This list doesn't quite describe all the joys and frustrations peculiar to each of these simulations, so let's go through the list section by section and sim by sim for a quick comparison.

  Quick Impression Overview

DI models full carrier ops, which Jane's does not. Does it really matter?

It certainly matters to me. If you never tried DI's simulation, you likely wouldn't miss these features when you fire up Janes' simulation. But I spent almost two hours in DI's sim prior to walking onto the deck in Jane's sim. I went, I saw, I was conquered.

Carrier ops in DI are so good they make me cry.. Seriously, they aren't perfect if you really know the ropes, but they have that "I am really there" quality to them that adds greatly to the beginning of your mission. It is really incredible.

The last mission I flew was a ground strike mission late at night, and as I rotated my view to cockpit right, across the glare of the deck lighting, I watched another Hornet firing up on the CAT and the Plane Director interacting with the pilot. The Director gave him the signal then ran out of the way. The pilot spooled up his engines and went to full afterburner, and then was away, a steam trail from the CAT operation following in his wake.

Damn.. it was good to be there!

There are no problems or limitations to Super Hornet when you're on deck. They have even modeled the APU. You don't get any engines spooling up before you turn on that auxiliary power unit.

Lifting Off the Deck

The problems with DI's sim don't show up til you're off the deck.

First, in the name of realism, they don't allow you to manipulate a single control while the game is paused. I call this, "the Pause function from Hell." Most likely this was dreamt up by a bureaucrat in Washington.

Hit CTL P for DI's Super Hornet (hereafter DISH for short) and the screen goes dim and all functions cease. You can't access another view, and you can't experiment with control modes. In other words, you better have that manual at your side and you had better hope you understand the directions explicitly. This makes the learning curve nasty.

Jane's FA18

Compare Jane's F/A 18E (hereafter JF18 for short) where you hit P or ALT P to pause the sim, but still have full access to the viewing system and full functionality for radar etc. The only thing Jane's doesn't allow you to do is to launch weapons while paused. No problems there.

As if this wasn't frustrating enough, in DISH when you want to quickly reference a key command you must pull out a budget version of the key command card. No, you don't actually get a command card, you get a small slip of colored paper and a magnifying glass. Oops. Scratch that, they forgot to include the glass. You had better buy one if you are 35 years plus however, because at my 39 years of age I need one to read this sheet.

And you WILL be searching on this sheet for commands, because few are obvious. Granted, F1 will give you the straight cockpit view, but it won't return you to a non-slewed perspective. When you want to move the target designator you'll have to reach for DEL plus I,K,O or P. Thankfully, you can also accomplish this action with the right mouse button or program the chorded function to your HOTAS.

Jane's, however, provides a fold-out command card and a spiral bound manual which is considerably more detailed in the radar and targetting sections. Why? There is more detail modeled in the weapons and targetting systems. More on this later.

Terrain and Graphics Models

Training Flight in DISH

By now you may have heard the rumor that the terrain engine for DISH is taken from an enhanced F16. I have no idea if that is true, but it certainly looks to be true. It's bland folks, very bland. No immersion factor here.

The terrain model in JF18, 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.

Clouds, friends? DISH has done alright, but JF18 is better. Again, think WW2 Fighters but improved. And varieties and layers of cloud, fog, weather etcetera in JF18 are truly splendid. Graphics are a non-issue for me in JF18, a bit disappointing in DISH.

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.

  And that begs the question: where is the action for the single player crowd? COMMS and control are somewhat 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.

In fact, the casual pilot is going to be lost with the incredible range of control and interaction offered in JF18. It is phenomenal.

As to 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. Then again, there aren't nearly the range of commands compared to JF18, so maybe it's not such a big deal after all. One more thing though.. you won't be able to use Game Commander.

Jane's Mission Planner

Interface, Mission Planner

As noted earlier, DISH lacks a mission builder, but there is a mission planner. The interface, however, is spartan and complicated compared to JF18. In all fairness, Jane's has had a bit more practice in this area, and their interface has evolved into an extremely powerful component. (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.)

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. Where to next? DISH lacks IFR, JF18 has it. 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 400 knots in 14 seconds off the carrier, compared to 48 seconds in JF18 (the aircraft will barely make this speed at 8 degrees AOA).

The differences also make themselves felt in damage modeling. The Hornet in DISH is considerably more resilient than the Hornet in JF18 beta. I was blown out of the sky with a single SAM hit more than once in JF18, but never in DISH. It may happen, of course, but it usually took two or more to bring an explosion or death in DISH. 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 JF18, but there are occasional shortcuts taken. For an example let's compare the naverick camera ad AT FLIR in both simulations.

DI's FLIR

JANE'S FLIR

You have to admit that the MFD from DIs sim looks extremely good. In fact, it is practically a photograph from an actual FA 18E cockpit. Functionally there are only small differences in these two, but some are going to prefer the photo realism of DIs cockpit to Jane's virtual cockpit.

One of the functional differences is that ALL the knobs that would work in the real Hornet work on DI's MFDs. For example, the brightness and contrast knobs at each corner are actually functional and you could vary the brightness on each MFD if you chose.

DI Radar. Brightness Knob lower left.

There are a few more differences in the modeling of the AT FLIR, however. Let's compare screens from both sims and take a look.

  First, let's look at the MFD in DI's Super Hornet simulation.

DI's FLIR

Again, the photo realistic cockpit makes this a very nice looking MFD indeed. But more important to some, there are a couple of additional function keys provided. Notice the ALG function second button from the left at bottom. And notice the STBY designation at top left.

Jane's AT FLIR

Compare Jane's AT FLIR MFD, which as far as I could tell can only be brought up in the center MFD. There appear to be only two modes: ON and OFF, with STANDBY avoided for simplicity. There is also a note in the DI manual that moving from OFF to STBY will require a five second delay while the gyros spin up.

Personally, I have no problem with simplifying some of these things. A strict comparison of obsessive tendencies on the part of designers would have to give the nod to DI in the functionality department.

But lest you think all is now clear and DI must win the toss, consider the total package. For pure avionics detail, Jane's wins. Factor in realism in flight control and interaction with AWACS, FAC, tower and wingmen. Again, Jane's wins hands down. Factor in a moving and pitching carrier and Jane's is the winner. Consider pilot and squadron records and ability to interact with the mission structure in campaign or single missions: again, Jane's wins the toss.

DI HCOM

Or suppose you want to lase the target for your wingman or your buddy in multiplayer mode? You can't do this in DISH. Or what if you would prefer to program your HARPOON for high flight and then sea-skimming near the target? Sorry, only JF18 allows this much flexibility.

SUMMARY

The additional length of the Jane's manual is necessary to cover the additional modeling in weapons and targetting systems. There is much more functionality in these systems overall, adding additional complexity to Jane's F/A 18.

Does this mean Jane's is absolutely exhaustive? No. For example, the real F/A 18 actually displays RWR info in the HUD, but Jane's does not model this for the sake of reducing clutter.

In the end DISH is a good simulation that will be better when the Command version arrives. But limited COMMS and limited gameplay (without a mission builder) are going to cause some to bypass this one. No possibility of Game Commander.. big downer. On the other hand, those looking for the most detailed carrier deck ever modeled might be snapping this up in a hurry.

Obviously, there is much more to be examined. Will wingmen perform their tasks equally well in both sims? I don't have enough experience to answer that. And personally, I prefer the padlock in DI's sim.

Some will not greatly care for the virtual cockpit of Jane's F/A 18. Some will think they have died and gone to heaven. There are always trade-offs, and now you know some of the ones that occur in DI's Super Hornet and Jane's F/A 18 E.

For more on these simulations see our Air Combat Previews and our F/A 18 Index. For info on the Command version of DI's sim see Super Hornet Update.