IN the hog this doesn't happen i since symobology and alphanumeric are displayed against a black backdrop making it more visible in the HOG's MFD's. The only thing worse about the interface is the symbology blends in with the moving map. overall more information can be displayed via HUD ( either fixed or off boresight) OFFboresight helmet Display is also something the Hog does have in its iteration ( IRL A10C suite 7+ have offboresight HMD). Sure the Hog has lots of fuel, and the Hornet needs to manage it more carefully, but I still like the fact the Hornet has something like the FPAS page. again Many features even RWR screen, and countermeasures programming is done via DDI's. IN the hornet everything is managed via MFD's or some form of digital display. you already have a bunch of preset staions, and manually chaging them is easier to input via keypad than turning dials for each individual digit. IN the Hornet, its all done via UFC, and therefore requires less heads down time. and requires heads down time to change frequencies among various radio sets. RWR and CM programing is entirely seperate. In the Hog the Glass pit has mostly to do with weapons/ sensors management. the Hog being a 1970s simple vintage aircraft modernized in the 2000s, whilst the Hornet from its first service batches were built around Glass cockpit with 3 displays. Youve got 3 not 2 multipurpose displays to work with. IF anything the Hornet has overall much more modern cockpit and has a much more digitally integrated avionics suite than the HOG does. The Hornet has a Proper Autopilot system, and not a basic altitude/heading hold The Upfront control is more intuitive, and i find buttons and switches are more logically laid out. and unlike the HOG can use it pretty much pure HOTAS reducing my keyboard bindings usage essentially completely.Īnd i actually find interfacing with the Hornet to be more user friendly. With the Hornet i can map all the HOTAS functions i need with the X56. For someone who doesn't have a Thrustmaster warthog HOTAS I found the warthog had too many assignable keys to be easy to use entirely with Hotas i am using ( (saitek X56 user) ![]() ITs simpler to use, and not over complicated. I actually like the hotas system on the F18 better. I disagree here with these points made with regards to HOTAS and cockpit IM going to avoid direct comparison of roles because these are two different aircraft, But i will comment on cockpit and functionality and ergonomics. Sure, the F-18 can pull nicer stunts, but the A-10C has a nicer, more weighty feel to it. Plus, I think the A-10C feels better in the air than the F-18. It's got more switches, the MFDs have a better, more modern interface and the HOTAS workflow is better thought out. ![]() I just think that the A-10C cockpit is more fun to operate. It's hard to define, but mostly (for me) I think it's about the cockpit. Still, the A-10C obviously has something that the F-18 is missing. The cockpit looks alot nicer (at least for now) ![]() It's a nicer looking aircraft (subjective, I know) Maybe it's just me, but I keep coming back to the A-10C.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |