The F-89 had the luxury of being able to rotate the firing sequence around the pods giving an extra dimension for spacing of the rockets, an important consideration if proxy fuses are to be used. It makes pics of the FFAR shoots look rather awkward as a result.
Meanwhile the door mounted rockets on the F-102 are more limited with respect to spacing, and pics don’t show a great difference in the delays used. The result is a more closely packed salvo, not great for proxy use. As to 12 vs 24 I’ve never seen any thing that suggests a double shot capability only an all-or-nothing.
Gaijin could change thing, but I would be interest to see any evidence.
The SUU-11 7.62mm pod was hung off a TER directly on the fuel tank pylon. It didn’t need any modification as it used the existing fuel tank controls.
The downside is although using a triple rack only one could be carried per side. Plus it likely made firing more awkward than usual as I don’t know if you could control the usual tanks form the control stick in normal use.
There little info on its use, although it seems the lmited range hanging from a high speed aircraft not designed for nimble ground pounding duties wasn’t an ideal combination.
Sometimes though weird is good…or at least different. Plus once it’s modelled you can expand its use to their more worth types.
it is not the same missile because that one currently uses a copy paste AIM-4G stat file as placeholder, the actual missile is the falco on the Mirage IIIS, which is much more capable
Need those AIM-26Bs or I am not even going to bother with this plane. I was considering going down the P-51 line to get it but if it ships without those, I’m not even interested.
For anyone else, if you notice that the central bay was modified a little differently from the left and right bays, the central bay has its rocket ports deleted, reducing the number of rockets from 24 to 12. This only happens if you equip one or two AIM-26s.
Also, I’m pretty sure the second AIM-26 would be mounted behind the frontmost AIM-26, while sacrificing all AIM-4 Falcons to accommodate those two missiles.
Apparently you could still carry AIM-4s but I think its mostly a weight distribution thing. None ever did it in service but I believe you could still carry 2 AIM-4s alongside the AIM-26Bs.
I doubt that, mainly because of weight limitations. I was consulting the F-102A SAC from 1962, and you can see that it specified that a modified F-102A was limited to two GAR-11s (AIM-26A) and nothing else.
I found a book that says the same thing. (Ignore the listed AIM-4G; they are wrong.)
There’s enough physical space in the weapons bay so they could be carried, but the problem is that the missiles launchers were wired to carry the same type of missile across the front, or the rear groups. And apparently rewiring the FCS to be able to launch different kinds of missiles within the same group was beyond the budget they had available. And the Aim-26a/b as well as the same sized Aim-4F/G wouldn’t fit through the side bay doors.
Yep, as I thought, weight distribution since the AIM-26Bs were much heavier. And honestly, just two AIM-26Bs means at least one guaranteed kill against a high flying Mig-21 or Mig-19.
