They gave the american one 240 flares to make it good, what they do for us is nerf the sraams and then refuse to fix them despite the fix already being implemented back when the r73 was added as it was a thrust vectoring issue.
Eh I think they should remove the SRAAM and put the Gr.1 at 8.3-8.7. Let it be what it was.
An earlyish cold war ground attacker. Shouldn’t be facing Strella…
BTW SRAAM was actually tested on a Trainer Harrier.
The Harrier T.52 ZA250 (better known as G-VTOL) was the company demonstrator that was used to test SRAAM and SKYHOOK while also being one of the earliest aircraft to carry ASRAAM but I can’t comment on whether it was used as a flying testbed.
yeah they paid it lip service in the road map and just moved on
We have model of a HUD and the Shar also had an altitude warning sound from the Radar Altimeter.
The Sea Harrier, a multirole, carrier bourn, V/STOL fighter. One of the last solely British build and designed fighters. Serving as a first rate fighter for almost 60 years with the British and Indian Navies. It was truly a capable, agile, and advanced aircraft of its time.
However in game all we have is a low effort copy paste of a half baked Gr.1 VTOL gimmick that gaijin wanted to add back in 2020. Every single Harrier 1 has the exact same flight model and general performance. Even the Radar equipped and modified Sea Harriers have the same inaccurately modeled Gr.3 HUD. Despite the aircrafts role necessitating the need for air intercept capabilities and radar tracking for dogfighting.
Airframe:
The Sea Harrier is a Modified Gr.3 or it was supposed to be, but after needing to replace all magnesium parts with more corrosion resistant materials it ended up being fairly different to its RAF cousin. Still managing to weight only a few hundred pounds more despite having a fully new avionics suite, radar, HUD, and a 11 in raised cockpit for improved view aft of the plane. It retained the same general design of engine only modified again for corrosion resistance and being renamed the Mk.104 vs the Mk.103 in the Gr.3 with the Mk.102 and Mk.101 being in the Gr.1A and Gr.1. Sea Harriers had more powerful reaction control to help keep the plane stable in the hover and lastly the Sea Harriers had 2 degrees more of tailplane travel helping increase maneuverability and make up for the longer nose.
HUD:
The Sea Harrier was equipped with a Smith Industries HUD with commonalties to the RAF Harrier HUDs but programed with air combat in mind. In game all we have is the basic ground attack HUD of the Gr.3 and are supposed to use it for an air combat role.
This is a bit from an ICAS article about development of the Sea Harriers NAVHARS and HUD integration system.
Below I’ve sourced what a “standby” display would look like when it gives you a radar lock the circle in the middles tells distance to intercept, top left is radar altitude and true airspeed, top right is pressure setting and time to intercept, middle left and right is same as Gr.3 AOA left and Climb right just with a digital altimeter, frying pan circle is a C scope display of the locked target it shows altitude and direction(vector) in regards to the pilots view. Triangle is Sidewinder lock marker. The I bars as seen above and below the frying pan where “directions” the pilot had to keep them even either side of the pan and it would advice an intercept path but could be changed if a different aspect of intercept was desired i.e forward to the side or just side. Below to the left is Mach number, middle is heading, right is altitude.
This is the Air combat mode. We can see a Frs.1 claiming 2 victories over an F-15 first with guns second with missile. In combat mode we can see that most of the flight functions remain the same speed, altitude, pressure, and heading. The one change to note is the time to intercept has become S042 or Span=042 feet for the radar gunsight to get targeting for the F-15s wingspan of 42 Feet. The gun lead indicator is similar in function to the Tornado AtA mode but has a smooth line and a big circle where the bullets will hit.
Radar and Raster display:
Operated in both PPI and B-scan modes and had a Back-up HUD display. In game it has its B scope pattern but is missing its vector pans. The contacts should appear as squares with lines telling there vector. I have added a picture of the Radar display screen and it also features frequency agility to help defeat clutter.
Unfortunately more information about this Radar are hard to come by so more information might be added later as more is discovered.
To simplify the different radar scan types here is this.
There should be enough information here to have Gaijin model a HUD for the Shar, would be nice if they did this the same time as they fix the Flight model.
Do we have bug reports in for all those issues? Would be good to have those and links to them. Otherwise sadly I doubt anything will happen (even with bug reports, often it can be months before they even accept the report I have noticed lol)
Especially the gun radar would be helpful imo, its hard enough hitting mach planes with ADENs lol.
HUD
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/RUYylzqxfToW
EEGS
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/dqeuzVcn1Fjh
If I’m not mistaken this is the HUD flame reported and how he interpreted it. Its mostly correct however I’ve seen some shar pilots say different things about it. I’ve emailed iwm as they have a training video for the HUD.
One just says labeled as a suggestion. Its hardly a suggestion it did have a radar gunsight and should have it in game. Along with the HUD.
It’s a suggestion as we don’t have the actual HUD to implement it, once the HUD is introduced it can be considered to be a bug.
I see so first the HUD has to be created they will likely just make the EEGS if they actually do the HUD. The training video about the HUD might help with that. Is Gaijins issue not having enough information to model it or they just don’t feel its important enough?
For the FA2, it has EEGS and they just used the Harrier Gr3’s ground canon mode for the symbology. Its really wierd and annoying that the FRS1 didnt just get the same placeholder treatment
True but that is the most zero effort solution to a fairly major issue lol. The FA2 HUD has all the symbology listed as someone managed to get to its manual IIRC. They can bang out a HUD really easy so they should have just made it properly. The GR.3 HUD is horrible for AtA.
Yep… and this is why I dont bother with the FA2 in Sim. I just cant be bothered to deal with the placeholder HUD anymore. In fact, I barely touch the FRS1e for the same reason
Yes it gets incredibly annoying. Example a teammate is in a dogfight, you can see 2 black dots, your radar knows who is the bad one, but as you have no Hud making on who’s is the bad one you have to fly blindly into the fight and put yourself at a disadvantage.
Yep, had that exact encounter in my last match in the FRS1e. 2 teammates vs 1 enemy. No idea who was who, despite radar seeing who was who.
Also, even if I could see who was who, I wouldnt dare fire a 9L without symbology telling me who it has locked onto. Whilst SEAM helps, with that a bit, I still dont like blindly launching a missile at a random target because you cant set it up right
Yes that is a 20,000 S.L fine waiting to happen. Sim can be expensive if you mess up. The Radar too seems lack luster although we don’t have much to prove it isn’t. It should however have a backup HUD along with the “TWS” circles showing the general vector of the contacts.
The radar is fine and based upon what i’ve read, probably is actually overperforming a little, at least every radar can handle ground clutter far better than they could IRL it seems.
but its just the lack of a 5° vertical scan mode that hurts it the most, and whilst it is suspected to have it, there is no proof it has it.