Because it was a rushed integration. Barely integrated at all. I really doubt given how janky the setup is that it could work on the twin pylon. We’re not talking about Harrier II here where it is integrated and part of its DASS suite.
1 Like
Really? I thought they had been developing it for years and had properly thought things through.
Those are BOL rails (LAU-138), As they are the only thing in inventory (other than the ALE-58, but that is a USAF variant of the BOL rail integrated into the LAU-128 Joint Common Launch Rail used by the F-15 ) that can fit the AN/MJU-52/B BOL-IR Countermeasure packet as subsequently referenced in the report.
I don’t think it’s mounted to the outer fuselage station(s), as the Chaff loading gate features is angled wrong for to be mounted to those as the rotation of the dispenser itself would be wrong for the mating surface to meet those of the station, also they don’t use a MAU-12 compatible station to mount the strakes / gunpod, due to the way that aerodynamic forces and moments get transferred to the airframe, they need to be mounted more solidly and thus why you don’t see non strake / gunpod stores able to be mounted on them (outside of ground clearance issues).
The scan of the image isn’t great, which causes the issue as it isn’t immediately obvious
I’d contend that it’s a LAU-115 mounted to the centerline station (could alternately be a BRU-32, with a series of adapters (?ADU-229?) to produce the observed rotation & spacing) with dual side mounted LAU-138 to match the rotation of the Features that are discernable from the image, at least to me.
So there is at least some configuration of dual BOL rails that has been documented
It’s not the first time things like this have occurred, many switches and HOTAS buttons change functionality if weight is on wheels, or the gear is down. For example many use the Nosewheel Steering button to reject / cage /step over missiles.
I guess it’s also better than directly stowing countermeasures in the Airbrake like the F-15 did because the ALE-40 was provisioned for but not mounted for basically the first 15 years of it’s service due to starting as an Interceptor replacing the Aging F-106 in the Homeland defense / Air patrol mission set.
For Shar no not at all. Even the CRL/BOL mod is a bodge job after they realised the full AMRAAM load resulted in just having the ALE-40s for chaff.
It already has twin BOL. Just not 4x with two on each twin SW mount. Not a huge amount is known about the twin mount but I suspect wiring up BOL through it isn’t possible.
Do we know what the designation is for the dual rails & the requisite adapter(s) used in that configuration would be?
Potentially even if they could, depending on the Bus-bar tie in, the dispensers may not be separately addressable and so always be stuck in paired release, which is the issue with the AV-8A, even though it has cockpit indicators for 4x AIM-9 it can only mount two due to the ECP to permit this not being procured.
2 Likes
It was just named “Twin sidewinder launcher” in the manual. I think one route would be to try and get the servicing docs for the launcher. I might have to explore that to put this issue to bed.
Maybe if we could get a look at a Shar 2 that hasn’t had the wires removed yet or we get hold of the build blueprints used for building then maybe we could confirm if it was possible or not. Doesn’t @Flame2512 have a Shar 2 in his yard?
Sounds like an average wt user, got so many keys to bind nowadays you gota fold them together. My toggle laser key is (` + e) lol. Apparently thats bad coming from my friend that uses alt + f to lock targets on radar… Mines middle mouse button as it locks as well as squad pings.
3 Likes
Still need the super-large chaff packet in the airbrake on the FRS1 modeled :P
Falklands map next major, AND we can hope and pray (cope) that the IR signatures get fixed and EEGS is added. kind of a big one i am surprised hasn’t been added.
Im just really hoping they dont butcher it.
A full Falkland island map would be really fun and we need bigger sim maps but the 3 points of interest they specifically mentioned are just on the east falklands and they could just crop the island down loads which would be kinda boring.
I also reeally hope its an EC map and not just an ARB map the size of a postage stamp.
IR sigs wont be fixed, but Im really hoping we get the EEGS and combined with fuel dumping as well is going to make carrier ops much easier. Kinda also hoping we get our drop tanks too
1 Like
I’m excited for custom battles Falklands map.
Could even do “what if scenarios”
With Bucs and Phantoms
No offense but you are daft if you think Gaijin is going to put much work into the Harriers within 4 years after “fixing” them
This would be the biggest EC map ever added to the game iirc and considering nothing new has come to Sim in so many years, I doubt we will get a proper sized map :(
Edit: To cheer up we can watch this:
Spoiler
We all know the chase Josh causes
https://youtu.be/2yYsmzeVHaM?si=uRrk2fxsf0Z64Y6d
3 Likes
I’m massively copium-ing that the reason we’ve had no new maps in so long is because they’ve been working on a super massive new map and it’s just taken twice as long as normal for an EC map
2 Likes
I hope not but I have a grudging feeling they are going to purposefully fuck something or with something just to spite us British players (not saying I’m British but British main)
Yeah, like it having no carrier spawns
Or being super small and only made for ARB
Would be cool if they added the Argentine carrier for the West side team
What br bracket would be most realistic for the falklands war, 11.3-10.3? Would get most of the early harriers which would be present in the war, mainly the squadron harrier. Although j7e/mig 23 kinda dominates that bracket