dcs world | best plane - top 5 jets

#dcsworld #pvp #f16 #tomcat #top5
What is the best dcs world (digital combat simulator) plane? Top 5 jets which in the game / simulation. Air to air, bvr, and air to ground. If you fly this will help decide your next module or starting new: bombs, rockets, missiles, speed and maneuverability.

00:00 intro
00:30 No F-15?
01:00 Air to Air (BVR)
02:00 Air to Air (Fox2)
02:30 AIR to Ground
04:30 TURN and BURN
04:45 fastest
05:10 final ratings
06:00 best plane?
06:35 final thoughts

[plazma]

⚠️⚠️⚠️ Hey guys hit the, 👍Like on the video and✅ Comment your fav plane below 👇👇👇 thanks!!! ⚠️⚠️⚠️

[DaveyCooter]

I agree that the F18 can do just about everything, while not being the best at any particular thing. Thats not necessarily a strength though. I find myself using different modules for every situation that just flat out do 1 job better.

[torarne]

As much as I like the Mirage, IMO it doesn't come close to the F-16 in capability. Datalink, Fox-3s, self designated smart weapons, it's not even close.
But that being said, I love flying the Mirage.

[simonhouel]

On the F-16 AG you did not acknowledged the upcoming TALD, the HTS pod, the CBU-105 and the fact that it can carry more Mavericks and more dumb bombs.

Considering the fuel economy, the Viper needs to be driven very carefully but you can get an actually very good mileage.

You could think that the Hornet can carry more but you have to consider the fuel you burn on launch and recovery.

In DCS, having 2 engines is not really a plus since most of the time we cannot play with random failures.

Jamming. The pods on the Viper are working a little better against SAM sites and you can chose what priority you prefer (radar or jamming) when the Hornet kills your own radar when jamming.

The Datalink is far more better on the Hornet and CAS can be a little bit fiddly on the Viper.

Dogfighting is definitely at the advantage for the Hornet with the HCMS datas, acquisition modes, auto IFF and the FLCS override.

Note that on the Viper has something awesome on the HSD page in dogfight mode : you can see where your HCMS is pointing at.
So, if you lose sight you can have a quick look on your HSD and point the helmet in the direction of the Datalink contact.

Lastly, the Slam. It's ok to fire from very long range but if your target is that well defended that you need the Slam(ER), then it will most likely have a couple of Thors that will shoot down your missiles.

On a personal preference, I absolutely hate the RWR logic on the Hornet.
The HUD is becoming crowded in hostile environment and I cannot use the RWR page as often.
The standbye RWR screen is difficult to read.

On the Viper, it is classic but just under your nose and has more modes.
It does not require to use one your screens.

[lbuckl]

I would have tied the F-16 in with the JF-17. Unfortunately the JF lacks in fuel capacity and armament restrictions. You either get the bags or the toys not both lol

[OscarZheng]

if we're talking about multirole, the f18 is the best of those planes, it can carry almost every weapon the navy has to offer and it has exceptional bvr capabilities and amazing dogfighting capabilities. for air to air combat, i would say the f16 is the best as it is super fast, very useful in a bvr fight and fields very good missiles for both bvr and within visual range. the f16 is a monster in the rate fight, even able to keep up with the f22 but if you want to do some bombing alongside your air to air combat, the f18 is the way to go

[TARCMMANDR]

The F-16 is definitely my pick. What puts it over the Hornet to me, even though the Hornet has some solid advantages, such as having all wing pylons GPS-plumbed and having all, is I far and away prefer the F-16's avionics. Entering data, controlling autopilot, HUD symbology - I prefer most of the F-16's features over their counterparts in the F-18, which feels clunky in terms of its avionics at times. Even if it does have more datalink capabilities and a more robust HMCS implementation (datalink contacts always on HMCS without having to be hooked, and direct HMCS-TGP cueing without needing markpoints), I can more quickly enter in new waypoints with better precision (entering in DDM is faster than DMDS and more precise than DMS) and the seamless transitions between Dogfight Mode and Missile Override vs the selected master mode are superb.

Some very important intangibles that I don't think were covered in this video - maybe because the creator is opting for a condensed format, which is understandable - are the possibilities with a Viper over those with a Hornet. There are a lot of subtle advantages a Viper can leverage over the Hornet, as the simple stuff is already well known:
• Unlike the Hornet, all four of the Viper's air-to-air hardpoints can mount AAMRAMs. And all of these mounts are dedicated, carrying them doesn't affect the rest of your loadout.
• The Viper has a dedicated hardpoint for TGP. The Hornet must sacrifice either an AAMRAM (leaving a fully air-to-ground Hornet that uses the fuselage pod with only one AAMRAM), or sacrifice the belly spot (more bombs, or fuel tank, even if the fuel tank isn't as necessary).
• While the Hornet gets the excellent JSOW-C, and cruise missiles (I'm still sore that ED walked back on giving the Viper the JASSM...), the Viper boasts cluster munitions that actually work. Nothing the Hornet carries can compare to the WCMDs. In at least a slight majority of air-to-ground situations, a Viper can be as destructive - if not more so - with four CBU-105s than eight JDAMs. To say nothing of the additional 6 CBU-97s that Viper would still have room for. Even the CBU-87/103s can be deadlier than Rockeyes/CBU-99s now.
• The Viper can also carry Mavericks on TERs, meaning it can have more missiles (I'd argue more numerous Mavericks are generally better than larger-warhead Mavericks), on only two pylons vs four, leaving two available for bags (did I mention the F-16 drops its pylons when dropping wing bags? Cleaner jet!) or more weapons. And TERs means the Viper can even beat the Hornet in dumb bombs, too.
• While in many situations, the two are equal in HARM employment... the Hornet has no answer to the Viper's HAD. Not only locating emitters unassisted, but also handing off to TGP and other weapons systems. It's easier to do SEAD without HARMs, sometimes easier still to cut to the chase and perform DEAD, all without prior intelligence pinpointing SAM location and type.

The Hornet is a bird to be respected. Her more robust foundation for munition carriage, her better range, her being happier at high altitude, means she's never a bad guest to bring to the party. And I've recommended the Hornet over the Viper for most of my friends getting into DCS. But for most of the situations one will find in DCS and for those of us who learn its ways, team Viper!


And for criticisms of the rating methodology in this video:
• The F-18's "Murder Hornet" loadout of 10 AAMRAMs plus two AIM-9Xs is also worthy of mention. No other aircraft in DCS has that level of BVR firepower, and I think the comparison should have reflected that somehow.
• I do disagree with giving the M2K a higher BVR rating than the Viper. The Viper lost here simply because it doesn't have Fox 1s; lacking Fox 1s is better than lacking Fox 3s, and it carries way more than the M2K. It should have been, at the very least, a tie: you can't give an extra 0.5 points for a nicer Fox 1, when a Fox 3 is generally superior.
• I think the F-16's "turn" ability is sold short in this video. It probably deserved a bit more than 0.5 points, and I think the Tomcat also deserved at least 1.5 points in this category.

The Jeff wouldn't have won, no, but it is still worthy of consideration. It lacks in quantity, but makes up for it in quality and variety. LJDAMs with better range than the GBU-54s? Yum. Laser-guided rockets that can kill modern MBTs and come in chunky pods? Yes please. An SFW glide bomb with functional terminal parameters? Heck yeah! I think the Jeff probably could have edged out the Flanker and the Fulcrum in this video, especially considering that it's Chinese origins can justify it as a REDFOR plane, sort of.
+1 BVR SD-10 Fox 3. No Fox 1s
+1 PL-5, no HOBS or long range.
+10 A2G for bombs, GPS bombs, LJDAMs, ASCMs and LACMs, AGMs, ARMs, laser-guided rockets and glide bombs. The high score reflects three unique capabilities among the other aircraft here.
+1 for speed, +1.5 for maneuvering. Not super fast, only agile under some circumstances (though it can be quite agile, I'd rather undersell than oversell its turning ability)
16.5 points right there. It lacks overall payload compared to the other aircraft here, but overall payload wasn't a factor, just capability.

That's my (probably more than) two cents.

[andreparadis]

There are so many subjective variables it is probably impossible to make a definitive choice. For instance the F18 yes doesn't accelerate like a Mirage but has more sustainable engine power. They fight differently. The F16 is an awesome dogfighter and can make life horrible for both the Mirage and the F18 if turn rates are maintained. The Mirage and F18 have instantaneous turn rates that balance that out. There are a lot of swings and roundabouts even down to pilot skill and experience that can skew the results. I would say you are probably right about the F18 but I certainly wouldn't rest on my laurels if I were to meet an F16 or Mirage in a merge.

[quadro]

i dont know why u put only 1 point into mig29 in turn and burn section, but this aircraft can win a 1 circle fight against kings of aoa (f18, mirage), dogfights are where mig29 shines in my opinion.

[koen]

I love the Mirage, but honestly, when objectively looking at this approach and 'best jet' / 'best multirole' the M2000 shouldn't even be on this list. You have the M2000 and F16 on the same spot, but the F16 can carry 4 AIM120 + 6 Maveriks + 6 cluster bombs. It can kill 12+ ground targets easily +still shoot 4x the best A2A missile and have datalink, targeting pod etc etc.
In the same situation, the M2000 can't carry the Fox1 with any A2G weapons and it is limited to max 4 missiles. Take any A2G and you are left with 2 fox2's. M2000 has no maverik, no datalink, and max 500lbs bombs.

M2000 comes nowhere close to F16 in multirole capability (unfortunately). I love my M2000 but I often leave it home if the mission asks for Multirole. I even take the F14 over the M2000 cause it can carry the same 2x fox2 but still have 6 1000lbs + 2 2000lbs bombs and 4 rocket pods (with bigger rockets than the M2000).

I don't fly the Russian stuff, but from this list it should objectively be:
F18
F16 (closely behind F18 depending on targets and mission. F16 can carry more Maveriks and clusters but no anti ship)


F14 (quite far behind the 2 above)

M2000 (far far behind the F18 and F16 and also quite a bit behind the F14.. and should not even be here really)

[kaan]

Ultimate and only realistic answer to this question is simply “it depends”

[julianmorrisco]

If you don’t know what the fight is gonna be like the F/A-18 would be my choice. But if I knew it was going to be air to air, and I don’t expect swarms of enemies. I’d prefer the F-16. The acceleration is magic.
But saying that, if it’s just down to flying, the Mirage 2000 and the Mig-29 both always feel like putting on a favourite jumper to me. But I’d prefer to not be in either of those if fox-3 missiles are heading my way. Don’t get me started on gen 2 and other older stuff. I love the F1. To me, it has all the benefits of the mig-21 (which I still love) without the Russian ‘agricultural’ vibe.

TLDR? It’s complicated.

[Pukin-Dog]

Harrier clearly gets a zero for BVR, but in a sidewinder fight it's only beaten by aircraft with helmet sights. A2G however. It's got LJDAMs which are without doubt the most useful weapon in DCS and also APKWS - probably the second most useful weapon in DCS - none of which are carried by any of the other aircraft in the video. Even more important for ground attack is its FLIR hotspots so can find targets within 5 miles really easily and it's TPOD is way better than that of the F16... and the Vipers is in turn way better than the Hornets whose pod is appalling. Even when it comes to Anti ship the harrier is way better than the Viper and at worst is almost a match for the Hornet as in DCS the Harpoon is quite useless at attacking most warships. Overall for ground attack nothing comes close.

[tacticaltoolbox]

F/A aircraft wins the multi-role competition? Unforseeable! I do agree that if you're going to count the A2G capabilities and score them, that's where the Hornet pushes ahead, making up for A2A speed/drag/acceleration shortcomings. Certainly for new players of DCS, other than buying FC3 to see if you even want to do this sim, the Hornet is a good all round choice: bang for buck very high return due to being able to have fun in carrier ops while still able to do all the A2A, A2G stuffs.

[primaryworm]

yeah, f18 are the best multi role, but me personally, i like mirage more for it speed and maneuverability for aa and harrier for ag

[Fariskov]

about 4 days now hard studying of mirage 2000c and I feel in love with it and maybe after a month i will feel obsessed with it lol

[MissingLink]

I would say this video is more or less not what the best jet in the game is but more what the most versatile jet in the game is...

[mikeck]

i love the Mirage in Fox-1 era scenarios but man...only 4 AAMs is tough. I do so wish they would offer the Mirage-2000-5 in a similar fashion to the F-1 or F-14 variants

[pteronoid]

The F18 can carry only 2 Mavericks and 2 HARMs at the same time while F16 can carry 6 Mavericks and 2 HARMs at the same time. the huge difference in points between them for A2G is unjust IMHO

[Ignition]

What about the Cluster munitions and the SEAD capabilities? The F-16 has the best cluster and SAM triangulation.