Its likely those updates where compatibility updates for the new weapon systems (AMRAAM/ASRAAM, mid course correction, C5 AMRAAM etc) rather than performance updates (or updates that could be useful ingame) sorry should’ve been clearer when I said it wasn’t upgraded.
I’ve often seen the list below as a list of radar upgrades;
What I’m inferring is that the CSP/AOP/FSP didn’t change the radar designation. And any changes where compatibility/serviceability changes.
So since the Stage-2G was used in the “CSP” upgrade our in game Stage-2G is good enough for firing AMRAAM.
It certainly is the exception. The reason I posted it was because at the time there was tak of 1 unit = 2°. In that case 40 units AoA would mean the Tornado was flying along with the nose nearly vertical, which is obviously unrealistic.
The AoA limit in the manual varies from 15 units to “no limits” depending on wing sweep, speed, and whether SPILs is on. 21 - 23 units is generally the upper limit though.
I think that’s a pretty wild assumption to make just because one paragraph doesn’t specifically mention improvements to the Radar performance. The UK parliament source I linked suggests the opposite.
Good enough to fire them in pitbull mode*. No mid-flight guidance would make it pretty weak, especially considering what BR it will be at if it gets AMRAAMs/ASRAAMs.
I don’t think they would be limited to pitbull only in game. And if they were I will report that the midcourse update was included in the AOP upgrade.
1 Like
It wouldn’t shock me - I didn’t think they would introduce the F.3 with an interim radar, but we still had to wait months for the 2G.
On a side note - is there any chance of the GR.1 getting revised payloads? It seems strange that we can put a 1000kg PGM on the wing pylons and not the GBU-24, which is lighter.
Also - I know the GR.1 didn’t use 500lb paveways in real life, as they were introduced to the RAF post GR4 upgrade afaik, but is there any reason to believe they wouldn’t have been backwards compatible? We have fictional yak141s and Japanese F-16s in the game, and the F-4J(UK) is made to use ahistoric sidewinders for balance reasons. Giving the GR.1 lighter precision weapons so we can carry more than four doesn’t seem like a huge ask.
Its something I’ve been meaning to report since the Paveway II’s were added for the wing pylons. The same logic can be used to allow for the Paveway III, I’ll get something done this weekend
Actually the Tornado GR.1 tactics manual does confirm they were used or atleast usable. There is already at report in for this.
1 Like
Brilliant, thanks.
Do you know if these 500lb paveways are still too long to have multiple stored on a single belly pylon?
I’d have the check the length compared to the Paveway IV but if they are of similar length then Tornado GR.4 photos can be used as a guide for compatibility.
1 Like
The RTS confirms two GBU-12s can be carried in tandem, but they might be a little bit too long. To fit behind the TIALD pod.
That sounds great specialy since it should be applicable to the italien and german versions as well right?
It is just a shame that loadout options are realy far away in the priority list of things to be added
Yes I would include all IDS models in that report.
Maybe two tandems and the pod in the centre pylon?
Pod was never carried on the centreline because it restricts the viewing and lasing angles to an unnecessary degree.
In the rare occasions where 4x 500lb paveways were carried, the 4th was on the centreline station and the pod remained in its usual place on the forward port station
1 Like
That’s cool. Confirms 500 lb Paveways can go on the centreline
Cheers added that to the GR1 GBU-12 suggestion.
The Devs will address the Simulator BR discrepancy between the ADV and F.3, the suggestion was to lower the F.3 to be at the same level as the ADV but they didn’t confirm which way they were going. @Morvran
1 Like
nice, anything for those search limits?
To be fixed in a future update, stay tuned to the news.
1 Like