So they just copy pasted the squadron Harrier made it 10.3 and gave it two 9Ls.
So why can’t I have 9Ls on my GR.1A.
And the jaguar is not that much faster than the Harrier at this point.
1 Like
Cause GR1A is faster & far more maneuverable.
are we flying the same jags and harriers? because the jag is not “far more maneuverable” than a harrier lol
2 Likes
Agreed
Actually disagree. You are forgetting VIFFing and generally the Harrier Base line turn is better (or if nothing else, near enough equal). The harrier also has better energy retention and TWR. The Jag is fairly nimble, but bleeds energy really really fast and is slow to regain it.
For the record though, i’d be concerned with the Gr1A getting 9Ls still though without being 10.7
1 Like
any chance to get outer pylon’s LGB
Any idea why the Jag can’t run 8x1000lbs and 9Gs?
It exceeded maximum load by 40 kg last time i checked. Is the maximum load correct? Idk. Will those 40kg make a difference? Doubt it. Will it get changed? No. Or maybe it was 7kg? I dont remember.
1 Like
It’s 140kg. Well, if we’re being picky, 144.9kg. It’s a pain in the backside because you have to lose both winders or one of the 1000lb bombs for a 500lb
Which is stupid.
What makes even less sense is how the GR.1 can only cope with 30kg less…
1 Like
Yeah it is, but a base only takes 5x Mk13s and in SB, the TIALD pod is a huge asset for VID. So in either case, 8x Mk13s is not always needed.
Oh, so it is another number. I wonder what were the other 2 about. Well, i doubt the 144 would effect the plane that much. You should still be able to take off and fly just fine
emphasis on the should.
given you get another 200kgf on afterburner and 50 in dry over the GR.1, i imagine you’d be fine in that department
1 Like
Guess its to do with wing loading. That being said, i doubt the 2x 9Gs on top make all that much difference to wing loading… hmmm
1 Like
Do we even heve the wing load that we can work with or no? (source that we can use)
if i remember the wings were specifically reinforced for having 9Gs on top. That said i could’ve sworn blind they had tanks over the wings, though i may be mixing the Jag and Lightning up
Lightning definetly had over wing fuel tanks (they’d be really good and really helpful but I dont think they can be jettisoned, so a mix bag)
but I have no idea about the Jag. Though could be helpful in SB, you do burn fuel quite a lot in the jag, just like the Tornado
The rails were strapped on top so jag can defend itself while on missions without sacrificing bomb pylons. That i know for sure.
When it comes to fule tanks jags had them under the fuselage or inner wing pylons. Thats all i know
1 Like
yeah, a bit less than the Tornado, but having tanks would be great for RB, u can then punch them off and run 20/min fuel and stand a chance of fighting
Yeah, as a psuedo fuel dump, tanks are handy too. Several aircraft id exploit that tactic with when we eventually get tanks on them. Like the Hunter, Sea Harrier, Etc.
1 Like