Yep, exactly
Honestly, aside from correcting performance and making the gunpods removable, my only two other complaints with the Legacy Harriers are incorrect cockpits for most, and a few lacking the ALE-37 CMs pod.
If all of that got fixed, then I’d be completely satisfied with the Harriers, and wouldn’t ask Gaijin to add anything else for them
One day maybe. My wish list is Sea Harrier with correct performance and HUD.
Fix the damn harrier gayjinxxxxx
I did some testing in comparison with a NATO document I have (claiming a time to climb of 142 seconds to 40k feet)
I tested a clean Gr1 with minimum fuel capacity in a few different climb profiles. The fastest climb to 40k was 3 minutes.
That’s 30 seconds to slow.
What VIFF should do. Compared with what it does in game. IRL as seen in the historic footage the harrier can go from cruising in level flight to flying 180 in the opposite direction in 2-3 seconds. In game to perform the same maneuver at similar (guessed similar) airspeed is a whole 10+ seconds.
Welp, I’m going to wish you luck, I suspect I may not be around much longer as they dont like my response…
What happened lol
My response about growing… got community standard flagged… then my edited version go flagged
Lol just be more careful.
Am trying… didnt think either was that bad tbh…
Just how it is.
any news on this front on dev interest or did they just drop out and shrug everything?
They just dropped it. Have been talking to a techmod though and we could make a bug report about thrust and time to climb as it takes over a minute longer to climb to any altitude than it should. IRL according to an actual Shar pilot it only took 7.3 minutes to reach flight level 35k from breaks release.
In game that same test from breaks release to 35K with Max thrust took over 8 Min 40 seconds. 1 Min 10 seconds longer than it should. Keep in mind 7.30 was there average.
So the Shar can actually accelerate flying straight up yet in game it can not due to the artificial thrust loss.
Climbs are based off of acceleration to 400 knots than start climb until achieving .8 Mach than you must maintain .8 Mach up to cruise altitude.
Goodness gracious,
when you see the comparison it becomes even more silly.
Also noticing that even at slow speed with that massive pegasus thrust and nozzles pointed in the slightly forwards position, it does nothing to push the plane in the direction of the thrust vector or even effectively slow the plane down. You can see in the footage the harriers accelerating in the direction of the thrust vector (vertically relative to the plane), not just forwards.
You’re also pulling down towards the ground meaning you should have the thrust, control surfaces AND gravity all helping point you nose towards the ground and yet it still feels like a struggle. I’ve noticed this a lot flying this in simulator; the thrust vector does almost nothing when used with hard pitch inputs until you get to almost zero airspeed and stall out. Slowing down with nozzles in the slightly forward position also feels relatively ineffective, and comparable to just an ordinary airbrake until you get down to a low enough airspeed that you can stall the plane.
Lastly I’m sorry for the closed bug report. It’s insane to me that even with all the evidence right in front of them they consider mach 0.91 to be the maximum achievable speed with such a beast of an engine. They’re incredulous the plane would have “insane” thrust characteristics to achieve what multiple documents in fornt of them say it can achieve, while also talking about a plane that can vertically take off with a greater than 1:1 thrust to weight ratio from a single engine.
Hope they pass the time to climb/thrust bug report, but I have a feeling they’ll push back on this since they’ve just been saying they think the documentation is wrong? Also surely fixing that would also have a significant impact on the planes manoeuvering characteristics as well?
Anyway good luck, I’m still following this with keen interest as the Harrier is a big favourite of mine.
Cheers,
Sebdspy
It looks like the time to climb report has been looked at and listened too. As for the VIFF its basically non existent in war thunder. Couple that with the Pegasus engine losing all of its thrust by simply moving forward and it becomes pointless. I have the official accelerometer readings for the VIFFing tests and it is able to generate decelerative forces that are enough to pull the pilot forward and be smushed into the gunsight.
Along with rapid deceleration the VIFF could also add an extra 1-2 instantaneous G to any given turn. Its benefit to STR was basically null however. The Harriers strength as a dogfighter was found in its TWR and extreme acceleration a pilot has claimed that the Harrier should beat F-15 and F-16 class fighters up to 400 knots. Its a good 10 seconds slower in war thunder to 400 knots.
Currently working on a VIFF report to pass on to the Devs.
Just a teaser to how bad the VIFF is modeled in game currently using the airbrake decelerates the plane faster than putting the nozzles to breaking stop.
VIFF report for those who want to see.
Harrier: Vectoring in Forward Flight // Gaijin.net // Issues
The devs how now decided that the time to climb being over a minute off is close enough. And state is close enough to standard aircraft characteristics. Yet it’s over 1 minute in disparity.
+801NAS
Man, Your Enthusiasm about Early harriers is insanely good.
Keep up the good work. XD
I hope someday, both Sea Harrier FRS.1/FA.2 get better FM. and become playable.
