Yeah, and a Bug report has been submitted. Considering its been 9 months for them to just give its right radar and to finish the cockpit. I think we’d need to give them at least a little time for the new skin. Im sure we can ask Gunjob to polish his poking stick for that
Increased weight & drag is far from negligible.
It also caused the airframe to weathercock, which the pilot would need to trim out in forward flight, adding more drag.
It was only ever fitted for ferrying and long range ops…neither which are done in WT.
& we already have a visual identifier between the early and late model…the fact the Late is a Phase.1 upgrade that carriers 4 Sidewinders as opposed to two.
Hah, observing how players fail to even land an aircraft properly in most cases (abd this in sim), I wonder how hard the struggle would be for most to perform air refuelling…
Hehe. Oh god yeah… Though im more worried about how they’d “protect” it. would have to be in a safe zone otherwise people would just spawn camp it/instantly shoot it down. At least the carrier shoots back.
But that being said. As we get to the next gen of aircraft. I think the current EC maps will become too small and a bigger map will be needed, at which point, being able to “quickly” refuel without heading all the way back to an AF (air refueler could be closer to the “front line”) could almost be a needed mechanic
Hah, observing how players fail to even land an aircraft properly in most cases (abd this in sim), I wonder how hard the struggle would be for most to perform air refuelling…
That is what makes games fun, playing Air Simulator with your friends struggling to refuel mid air to end up crashing would be absolutely goofy and hilarious. 😂
It also caused the airframe to weathercock, which the pilot would need to trim out in forward flight, adding more drag.
In Air Realistic this wouldn’t be a issue because of the instructor and in Air Simulator you can simply enable dampening mode which I use all the time anyways.
& we already have a visual identifier between the early and late model…the fact the Late is a Phase.1 upgrade that carriers 4 Sidewinders as opposed to two.
Both carry the pre Falkland War camouflages which I mentioned above is Ahistorical. Morvran made a good point though and we’ll probably have to wait a while especially since JUST got IFF after how long?
Increased weight & drag is far from negligible.
Compare the Israelis F-4E to the Kurnass 2000 and tell me if that probe makes a big difference.
Id expect it to get some “easy mode” like being slightly magnetic. So you dont have to be perfect just really close and to make it easier to keep it in. Otherwise not only will it be impossible for most, but server lag would have a massive impact and SB servers are rarely perfect
If you want goofy fun with those mechanics, go play DCS.
They have no place in WT.
1 Like
It’s just a idea really, the issue is Air Simulator isn’t getting much attention and something along the line would be a huge upgrade like a bigger map. The gamemode has been neglected for years and people still fail to see the issue with Air Simulator.
Either way we’re getting off topic and should either discuss about it in a related topic or direct messages.
No what weve got is the aircraft as it was just prior to the flaklands hence its got 9L, not that it matters anyways as the refuling probes werent standard and could be added and removed fairly easily.
I know that the Sea Harrier FRS.1 Early is prior to the Falklands War simply by looking at the camouflage. The white sections on both the underbelly and roundel were both covered before the Harriers fought in the Falklands to lower detection (my guess).
The dual mounting (AIM-9Ls) was only available to Sea Harriers post Falklands which shows that the version we’ve got in-game is after the year 1982.
the refuling probes werent standard and could be added and removed fairly easily.
I really only mentioned it because it would actually provide a visual difference between the Sea Harrier FRS.1 Early and Sea Harrier FRS.1 Late since they are LITERAL copy and pastes (visually) besides one having more AIM-9Ls (the lazy route).
1 Like
I think I would prefer fuel tanks to a fuel probe more than anything else. They’re going to have to increase map sizes soon when they bring in better missiles with bigger range.
Yeah fuel tanks are a must for all vehicles, taking 20m of fuel can be annoying and taking 10m doesn’t help at all (you’ll have to go in and out). Fuel tanks would provide a better experience for all generation 1 Harriers including the Harrier GR.1 and Harrier GR.3 (not sure if the AV-8s ever carried them).
Does anyone know if when we put the nozzles to 100% in game, that it equates to the nozzle going to the breaking stop?
If so, does it give us any form of deceleration in game?
IIRC, 100% nozzle shouldn’t point fully down, because on Gen 1 harriers, it points 10 (i think?) degrees forwards, giving a pseudo reverse thrust.
This nozzle position was removed on Gen 2 harriers.
100% points slightly forward yes, and does provide reversing thrust in my experience
1 Like
Yeah, looks like they went with 1% = 1°
Surprised its there, i thought it couldnt in Gen 2 Harriers.
Maybe disabled in the GR9/A
