by Eric Larson, LT USN January 12th, 2000

  I learned the sim was running on an experimental 600MHz machine under Win98 on a *large* monitor - wasn't even sure of the rest of the configuration (vid card, mem, moboard, etc). There was a Microsoft joystick there. The speakers weren't hooked up, either - not enough space on the power strips between the two computers and other things plugged into it in support of the rest of the booth...

I've stated before that GOTS sims (that's Government Off The Shelf) tend to focus on a particular requirement (or small numbers of requirements), to the near absolute neglect of others. For example, very high fidelity flight model, but terrain representation suffers.

On the other hand, commercial sims (and I'll keep my comments limited to the focus-type sims as that's pretty much all I'll buy, hence that's the only type of sim I have experience with) attempt to cover the full range of the aircraft's environment (flight model, weapons, atmosphere, terrain, damage modeling, comms, AI, ATC, WEAX, networking/multiplay, avionics, campaign, stability, frame rate, HOTAS/key-mapping, etc).

I make the following statement unashamedly and without hyperbole: This sim rivals each of those GOTS simulators in *each* of the foregoing areas, regardless of the focus of that particular simulation. I'd go so far as to say that if you combined all of their strongpoints, this sim would *still* be a contender.

Now, I'm using words like "rival" and "contender" advisedly - this sim runs on a PC, not a rack of SGIs. The terrain rendering doesn't extend to the horizon and the user isn't presented with a wrap-around view or an actual cockpit. But my point is this, for the money, the performance is *very* comparable to what industry is developing for the government.

Might I add, there was actually a booth at the conference featuring a table with four computers running Hornet: Korea. They were linked on a LAN and attendees were connected on a voice network (headsets, mikes and all)trying their hand at waxing eachother in online dogfights. This particular organization (a government office) recognized the fact that military aviators were actually bringing their sims on deployment with them and flying with/against eachother to keep their skill up while they weren't flying.

Leveraging off of this concept, this organization really didn't care which program they were actually using to develop skills - just so that they could satisfy Mission Essential Skills. And, though they were featuring an air combat simulation, their goal was to utilize low-cost commercial products to enhance training opportunities to all warfare mission areas.

Click to continue

Flight Model.

Very good. And I am comparing the Janes FM with my experience in the high fidelity FMs in contemporary simulators built for the government. Obviously, you can't expect as much fidelity as in the Boeing sim, but its not bad. I'd say head and shoulders above the other GOTS/contractor simulators on the floor. I did seem to have more difficulty keeping power while on the glideslope. The FPM tended to drop below the fantail and was a little harder to get back up.

But then again, for a throttle I wasn't using an actual HOTAS setup, just a wheel device built into the side of a sloppy Microsoft unit. Controls also seemed a little more sensitive than in the big ticket simulator. But then again, there is no resistance to joystick motion. There isn't that fine control that you get in the real deal. (Mental note: Will have to futz with the joystick settings once I get this game home... )

I don't think I can adequately comment on the low-speed handling characteristics without rudder pedals, but when the nose was left high, power cut and control is lost, the sim lost aileron authority and slushed around not unlike the TSTARS F/A-18E simulator I experimented in. Good sign.

Weapons.

Better weapons modeling than what I saw in Janes F-15. Once you get this sim, get into an external view and launch a HARM! The thing drops off the pylon, lights and pulls away from the jet and jumps ahead - not unlike what you see on TV! ;D Really something else. Bombs leave honest-to-goodness *craters*, for crying out loud!

Missile exhaust rendering is better than anything else I saw on the conference floor. Nothing else held a candle. Bombs leave what look like holes and scorched earth (blackened) around the impact point! Great stuff!

Go to Page 5.