Avionics and military doctrine-wise, JF-18 is one of the top 5 flight sims ever built. However, dated graphics have moved it down to second tier for many. If someone like TSH were able to secure the source code, and a license to work it over, modernize it, it would rise to the top 3 of all time, no problem.

This sim sucks if you compare it to modern sims and eye candy. It rocks when you compare it with regards to comms and landing procedures on the carrier. And since this is the only closest-to-real naval sim available, it has it's place in the flight-simming scene.

So it is still a wonderful study-sim though without the modern graphics. Surprisingly, it has a 3D clickable cockpit!

And night carrier landings with a squirrely aircraft is a white-knuckle ride!

Securing the source code would be only half the challenge -- you would still need the tools that were used to build it, and people (real programmers) would be needed to wade through all that code in order to bring it up to date. Without that, having the source code only would be of little consequence.

Ripcord

Well, the tools are one thing, programmers are another. This sim has but a small and dedicated following these days. Even back when its fan base was bigger I never saw a bunch of C++ guys coming out of the woodwork to volunteer their services. Are they out there now?

Good point. The source has been available for Enemy Engaged for a long time, but the core of it has not been particularly changed. It couldn't hurt, though, and I'm sure there are some simple fixes possible by amateur coders if it were.

***

“The semi-dynamic format allows better story-telling than a dynamic campaign.”

That is so true. I love that description. I also think it helps how much variation this sim has to draw from. DCS Blackshark’s scripted, branched campaigns are some of the most boring I’ve ever played, but likely due to the nature of the limited weapons and narrow capabilities of the aircraft modeled.

I think the whole mood, which I agree is special in JFA-18, indeed is a result of the slightly non-primary color sky palette and the scripted “story” missions, but in the case of night missions is further enhanced by the lack of full pilot night vision. That little NV HUD is all you get and you’re surrounded with darkness in a way that’s very effective. Falcon and a lot other sim’s full screen PNVS kind of ruins the mood.

Agreed that Janes comms are awesome.

I don't have hi tiles, so I can't compare that to Janes. But have you tried Free Falcon? Amazing weather. You can fly over, around, or directly into it and can tell where it is based on the height of the clouds and the amount of shadows they cast. The lighting is in the same league as FA-18, except it's 32bit. How ever EA/Janes coded the volumetric clouds is not a speedy, shortcut way. They don’t rotate. They’re wispy, semi-transparent, and have an effect on how the light shines through. They don’t seem like video game graphics, but closer to complicated old-school rendering.

There's something to be said for having twin engines. You have improved survivability in JFA-18. Even with the mods, Falcon still seems to be stuck with one engine on every plane. One engine and no fire extinguisher. Yes, you get a fire extinguishing system in Janes. And as previously mentioned, it helps to not overdo it on your way to a landing strip. I don’t even think F4AF has a HUD MFD, and you need one as the HUD’s always the first thing to go out.

Allied Force has those true Off Boresight IR AAM shots available like Lock On. Both FF5.53 and JFA-18 require padlocking. Free Falcon's is kinda quirky, too, with the seeker cooler needing to be dealt with. I haven't fully learned how that works or how long the seeker can stay 'open'. Allied Force has it in the SMS MFD, but there doesn't seem to be any reason to touch it.

Free Falcon 5.53 is pretty unforgiving with AA radar targeting. You have to be very specific with your beam, mostly going by audible feedback from the AWACS. Allied Force is about halfway between Janes and FF5.53 in this department. It's easier than Free Falcon, but harder than FA-18 to paint targets quickly in AF. I'm not saying which is better or more accurate, since I have no clue. Electronic Warfare is very effective in Free Falcon. That might be part of the reason.

Janes' has probably a more modern and complicated radar system modeled, but not so modern as to be video game like. It's a playable balance. The FA-18 radar on the surface has a shallow learning curve to jump in and get started, partly due to the RWS/TWS Auto ACQ having its own dedicated button. But there’s a lot of depth to it if you look closer. I think the F-Pole in Falcon is more strait forward than the NERD (think that’s what it’s called) in JFA-18, though it does look cooler.

TWS multi-target firing is effective in JFA-18 and Free Falcon, with perhaps Janes having the edge in graphical representation. Allied Force is unpredictable at times. While it's easier to get the tracks in the first place with F4AF compared to FF, you lose them more quickly in the former and it rarely will allocate properly to each of the 4 IDs. Both Falcons allow you to correct targeting mistakes, but even in FF5.53 if you rapidly do the wrong order, it can mean a bunch of wasted missiles at the same one or two targets. You have to switch that ID transponder code before you switch targets, otherwise it will update any semi-actives still following cues for that ID to the new target. In FF5.53, using TMS Right to bump into auto TWS definitely gets the best results in that sim with multiple targets... and of course it's the only auto mode you get.

In FA-18 there’s an RWS/TWS combo mode that allows multiple directional tracks, but you can only fire and update one missile at a time. Change targets, and the missile is on its own. You get to this with that Auto ACQ button. Fast. Easy. Then just hit the Undesignate button and it cycles through single target Launch & Steering (L&S) tracks. But if you go to the dedicated TWS mode (not the combo one) you can pre-select multiple targets first and it will cycle automatically after each missile is fired if “auto” is selected. If you just have one non-STT track in TWS mode, you can fire, manually designate another, fire, repeat, and they will all update. It shows these nice little lines and missile indicators for each. Either way, JFA-18 requires some manual designating for true TWS.

In Falcon, if you just manually switch targets in TWS and nothing else, it's no different than doing individual RWS shots and breaking the lock to send the missile off to do its best on its own with no updates. Manual TWS in Falcon, while no more effective at guiding the missiles to targets than rapid manual RWS shots, does have the added benefit of its narrow/zoom mode. So if you don't want to mess with the ID codes, aren't using TMS Right, and don't mind the reduced info going to the missiles, you can go to TWS, zoom, scroll around to find what you want, lock, fire, unlock, rinse, repeat.

Janes also has AWACS datalinking Multi Sensor Integration, which while not exactly the uber-modern sensor fusion, is extremely helpful and does combine it in a way that portrays the origin of the info. I can’t say enough about that. Situational Awareness display can use that and MSI selected in the AA radar connects the two.

Off the top of my head I can't remember which does NCTR faster. They're all pretty slow at that. Janes does attempt it with just the L&S track, though it works better in STT. It further gives a generic description first, jet/helo/large before giving the exact type. So even if it’s not any faster overall, you’ll get more use out of it when it does do something.

JFA-18 also can do a crude airborne FLIR. I don't think any version of Falcon can do that, though Total Air War and Lock On are still king of the IRST. Actually, the Janes FLIR visually looks almost as good as Gunship!. Like the radar, it’s both superficially more streamlined but has greater complexity and depth than Falcon's if you dig into it. For instance, in CCIP it looks by default (if no target is selected) at that point in real time. Tank passe through FLIR. Hit pickle. Tank goes bye bye. Roam and bomb all night long.

The aforementioned datalinking in Janes spoils you with its IFF look, but the actual manual IFF in JFA-18 is similar to FF5.53 when you turn IFF on for all aircraft in the ffviper config file. Carets instead of green circles. Allied Force has no IFF.

JFA-18 still has the best HARM implementation I've ever seen. Though FF5.53 is getting there, it still lacks a self protect mode. That's a big deal to me.

Similar trend on GPS and autonomous weapons. Janes, for what it has, does them very well. Allied Force mostly doesn't do them at all. And FF5.53 is improving. The AI aircraft have a greater variety in Falcon, but that’s not of much use to us.

Of the three, gun kills are easiest in Janes. Hardest for me in Allied Force, but thrilling when you get one.

Cluster bombs seem to be most lethal in Janes, possibly because there are fewer vehicles and they tend to be grouped together driving on roads. More effects of the scripting? Ditto with just a dumb bomb landing next to a tight convoy. A whole mess of MK20s in any version of Falcon might just only take out one or two tanks. That can be annoying. Ground forces are oddly spread out in Falcon. I find mud moving in JFA-18 to be more rewarding and predictable. The visual of a cluster bomb dispersing in mid air is more obvious in Janes, too.

Janes has drones & decoys, Auto and Semi-auto ECM modes, EMCON, and all sorts of other goodies, too. And some Low Observable radar aspect characteristics is modeled for the Superhornet. So you lose some details and gain others.

JFA-18 has one pit, 3D, and nearly everything you need works and clicks. I think the exception is the group of four switches between your legs, but there are keys for them. Ramp starting is not a biggy for me, but I do like to manually control the leading edge flaps and things like that in Falcon if I'm damaged. I don't need that stuff, though. TSH pits for the F-14 and A-10 (last time I checked) aren't particularly useful; mostly just cosmetic. Pretty, but I don't use them. Not sure if that's been fixed.

Allied Force's 3D pit, as you know, is not click-able and some of the instruments don't work in it. Free Falcon has some clickable 3D pits that are fantastic, but there is large variation in MFD placement between 2D and 3D pits, buttons, etc. It's amazing how modders have achieved and it's just icing on the cake, as far as I'm concerned. There are ingenious solutions to limited space. Check out the FF5.53 Raptor.

As far as flight dynamics... It's hard to describe exactly, but all the versions of Falcon can be simplistic in general everyday response and feel. The latter is a misnomer, I know, because there's no inertial sensations. While there are clearly some glitches in the flight models that never got fixed in Janes F-15 (crazy AoA) and FA-18 (no rudder, extremely sluggish at low pre-stall speeds like you're caught on something), they feel deeper for some reason. Accident? Intentional? Add not-so-subtle nuance and effects (that sluggishness) to make up for the lack of physicality? It feels underpowered in both Janes study sims, and perhaps that helps the experience by making you work harder.

Speaking of inertia, the Falcons all do aircraft loading stresses. You will miss that, even though you curse it when you break the AFCS in Falcon. So whatever simplistic response it usually has, they make up for it with the extreme end of the envelope. Even with Cat III selected, you can over-G the airframe. An extreme roll acceleration is enough if you've loaded excessively on the outer wings. At audible indications of stress, you need to quickly back off the stick. Over-speed is also (maybe over) modeled, sometimes to the player's dismay if you're trying to dive in an A-10. So it's an interesting reversal here, too. I don’t think Janes does any of this.

Speaking of over-G, the heartbeats are cool in JFA-18. I like that better than the breathing in Free Falcon.

F4AF is more stable and easier to get running than either FF5.53 or JFA-18. The fly any jet mod in Allied Force combined with the newer 2012 mod is outstanding. While it doesn't give you the various pits of TSH or FF5.53, it's easier to find things in a pit you know. FF5.53 requires you to back out of the campaign after every mission... or you're rolling the dice at a Crash To Desktop. Once you move away from the warm glow of Lead Pursuit’s rock solid product, you are moving into dark, cold uncertainty of hacker land.

In my experience, Janes is most dependent on your graphics card. Not so much speed, but compatibility. There’s probably a bunch of other stuff going on, but make, drivers, and generation of GPU has made the biggest difference for me. Some cards and drivers just won’t dance with it. Falcon seems only finicky about how it's internally configured and what kind of sound card you have. Note: use an ordinary Direct Sound gaming card, not pro-sound recording cards that happen to be able to emulate one.

If you already had JF-18 and were asking about Allied Force, then absolutely you should check out some version of Falcon. Someone should have smacked me upside the head a long time ago. The learning curve is not that big. People shouldn't be afraid of it.

In the inverse circumstance, I increasingly say "No"... unless you have a second machine you can dedicate to old sims (and swap out parts until it's compatible) or a brand spanking new PC with a massive amount of horse power that might be able to push through the legacy slowdowns with raw CPU and memory speed.

On my computer, I'm getting abysmal but playable framerates in JFA-18 and I don't think F-15 is stable at all anymore. I get higher average rates in Blackshark, and that looks a zillion times better even tuned way down and sync limited to 20fps. And I've never been able to run FA-18 with anti-aliasing. Switching from F4AF to it is shocking. Sure those horizons and clouds look stunning, but it doesn’t make up for 10fps. If the Janes sims did run faster and with AA, would I fly them as much as Allied Force? Maybe.

Yep. A modern, fast, 32-bit port of JFA-18 (with at least a fixed rudder) would be an instant top-level flight sim. I have no doubt about that.

Like the other guys said, if you're a naval aviation fan it's worth a try. If you’re a sim collector, go for it. I guess it's also worth the effort if you want more rewarding mud moving and that’s bugging you about Falcon. You might get lucky with your config. Just think, in the amount of time you've just wasted reading this, you could have had TSH installed! Mwah hah hah.

Happy new years.

Correction: TWS multishots aren't just glitchy in in F4AF. They don't work at all. Open Falcon and Free Falcon both have it. Thanks, Rhamphor.

Reticuli, just wondering what system you have? On my system, the fps in F/A-18 never dips below 30 and the game is always smooth and playable, even when the action gets hot and heavy over land.


In F/A-18, you can track and fire at multiple targets using the TWS RAID mode. Designate the target blip once in RWS, switch to TWS, activate RAID and the radar will automatically sort/track all targets in the group. Each AIM-120 you then ripple off will track a separate target in the group.

I have an older computer. For the benefit of the original poster, if you can run Blackshark, Flaming Cliffs 2, or DCS A-10 fast at high detail/quality, Janes FA-18 will probably run sufficiently fast on your computer... assuming it's otherwise compatible with it. That is not a judge of overall stability, rather just what kind of fps you can expect. I average about 10-20fps in Blackshark with everything at or below minimum and it fps-limited to 21 or 22fps. Janes FA-18, though it is graphically crude by comparison, only 16bit color, and usually anti-aliasing must be off, still has difficulty even consistently getting those kinds of framerates. So the code is highly out-of-date if it looks this bad and has lower fps than DCS.

I am not aware of any method to automatically designate multiple targets in Janes FA-18 automatically for multi-missile, multi-target update shots. You must either manually designate each of them in TWS before firing, or designate each manually after each successive shot. If the former, it will switch targets automatically as you fire. If the latter, you are doing the switching during the designating of new targets. Either method requires manual designation in some manner: before or during the firing process, in order to have them all update simultaneously while in flight. That is the only way I know of in Janes to get multi-missile updates simultaneously. Any other method will usually show only one missile track/update symbology at a time, which I assume is for a reason: it's not updating the others. The auto-ACQ button will only make an L&S target if there isn't one already in RWS, or it will go to STT if there *is* one already or you are in TWS. The Undesignate button only switches from one L&S to another, regardless of whether you're in RWS or TWS. It does not create secondary tracks in its wake. Certainly that might be effective enough in some circumstances (it's all you can do in Allied Force, as it turns out), but is not full multi-missile updating. I have never previously found RAID to do what you mention, other than showing the targets that are clumped together.

Correction: You're right. RAID does a kind of auto designating of multiple targets from an original track if they're in a close formation. I checked this again by creating a flight of four Mig-29s and they were indeed all hit by four missiles. It took a moment for each to show up and there was only one missile line that I guess is shared, but they were all four splashed and the missiles didn't go to just the one target. The first few times I did it the missiles were off before the 4 bandits were visually shown even though they all still splashed, but if you wait first for it they will all display as tracks in the RAID screen. If they didn't even show up individually but were still downed, RAID might not have much use in the sim as you wouldn't know how many to shoot at! Eventually I replicated what you're talking about. I don't think I'd previously tested it on a flight and confirmed the kills, as before posting I tried it with individual separate aircraft in one direction in a big fur ball I created. The targets weren't close enough together. Thank you, sir.

There is also a voice over RAIDscan training mission you can download, 1 F/A-18 v 4 MIG-21, from here:

http://tacops.virtualfightersquadrons.com/

It works pretty well in game, although I rarely get all 4, usually 3, sometimes 2, sometimes 4, although I think that is just the way the game is designed.

In the campaign it is useful, since bandits often fly in pairs, with TWS RAID you can attack both at the same time.

I tried two flights of 5 set up as drones side by side in a nice big double V. Modded the First Look mission and moved myself back a bit. Since they don't evade, I can get them all. Pretty neat looking from the other end at 10 streaks coming at them and a quick succession of fireballs. I presume you don't see all 4-8 of the aircraft in a flight flying in formation in the sim when they're under attack. You can Auto ACQ, which switches to RWS/TWS, then switch to TWS and RAID, which I now have as joystick buttons (can't resist anymore... bye bye jammer and master arm), then fire off enough missiles to take them all out. With more than 5 or 6 of them, though, I can't tell how many there are since they spill over the edges of the B scope. But that's some deep avionics. I also switched them to two flights of 8, gave them AA loadouts, and told them to be offensive. That didn't work so well unless I switched to all the radar modes while paused first. Otherwise enough of them turned into me and got shots off. Even with the pause cheat, I only bagged 10 or maybe 11 in the first round and had to chase the others for 9X and gun kills. Guess I scared 'em off.

I agrees with Tarnsman . I my self do not bother much with its graphic ( acceptable to me ).Air to Air refueling remain the toughest task in Jane's F/a 18, IMHO you will not get that experience anywhere else.