Even after the decompression, the Harrier Gr.1 is probably still the worst striker/jet in the game.
You NEVER reach a base to use the bombs because the other jets destroy ALL of them first. Only mere bots are left on the map, which do not reward RP/Lions.
Your engine is always hot above 85% trust.
It turns like a brick, so you won’t be able to dodge anyone behind you.
It doesn’t have flares, so if you get hit by a missile, it’s over. (Remember that it doesn’t turn either).
ASRAAM needs to attack from about 1km to 1.5km away, but it will take time to lock on, and you will lose the target. Additionally, one flare and the missile is lost.
These five points are enough to ensure that in at least 75% of the matches, you will just take off from the base and get killed in the middle of the map without achieving anything in the match, compared to facing faster, more maneuverable planes, some with flares for defense.
Try Sim EC, it’s great there as Bases are less contested and spawn reliably
You only need more than 85% if you take off vertically. For normal flight, 85% is a good setting.
True to some extent.
Also true. Just like many other aircraft at its BR (Milan, for example)
Also true. They’re very short range, but if used with trigger discipline quite deadly. Disadvantage: You have to get close. Advantage: When you’re so close, enemy barely has time to react. Also, it’s very agile for its BR.
What you lament is something you hear in one form or another about many dedicated attacker/bomber aircraft in RB: Also the Tornados and the F-111 for example suffer from “getting late to the party” in RB matches.
Seriously, try sim if you like this class of aircraft - it’s much more suited for exactly them!
The most effective strategy I use with the ASRAAM is to use a missile-only loadout and fly high. At this point, I have to hope that no other jet has the same idea. Then, I dive at full speed after some targets that aren’t fast and are distracted, trying to get close and lock on. In this case, I need to remember if they have flares or if they are too distracted to react in time. But it’s not a type of gameplay that attracts me much, knowing that the Harrier should be more about strike and support, flying with other planes.
I played with the Tornado 11.3 striker and managed to destroy bases and engage other planes. The decompression helped a lot. With the F-111, I usually carry a few bombs to be able to close the wings and easily reach the bases first to get the points, and then even hunt other planes with the Vulcan or help allies.
I particularly prefer realistic modes, both air and ground. In the case of the Harrier in ground mode, it performs very well at 9.7, allowing you to make some passes and destroy tanks before being caught by anti-aircraft or other jets.
Try deploying the flaps to takeoff position and deflecting the thrust vector by 45 degrees. With other Harriers, this helps a bit to improve their maneuverability.
Actually, the old Harriers have some issue with the instructor because in the simulator they turn much better.
Spoiler
And it’s a premium one. Seriously, you bought this with real money? Oh you!
In a Sim EC match yesterday I was surprised how quickly I could get my nose 90° around (while capping), but then I often suffer from completely misjudging when pulling out of a dive.
It needs careful energy management, that’s for sure…
well, yeah everything can work in an EC setting cause youre not forced into a furball to dogfight people, you can actually use your planes strengths across a larger enviroment with less interference from others
an ahistorical behaviour in the game and one that should be fixed, but alas
think you can name one of these “many other” 9.7 aircraft thats relevant nowadays without any flares? cause excusing the GR.1 for not having any by saying a slightly less shit plane also doesnt have any is a weak argument
as how SRAAMS currently stand ingame, its a fictional missile, as irl it was all aspect, some 30~G of maximum overload and was capable of hitting targets at ranges of 2km on a subsonic target, all of which was reported (with in conjuction of the red tops underperforming) just over a year ago.
asking a subsonic harrier I airframe with no flares to get close (within 1km), then get behind another plane to then launch a missile that has trouble flying straight is madness
i understand how its making do with what you have, but the poor things been trying to box above its weight class with only an arm and a leg,
i didn’t mention the gr1 having the possibility of having flares because to my knowledge that was already declined by gaijin/it was a prototype or whatnot, so ive accepted it wont have any
Just one point (and I’ve been defending this for ages as well for the Milan already mentioned): The Harrier GR.1 is an attacker, not a fighter, and its SRAAM’s (whose existence in the game I’m completely against anyway) are just a means to defend itself if it can’t avoid getting engaged.
But this is a general issue with many aircraft in WT: People just stick to the belief that everything is or should be a fighter and thus be utilized as one. Then they complain if it gets stomped in dogfights…
this is why i always say we should get RB EC, because then a lot of posts in a similar vein as this one wouldn’t be popping up, as every plane would (potentially) have an objective that it was catered for irl.
I’ve tried SIM EC a couple times, but i found it too disorientating without a HOTAS system, so i had to give up on it unfortunately.
To be frank, also in Sim EC there is a lot of yet undeveloped potential if it comes to objectives: You can still simply attack enemy players, enemy AI units (which are very predictable, behaving stupidly and are not immersive in any way), attack area targets or a few bunkers and ships. I’d even go so far and say if it comes e.g. to ground targets, AB and RB have more to offer, depending on the maps you look at.
Especially the high tier aircraft and weapons we have would scream for more diversity: Point targets (individual buildings, bridges, …), AI vehicles with different roles and behaviour, air defense sites,…
We’re pretty much WW2 warfare, just with modern tech.
This is just because of an over simplification in WT.
The Harrier has 3 levels of thrust.
80% = 100%
80%-100% = WEP
100+% = Water Injection
80% is the normal “max” thrust for engine, which is why the harrier overheats above 80% throttle. You can happily reach max speed and cruise at 80% throttle, and then just apply more thrust when needed in a fight.
SRAAM are also quite badly nerfed. Multiple bug reports in for their current state. Including the fact they have half their IRL range. They should also be all-aspect, but thats a tricky balancing decision.
By the way, about ground units (I don’t know where else to ask about this). Today, I attacked those units in Sim EC with AJ.168 missiles - out of 6 missiles, only one hit. I went to check in a test flight to see what was wrong - it turned out that when launched from a low altitude, the missile often flies over the tank and explodes behind it without causing any damage. It seems like this problem didn’t exist before.
Su-25T and Su-39 have rear-aspect IRCM (IR Jammer) that makes them 100% immune to rear aspect IR missiles. They are also the only aircraft in game with working ground radar as well.
Oh how wrong you are…
Harrier pilots especially use lower throttle settings for cruise.
F-16 pilots will drop throttle to at least as low as 40% during cruise.
In the Harrier’s case. Its not that. 80% throttle = the normal max engine RPM for pegasus engine. So going above 80% throttle in game is essentially the same as engaging WEP.
Ah, I see. I thought Gaijin secretly gave the Su-27 the Sorbtsiya ECM system. No, this IRCM doesn’t make the Su immune; I’ve hit them several times with 9L and 9M missiles. It’s just that the missile wildly jerked around before hitting.