The thing that always gets me is the use of airfix kits
1 Like
And then they still used both color schemes during the Falklands. 809 squadron got the new light grey camo while the other two squadrons used the dark grey one
Hey everyone, I’d like to update this thread with the Sea Harrier FRS.51 (Indian variant) as it shouldn’t need its own thread and I would welcome any contributions (photos, information etc).
1 Like
Added a first pass on the FRS.51, feedback welcome as naturally this isn’t something I have a huge amount of information on and is largely informed by the SHar in FAA service.
Also standardized the formatting to match that of the Harrier II thread.
1 Like
SNEB’s confirmed nice, SNEB’s weren’t used on FAA Shar’s due to concerns the ship radar might activate the fuse.
Improved RWR from the looks of it as well.
I still think the FRS.51 should be the prem harrier, not the GR.1 in its current SRAAM config.
Add FRS.51 as Prem, remove GR.1 from sale.
Re add GR.1 without SRAAMs at a much lower BR.
(Or has the whole GR.1 with SRAAMs debate been settled?)
Also,
We discuss the FA.2 here a lot…
…has anyone made a suggestion for it yet?
It’s all well and good discussing it, but it’s all in vain if there’s nothing to pass to the devs…
I wouldn’t worry about suggesting it. The FA.2 is known to the devs.
1 Like
I reckon its this years “top tier” addition for Britain. Just feels to perfect not to add it
-
FRS1 has just gotten a lot of work and Imagine the tricky bits to model have been completed as part of that
-
It has inherrent handicaps make it the perfect early AMRAAM carrier to add
-
It’s inherrent handicaps also make it the perfect test platform for the next generation of more advanced radars
-
it is Britains last Gen 3 A2A aircraft before Typhoon. Adding it now just makes sense. As adding it in the future would be the same as to adding the FRS1 has been, a TT filler. Would still be good, but would be a bit of a shame to get it so late.
It may well be a Commonwealth Hornet ((A- or C-)F/A-18A or -A+) instead, just so Gaijin can further C&P yet more US tech to another tree, it’s not like the various F-104, F-4, F-16A / -C, AV-8B variants / derivatives were going to be anything other than an indication of the way things are going to go for the remaining Teen series (F/A-18 & F-15) considering that they could be added to the majority of trees one way or another.
One mechanic I do think is missing at this junction is any form of ECM since Strike airframes already really struggle to deal with interceptors so some expansion there should hopefully mirror BVR developments to ensure there is more than just one viable way to fly them and that they don’t become entirely redundant.
Yeah that is always a possibility, but do the US really need another top tier aircraft? That would be kinda BS for them to get one so soon after F-16C.
Also everyone seems to be convinced Britain is getting the Gripen C from South Africa. which in my opinion would kinda suck, but the Gripen has been “confirmed” for Sweden this year, so never know, would be another C&P option.
But yeah, I agree. ECM though along side ARH would just make sense at this point. and they cant hold-off on it forever.
B- but muh gripen :(
Not really, but it would probably be difficult to sell another member of the Century Series (F-102 /F-106), or strike airframes (A-4M, Tech tree A-6E, AV-8B, F-111, A-10C, OV-10, A-37, YA-7F, etc.) since they are either going to be thrown into the 8.7~10.x matchmaker or deal with whatever gets added with the upcoming patch making them even less viable than they already were going to be.
also considering existing ordnance / stores restrictions (balancing) they were all effectively made entirely redundant (worse flight performance with the same or worse ordnance) by the F-14B, let alone the F-16C so something would need to be added to give them a leg up (e.g. Anti-radiation / Cluster ordnance) which due to the existing issues with SPAA implementation would cause significant issues with GRB lineups and increasingly unattachable CAS.
It’s mostly that End of Line additions to the US tree tend to follow a pattern where Airframes tend to be added in a round robin fashion and then double up now and then, with the recently added F-16C and F-14B that accounts for the USAF interceptor and USN Fighter lines, so we would be looking at additions to the USAF Fighter (likely to be the F-15A or -15C) or Attacker (many options, though the highest probably would be the F/A-18 or an AV-8B variant). With the bomber line being the odd one out and probably to receive an F-111 at some point, well after it would have been a viable addition considering a basic model is likely to have to face off against All-Aspect IR and advanced SAM systems and the later ones interceptors like the F-14 and Su27 let alone AMRAAMs, AIM-54s and R-77’s that hard counter them assuming that their ground mapping modes for the radar remain unimplemented.
Really all an an introductory config F/A-18A is an A-7E with Sparrows, a PD capable radar and a higher CM count, it won’t bring advanced ordnance to the table outside a prospective AGM-65F, which is effectively a worse -65D, with a HE warhead(the same as the AGM-65G). the only thing it might have is ERDL series of Walleye(s) (or AGM-84E) which added post-release control & retargeting capability, though considering the GBU-15’s that have been implemented for a number of updates are missing said feature (both use a datalink pod) it’s probably not going to apear anytime soon.
The F/A-18A+ or -C is what added AMRAAM, TGP and other advanced ordnance capability, but would be a step up in most ways from what exists.
Yeah i really hope they add it sooner, as an early AMRAAM in game testbed, rather than later, like the afterthought the FRS.1 was.
Because with AMRAAMs, its likely to sit at 11.3 at the lowest, my tactic will be to get airborne, climb as high as i can, yeet my 4 AMRAAMs, then RTB, rinse and repeat until its safe enough to ‘go in’ with 9Ms
Absolutely no way you can go toe-to-toe with the FA.2 with the games current top tiers
2 Likes