What exactly did you want to know
Not anything specific just if there was any sources that indicate (turning) performance of the big wing relative to the First Gen Harriers as we now have primary data on that.
Yes there are many E-M diagrams of the AV-8B
Here is a good open source for the AV-8B and it has a good comparison.
The Harrier 1 actually in the 2 setups used turns better than the Harrier 2
6+ G sustained vs 4 is massive the Harrier 1 should clap most other jets even the Harrier 2 in some cases this is a huge performance discrepancy seen in game and is not fair.
2 Likes
Do we know that the AV-8B in game holds to this data?
I know that the main design goal of the Big wing was to increase carriage capacity, stations available and Fuel quantity, not optimizing sheer performance qualities.
So it makes sense that the Gen 1 Harriers will perform better in some regimes, especially if combat loaded.
3 Likes
The Harrier 2s in game also all under perform.
In game a Harrier 2 turns better than a Harrier 1 in every loadout there is no comparison yet IRL it was almost opposite.
Yes the AV-8B was designed for the USMC and had payload and range as the main goal. Its why the Sea Harrier was better than the AV-8B as a fighter until its retirement.
The Harrier 1s are also faster and can climb higher.
I really want to see Gaijin do something about the Harrier 1 soon as its more frustrating that it ever was as we now know exactly how well it should perform but we are stuck with a brick.
2 Likes
Actually let me point something out. Gaijin was so lazy with the Harrier they didn’t even bother checking if the AV-8A was different to the RAF Harriers.
Gr.3 Fuselage shape in game.
Vs. Gr.3 IRL
The British Harriers after the Gr.1 Had a remodeled fuselage for the more powerful Pegasus engines. Being both wider and more aerodynamically streamlined. This can be seen with the front nozzle cowling smoothly flowing over the front nozzle. The rear nozzle cowling is smother and less angular and widens out to cover the rear nozzle better as well.
Under the front nozzle the body actually gets so wide a flap spot had to be added in to allow the front nozzle to rotate.
7 Likes
No update yet on report status.
1 Like
thissss
I just got clapped by an A-4 skyhawk as it sustains better turns in game.
Yet IRL the E-M charts say that the A-4 is a fish out of water compared to the Gr.3.
I am insanely tired of suffering unrealistically when the Harrier was a massively better plane irl than in game. I have all the evidence I need now as well. I want them to fix it and soon so I can just have some fun. Instead of being insta-cooked as soon as the first MiG-21 sees me.
5 Likes
The main reason why I halted playing SHar FRS.1(Early) for spading.
:/
3 Likes
Legit the Harrier with 5 pylons and Guns with almost full internal fuel should keep up with a MIG -21 until about 500 knots and beat it easily below 400 or so.
Legit sustaining around .5G more than a fully afterburning MIG-21 at 400 knots with more drag and more weight
1 Like
I just wanted to add this beautiful video here, incredible in cockpit footage:
4 Likes
IIRC dont a bunch of SHAR pilots (esp Sharky Ward) have strong claims to dunking on planes like Phantoms in DACT/dogfighting scenarios?
1 Like
Wasn’t this the one where he was like now I’m using full power against air brakes to prevent the aircraft from going to fast while legit being in like a 4-5G turn.
1 Like
Yeah they also clapped the F-5 aggressor squadron in the states. Sharkey had a 7-1 K/D
They even bested F-15As in a similar fashion.
1 Like
Meanwhile, in WT “best we can do is make you able to maybe outfight a yak 38” xD
I do wonder if the reports of those training exercises might help convince gaijin that harrier “indeed” can do things given they actively did it.
Nah F104 at a push.
Realistically planes would be forced to use afterburner to just have a chance in hell against the harrier. They would be forced to essentially run away at high speed and the Harrier would just wait with its claws out while its fuel drains.