BAe Sea Harrier - Technical data and discussion

Is Sea Eagle classed as a dumb weapon? Thought that was inboard as well

Sea Eagle isn’t even in the manual at all as a suspended weapon. Bear in mind the FAA was already running out of Sea Eagles when the FA.2 entered service.

There are the odd mentions here and there.
image

This section covers why;
image

2 Likes

Interesting, Thank you

Is there any chance that that wiring is what was used for the harriers I sent, or would it not be possible to alter like that?

I couldn’t say if the Sea Eagle wiring is usable for sidewinder, I have my doubts.

Sea Eagle trials were done with FA.2 by 899 NAS at least. Some photos from 1994
53637397153_6cc15e7898_c

7 Likes

I really hope we get a proper roll out of ASMs at some point.

4 Likes

Courtesy of @Flame2512 and the National Archives. By the time of FA.2 they only had 3 left for test firing for the remaining life left in the missile. It was pretty bleak.
image

4 Likes

I suppose carriage of Sea Eagle and WE.177 on the inboard of Sea Harrier suggests it was wired similarly to the SWDERU/HDERU stations on Tornado, which generally don’t have any wiring for AIM-9

5 Likes

I noticed this on the HUD image

Spoiler

Opera Snapshot_2024-05-28_195655_forum.warthunder.com

Is this an error or something

An error for what?

It has g for gravities not a rate of acceleration

Gravity is a measure of acceleration.

1G = 9.81ms^2

Also can we use this as info to get AAMs on the inboard pylons

Ok but would also work to the Gs when turning?

Ever heard of term lateral acceleration?

Might’ve

doubt it, if it is a bodge like Gunjob suspects then it won’t be able to mount on both pylons at once

Aww, I was hoping we could get the SHar a bit better

Trying to make this simple.

When you’re turning at speed, the centrifugal forces are trying to throw the aircraft out away from the centre of the turn, these forces felt are in relation to the gravitational constant, which is a rate of acceleration.