4x magic II + 2x Derby would be its main fit and there is an argument to be made that a Harrier with Magic IIs would be a decent dogfighting platform. Yes it doesnt get BOL, but neither would the FA2 with the twin rails. Neither SHar gets HMD.
The only major upgrade the FA2 gets is the better engine.
But if the FA2 is denied 12.7 because “reasons”, then I cant think of any reason why the FRS51 would be 12.7.
still limited to 2 arh and current harrier fm? and the ARH is the derby? nah 13.0 isnt for it… especially when f4f ice which is supersonic with 4x amraam and 4x aim9mish missiles is at 13.0…
Also the FA2
I only run 1+3 or 0+4 because I have access to the BOLs and Aim-9Ms are terrible at the moment. But if I had M2s, Id probably run those over additional AMRAAMs.
Maybe, has its strengths too, pulls better for example.
Its just a compression issue. The same could be said for every single other 13.0 ARH slinger bar the F3 Late. ICE and F3 should be 13.3, but cannot be due to compression (though F3 late can get a LOT of buffs)
knowing gaijin, we will not do anything to fix it anytime soon, so in the current state, the frs51 should definately be 12.7 imo…
at that br it would be enjoyable and not borderline op at the same time
And I have the same opinion for the FA2. I cannot justify it being any higher than 12.7 in its current state. Even ignoring the ICE and F3 Late. Its weaker than the F-14A in some regards at the moment
Another photo of the LUSH
There is also this image, which I have no idea what missile this is. It is allegedly a “Derby”, but I doubt that as not even the training version of the Derby looks like that from what I’ve seen
Local? Certainly a test launch. Also, did the LUSH use HMD like DASH?
DASH is used, yes
The Derby + Magic II on each of the TMCs and nothing on the belly is a wierd config
its going to be mid if its carry only 2 fox3 and 2 ir missile and subsonic
But it is manoeuvrable though… Fuck, forgot that we don’t have that here cause Gaijin Hates Britain :(
I think Derby can be mounted on the belly still, so that does mean 4+2 or 2+3 or something is probably possible.
But compared to the FA2, no BOL & No Mk106 engine. Its a straight downgrade
i always ask myself why can the harrier carry 8 missile, i know there is a lot of variants, but 2 belly, 2 inner wing, 2 double rail as we see it now and maybe 2 wingtip
that is 6-8 fox3 and 6 ir missile
You mean the GR7/9?
There was a proposal for a Sea Harrier MK3 which was a Harrier II turned Sea Harrier. Which probably would have had some of that capacity. But never happened unfortunately. Instead we bought the Fail-35
yep, gotta feel bad for britain, thier power was completly lost since ww2, long live the british empire but if only the gov can take care itself first rather then sending more debt war
Made a forum about the Harrier III a while back, look on my profile for it, there is same nice stuff. TL;DR of the Harrier III/ Sea Harrier 3, a GR.5 with Blue Vixen, or the 2000s one is a GR.9 with Blue Vixen and can carry 8 missiles.
@Morvran could the Sidewinder pylons on the GR.5+ carry a weight like the AIM 120? or is max ASRAAM? Wondering how many missiles a theoretic SHar 3 could carry on belly and wings
I doubt the weight would be an issue.
If I’d hazard a guess. Probably would be very similar to AV-8B+
2+4 or 4+2 (and still leaving the station for fuel tanks) with the belly free for either mission equipment, guns or extra missiles
If the pilots wanted to go full intercept mode, I’d imagen that they would bring (inside going out) Belly AMRAAMs, Inner wing AMRAAMs, Sidewinders/ASMRAAMs, AMRAAM, AMRAAM but maybe guns tanks and 4x AIM 120 and 2x Fox 2 is more realistic
About the pre-LUSH version, do yall think it’d be better to put it at a low BR (11.0?) with only Magic 1s, or with Magic 2s at a higher BR (11.7? 12.0?)
Don’t add it at all. Unless the flight models get fixed.
Gaijin refuses to fix the plethora of issues riddling the harriers.
It’s a terrible platform in game. Subsonic brick with 0 hope.
