they removed ship maps from air rb because me in my ju 288 acting as an ac 130 would keep getting 10k sp games and rocketing through the ranks. also they are some of the best (or used to at least) ways of getting sp without bombing bases as it was very efficient. now you get 200sp for killing a destroyer. shame really, the one map with ships in rb and there are 4 destroyers to kill. no point when bases are a thing.
Yeah… sounds about right
Just me or does it feel like it might be CBT trying to get AMRAAM unlocked on the SHAR? Looks like what, 91k RP to get to it?
I think I saw some others with AMRAAM as a rank 3 module, would be nice for SHAR to have it there instead lol, esp given its a subsonic fighter.
Only the F4F-ICE I think. But yeah, I dont think it would be totally unfair for the FA2 to get AIm-120Bs at rank 3 instead rank 4. Plenty of space for it.
Also a tad wierd (and just noticed this for the FRS1) that the rocket pods are rank 4 not rank 1/2 like they are for the Jaguar and Gr7
1 Like
Yeah, would be neat lol.
Also, I am assuming the flight model isnt perfect yet as in the test room I am managing to get speed like a bat out of hell and also pulling like 16G turns and flipping the plane around in a couple seconds flat while managing to maintain momentum/rebuild quick when going 800km/h plus.
I am assuming not how it should be? Or is the engine refit they got really just that good for it? XD
Im guessing the FM is wrong, though it should have the Mk105 engine that can be found in the Harrier Gr7 (I think) should be better than it is currently
Its the other way around, That some Launch rails can mount both.
The MRL family of common rails; LAU-127(F-14 & F/A-18), -128(F-15 & F-22), -129(F-16), -139 (Grippen) for example, use geometry that can accommodate both Sidewinders and AMRAAMs(And LAU-138, BOL dispensers).
While an AMRAM doesn’t fit on the LAU-7, it is certified for International Missiles and smaller aircraft (HAWK, AH-1, AV-8, etc.) that aren’t certified for carriage by the MRL rails(on the aforementioned Teen series airframes, though these days certification has been performed on wider array of missiles so its less of an issue, though still impacts the configurations found in game) like the ASRAAM, IRIS-T, etc.
and the less said about the Aero 3 rail the better.
3 Likes
the only thing they would change is the engine so i don’t know what else then could of done
Stock grind improvement thread for Sea Harrier FA2 and AV-8B+. Figured Id kill 2 birds with 1 stone as they are in a similar boat
3 Likes
Did the Sea Harrier FA2 not get access to the twin bomb mounts for in boardboard pylons like the Sea Harrier FRS1 did?
Bug reported
If you ever looked at the discord you would know :(
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/6rpuKelVaenf
Nah, thats way too organised :D
and thank you
1 Like
Has the missing ejector rails on the belly pylons for the Aim-120Bs been reported?
Don’t think so
1 Like
I remember when “stopped using x” didnt stop gaijin in the past, cough L15 ammunition on challenger tanks… xD
I have to ask, weighing up the pros and cons, in the fullness of time, is it really going to be that big of an issue giving them the dual carrier when the plane only carries dumb bombs anyway at 11.7/12.3? Everyone and their mum at that BR carries way more payload or even smart weapons. It would allow the plane to carry 2 extra bombs, so instead of 3(?) it can take 5?
The real question shouldnt be “did they still use them”, it should be “would the plane be able to use them still?”.
1 Like
What I’ve been told is that the twin stores carriers stopped being used just because they didn’t safely separate from the aircraft in the event of the carrier being jettisoned. I don’t know whether this was only when they were empty, or with stores as well. Either way, they were restricted to emergency/wartime use for the aircraft that were certified to carry them. And that’s why you practically never see photos of them being carried outside of e.g weapon trials.
Even during the Gulf War it appears only the Saudis carried them on Tornado, and the RAF had either chosen not to or got rid of them by then (entirely possible we just gave them to the Saudis). So effectively they were no longer used by the UK by the early-to-mid 1990s when Sea Harrier FA.2 was introduced to service.
At some point it’s likely that aircraft were never even certified with them in the first place because of the known risk associated with them that might delay the aircraft’s entry in to service. But as you say, it’s almost certain that the FA.2 would have been able to use them as much as the other 1st Gen Harrier airframes could.
4 Likes
Question.
Was the BOL rail ever used in the duel rail config?
Seems a shame that we can only take the BOL rail with a single ‘winder.
1 Like
Probably never done, but likely possible
2 Likes