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)
Unfortunately the SHar isnt enjoyable since the patch.
AIM-9L Still being easily defeated.
And with the F5 being able to grind the F16, it’s being spammed to heck, doubled with they’re nigh impossible to lock outside of 1.5 mile in any aspect, it’s just pure frustration.
I still think the squad FRS.1 10.3 worthy. it almost always gets an uptier, so it would still fight 10.7-11.3 more often than not, a downtier to 9.3 would be rare, like a downtier from 10.7 currently is.
F5s also need their ahistorical flares removing, but thats a topic for another thread.
(If the US F5C gets flares it never used, why cant the british Gen 1 harriers get the centerline flare pod the AV8 gets?)
1 Like
A lot of vehicles get ahistorical flares not just the F-5C. Also British Harries didn’t get the ability to mount and use flares until the GR.3.
Its made worse on the F5C because of its low engine temp. that afterburner plume is no way as low as 600c.
The engine may be that hot, but afterburner plumes reach over 1000c.
My SHar in wep has a hotter signature than the F5C in wep with afterburner.
3 Likes
SHar in GRB is so much fun. Usually take bomb/missile combo and get 3 kills with the bombs before I go onto CAP. So much fun.
Leak these docs. As a devil i tell you.
1 Like
Have fun
1 Like
Still working my way through Sharkey Wards Sea Harrier book.
Interesting to see a 1000lb on the outer pylon.
Can only assume with one on the outer, you cant have the double rack on the inner?
