F5C Spam making playing the SHar a pain at the moment.
Issue being how easily countered the 9L is, and the crazy low heat signature of the F5, makes for a bad time.
;-;
2 Likes
I’ve found it to be hit or miss with the F-5Cs. Can sometimes get the drop on them and others I’m scrambling. Though nothing is more fun than viffing them when they’re on your tail and shooting them down as they pass by. The sheer panic in their flying always brings a smile.
Soon™
We already have one of these.
Just need the other.
2 Likes
Was discussing this in another thread. Is there a reason BOL+Sidewinder wasnt possible on the FA2 like it is on other aircraft?
- 2 x Sidewinder + 2 x Gun Pod + 380 countermeasures ( 2 x BOL 304 & 2 x AN/ALE-40)
- 2 x Sidewinder + 2 x AMRAAM + 380 countermeasures ( 2 x BOL 304 & 2 x AN/ALE-40)
It is possible, that’s what these loadouts are. You can’t however have the twin sidewinder rails with BOL on them. So any loadout that has the 4xSW cannot mount the BOL rails.
Ah, so its due to the twin mount. So its 2x Aim9M mounted to a bol rail or a twin mount
Yellow = SW with BOL
Blue = Twin mount no BOL.
1 Like
Thank you. Much appreciated.
I assune you “could” run assymetrical loadout with bol on one wing and twin mount on the other?
Can’t see why not.
1 Like
Awesome might be the best of both worlds
Correct me if I’m wrong, but we haven’t found anything to prove 4 x Sidewinder with BOL (either 2 or 4 dispensers) was impossible have we? We just haven’t seen evidence to show it was possible either; which isn’t too surprising as the 4 x Sidewinder rails seem to have been rarely used in practice, and BOL was only introduced right at the end of it’s service life (I’ve only seen 2 pictures of BOL rails fitted to a Sea Harrier). So the odds of seeing both together would naturally be low (if it were possible).
Maybe a good compromise would be to have two BOL rails and two regular rails like the F.3.
Considering the enviroment its entering. Certainly would give it a minor advantage.
Another loadout question.
The central belly pylon, I assume that can only carry a bomb when using Gun pods and not when using AMRAAM? Or can it have a bomb at all times?
Sure, its not been proven to be impossible but there is no proof of it being possible either. I suppose you could swap one of the LAU rails out the outboard mount of the twin rail?
Would probably depend on if it would break the AMRAAM fins, probably not possible in real life for that reason;
Room for a drop tank, so maybe?
I was thinking rocket motor damaging the bomb when fired? But good to know space isnt the issue
Oh that wouldn’t be an issue.
Ah, nice, Awesome. Then that should mean 5x Mk13s ( i guess they are Mk13s) so 1x base kill per sortie in SB. Gunna be a big help on the economy side of things. Thanks again
AFAIK AMRAAM from Sea Harrier’s fuselage was cold launched. i.e. it is pushed away from the aircraft before the motor fires. So might not be an issue there.
Can see in the photo that the LAU-106/A type launcher has an extending “foot” to push the missile away rather than it firing off a rail like the LAU-127 etc. type AMRAAM launchers.
Clean separation of a bomb from between the two missiles would probably be a greater problem
Ed:- forgot about the wing-mounted AMRAAMs. Those are LAU-127 type ones where the missile is hot launched off a rail. But not actual LAU-127s by the looks - they look similar to Swedish ones (Lavett?), but don’t know the designation.
Think this particular one is a luggage pod. So unlike a fuel tank, I imagine it wouldn’t be dropped from the aircraft except in circumstances where it was also necessary to jettison the AMRAAMs
1 Like
Thank you
(now that is an epic picture)