I was flying the FRS1 the other night and was experiencing far more ground clutter interferance than I’d expect. I think Schindibee also touched on this a few weeks ago. Even at alt, with the nose of the aircraft pointing up, you seem to get quite a bit of interferance.
Is this a bug that needs reporting or is this expected behaviour. Would have figured that a aircraft/radar designed for naval air defence it would be a little better than most for handling ground clutter (I also took the Phantom FG1 out and its SRC mode was fine and what I was expecting in terms of ground clutter on the radar)
Even then, unlike the Gr7 or AV8B+. It’s 4x Aim9M and no BOL or 2x Aim9M and 2x BOl (or 3x Aim9M and 1x BOL). So would be a lot less than either of the Harrier II. Would still likely be 11.7, but might scrape 11.3.
Ok i think made it sound wrong. The Shar 2 uses harrier 1 base, so it has 2 pylons per wing, while GR 7 has 4 per wing. That is why Shar 2 has to use double rail, just like squad Shar 1, to mount 4 missile on the double rail on the outboard pylon. But bol cant be mounted on the double rail. So you either mount double rail with 2 9m or you mount a bol with 9M.
Inboard pylons are for fuel tanks and dumb munition, so neither missile nor bol can be mounted there.
Also i dont think the bol(what would be a better term to call amraam/Skyflash rail, bol or crl?) was mounted under fuselage, but i might be wrong.
On the Sea Harrier FA2 on the wings you have a choice between these 2 configurations and only 1 hardpoint for AAMs per wing. (You can also have AMRAAM instead of Sidewinder, but only with the single rail, though should still be able to have a BOL)
I understand that. What I’m asking is: the sidewinder rail. On the F-14B, Tornado F.3, JAS39, and Harrier Gr.7. that has 160 countermeasures in it. Was that ever fitted to the Shar FA.2?
