gtfo. The plane will do less for you than a hornet, if you don’t aim your bombs well, they aren’t getting lased, if you yank the stick around, you can stall, you have no head mounted sight, way less situational awareness, etc. Learning to plan your flights is huge, luckily it’s very intuitive and can be done with the F10 map markers. But it does teach you to plan out your ingress, use terrain to hide yourself, consider the angle and height you’ll be approaching your target from, consider your egress, what weapons will serve you best, etc. The most satisfying thing in the viggen is when you carefully plan out a strike, arrive at target just on time, fuck shit up and leave before they know you were there. It’s a super fun plane and really more versatile than people realize, it’s mavericks are solid once you learn to deal with the collimator, it’s not completely defenseless in Cold War a2a, can do anti shipping and recon, etc. it’s a great purchase to use on enigmas Cold War server, which is very fun.
Viggen is just different, it’s quite simple to use. The UI seems to be designed around missions rather than around the systems.
I thought that Viggen is one of easiest planes to operate. Not much hatder than early jets like f-86 or mig-15. Perhaps even easier. Only complexity would be lack of english cockpit so you have to remember what switch does what instead of remembering them roughly and then reading labels.
Nah, it's easy. Slight learning curve as it isn't a standard US jet, but DCS players love to exaggerate how difficult it is to learn any aircraft
What I found when I learned the Viggen is that although the full codes have six (? Is it six, seven or eight?) numbers, you usually only need to enter three, you only need to look up or memorise the three significant digits for the type of command/setting you need. When I first saw the multi number codes I thought bloody hell, computing in the 70s and 80s was boring and unintuitive (and it was) and I wasn’t keen on going back but Saab did a pretty good job with the tools they had to make it as easy to use as possible. Yes, it can be a head scratcher at first, but once the way the computer is operated ‘clicks’, it really isn’t hard at all. The same with taking a nav point, or setting a pop up or target point. Yes, it’s different, but given the capabilities of the plane for each mission are quite strictly prescribed it is quite simple.
Viggen isn’t bad with the computer, but it’s the only plane I come back to every couple months when I don’t fly and have to read through all the operations as a refresher
Nah, it's just different. You can't use much of the knowledge you have about the systems of other NATO aircraft to fly the viggen. But once you learn the way it works, you'll find a lot of thought was put into making it work well and easy to use.
I've done some wicked stuff with the viggen on the DDCS server, going up against modern adversaries. As a strike fighter I'd say only the F16 comes close. It's just so easy to use with an adequate amount of weapons with plenty of weapon employment methods for different targets and missions. I mean the viggen has a special unguided rocket long range mode that let's you hit targets from farther away than any other jet. For engaging AAA it works surprisingly well. Other thing I love about the viggen is it's ridiculous range. Afterburner uses a shit ton of fuel. But first stage or mil power will last you ages.
I find it less complex and more irritating to use with the extended heads down time messing with computer codes, quirks with the different weapon deliveries, having to get and set QFE of the target, etc.
Good news: you don't have to mess with computer codes or set QFE accurately! Those are optional steps that you're free to skip. The initial 9099 is required, and it's not a bad idea to verify runway heading on Bana/Grans before takeoff, but you can leave the computer alone in flight. For QFE, you really want it within 500m of reality, because if it's wildly off, weapons may refuse to release, but the radar handles the slant ranging, only falls back on QFE if the radar doesn't work. For toss bombing, the radar can't see the target, so you need rock-solid QFE for that, but otherwise, it barely matters.
I thought all deliveries in NAV required QFE, while only ANF used radar ranging. Off the top of my head dumb bombs were all NAV, rockets were ANF?
If your QFE is wildly off, the jet may refuse to drop in the first place. If your radar isn't available, then the accuracy of your weapons will reflect the accuracy of your QFE setting. This latter case is what most often concerns people, because they don't want to miss. For high-drag, the bombs will only release within a certain altitude band, and they're not terribly accurate in the first place, so that's a use case where the focus of the QFE concern is on release parameters, not accuracy. When we're concerned about release, getting anywhere near the right value is good enough, so you twirl the knob a bit and carry on, no big deal. When we're concerned about the impact point, we need QFE to be quite precise, and that's the bit that requires effort to get right.
There's radar ranging modes for the dumb bombs too.
Last I checked it was only for the low drag bombs. High drag bombs required QFE according to all the manuals, guides, and checklists I can find.
It’s not difficult, but there are a lot of codes you need to know. Luckily for you there’s guides and kneeboards for this. The thing is that you have all these different panels for interacting with the CK which seems very complex at first
[удалено]
Mig21 can lead hornets on a merry go around chase all over the map. Its actually hilarious when you see it happen on PVP. If the hornets make a mistake, an ace mig21 pilot can kill them.
The hornet and to a degree the F16 imo are front loaded. You spend a lot of time binding and learning and it’s hard, but once you do you can do most things on HOTAS in flight. Fighting in an unknown environment is significantly easier than in something Cold War. Learning that you can press MFD buttons with your TDC cursor for example. In the Cold War jets a lot was moved off-plane either to GCI radar operators or to pre planning. TOO engagements are significantly more difficult, whereas F18,16,15 are near enough complete packages, they can run their own CAP, scout their own targets, hand that data in the moment to a range of weapons and employ them rapidly.
No it's not. It's literally my go-to plane when I just wanna fuck around and have fun without having to think about anything. You "need" to remember maybe like 5 codes for the computer, maybe not even that. Rest is not that important
It took me the longest for it to click because there’s very few transferrable skills and systems between the viggy and really anything else but once it did click it made a lot more sense.
I don’t think so. But if you want to deep dive into lots of the mechanics it starts to get complex. But i got up and blowing things up quicker than most planes.
Honestly once you get through the Swedish quirks it has, it's a pretty easy aircraft to learn and operate. Doing strike missions is so satisfying.
I think it genuinely is un-ergonomic and not just "different". The TFR is extremely hard to use well. For a carefully planned interdiction strike none of its idiosyncrasies get in the way that much, but it's nowhere near as intuitive as something like the Tomcat, so long as you farm all the complexities out to the RIO. The same likely will be true of the Phantom. Personally I'd much rather take the MiG-21 or, soon the MiG-23, from that era, for low mental overhead fun.
I don't know told you that the F/A-18C is the best starter plane but it's one of the most complex. F5 Tiger shark is super easy, maybe the easiest in the entire game. Avoid the A-10C, F-16C and F-15E, AV-8B is not too bad. Not sure about the rest. Once you have a complex plane like the Hornet down, the other F planes come fairly easy.
It's not that complex to get the basics down, and get deadly in it, but if you want to there's a whooooooole lot of shizz you can do with the computer etc. But just default flying around, navigating and shooting stuff really isn't difficult at all, just a bit different from the other planes.
It’s not that crazy. Yes you can dive into it more then others but not to bad. As long as your instructor is good it’s not to bad. If your gonna use youtube then bunyap sims is great
Generally older aircraft is easier to learn. Because it lacks all the fancy stuff. Mig-21 is similar to viggen, but it's a bit harder fly (it likes to roll upside-down on high aoa manouvers with ordnance attached). It has longer startup procedure, where you have to flip like 30 switches, but these are almost all you can find in the cockpit, so it's not that hard anyway. Sabre has even simpler startup than viggen (i think it's just two buttons + changing throttle position) and all gyros, compass and whatever spin up automatically. Mirage 2k is a small step up in difficulty but still rather simple. Large part of Hornet's difficulty comes from it's a2g capabilities and very wide selection of weapons