by Tim "Flyboy" Henderson and Leonard "Viking1" Hjalmarson

  The terrain model in JFA, on the other hand, looks like an enhanced WW2 Fighters. I suspect there is some level of detail thingy happening here, since it looks great from up high, and looks great from down low. Sense of speed is quite good.

Tim: I don't mind the terrain as much, though I confess it looks pretty weak after JFA. Clouds? DISH has done alright, but JFA is better. Again, think WW2 Fighters but improved. And varieties and layers of cloud, fog, weather etcetera in JFA are truly splendid. Graphics are a non-issue for me in JFA, a bit disappointing in DISH.

Viking1: But on the other hand, object detail, particularly aircraft, are gorgeous in DISH, and look unfinished in JFA. This won't matter much to the serious sim crowd, but it is likely to hurt sales.

COMMS and Control

If you are a multiplayer hound, DISH may disappoint you. Deathmatch mode is the only game in town for this edition of DI's sim.

Tim: And that begs the question, "where is the action for the single player crowd?" COMMS and control are much too limited. If you recall DI's F16, this again seems like an enhanced version. You do have more control than the earlier game offered, and you even get four or five AWACS commands. For the more casual sim pilot, this may prove entirely adequate.

Viking1: On the other hand, the casual pilot may get lost with the incredible range of control and interaction offered in JFA. It is phenomenal. Think F4, but up another notch. The levels of menus are fantastic, and wing performance seems to be solid. You can interact with your own flight, escorts, AWACS, FAC, tower, marshall, tanker, JSTARS, and your mother-in-law if you need to!

As to comms interface, DI has placed all their COMMS on the UFCD (Up Front Control Display) under a menu labelled HCOM. This is an interesting variant of the old menu system. The problem is that you will have to mouse in all your command choices. It's very kludgy, especially when the going gets hot. Then again, there aren't nearly the range of commands compared to JFA. And note that you won't be able to use Game Commander.

Jane's Mission Planner

Interface, Mission Planner, Flow

As noted earlier, DISH lacks a mission builder, but there is a mission planner. The interface, however, is somewhat spartan. In all fairness, Jane's has had a bit more practice in this area, and their interface has evolved into a powerful component.

Click to continue

On the other hand, the JFA mission builder is resident within the program and is limited to 800x600. Too bad it isn't more like the USAF UME or Flanker 2's editor (For more detail see the various preview coverage on both products. Note that a full featured mission planning component will arrive sometime in spring, 2000 with the GOLD version of DI's Super Hornet.)

Tim: Mission structure in DISH is almost absent. You can fly the missions in any order, and there is no sense of immersion and no meaningful flow between missions. This is one of the big gameplay downers for me.

Where to next? DISH lacks IFR, JFA has it. The realism of in flight refueling is even configurable in JFA, so the newbies can also do it. Not much debate there, JFA wins out. What about FM, weapons modeling and avionics?

FM, Weapons and Systems

Both simulations model the required components, but the model in DISH is weak. The rate of acceleration is substantially higher in DI's sim and flying off the deck with a clean airplane DISH can make 400 knots in 12.5 seconds compared to 22 seconds in JF18. A fully loaded Hornet (4 Harpoons plus 1000 pound bomb on centerline) in DISH will make 350 knots in 13 seconds off the carrier, compared to 30 seconds in JFA (10 degrees AOA).

The differences also make themselves felt in damage modeling. The Hornet in DISH is considerably more resilient than the Hornet in JFA. You will occasionally be blown out of the sky with a single SAM hit in JFA, but never in DISH. In the same way, landings are very forgiving in DISH.

As for weapons and systems, both sims are very detailed. Weapon reliability is much higher in DISH (missiles almost always hit something.)

Individual systems are more carefully modeled in JFA, but there are occasional shortcuts taken. For an example let's compare the naverick camera and AT FLIR in both simulations.

DI's FLIR

JANE'S FLIR

Go to Part IV