So in fact it’s further more complicated to calculate how hot a engine is… Gaijin just take it easy and replace it with thrust. The Harrier has powerful engine so it suffers a big loss…
I notice some rear-aspect IR msls can even lock on harriers from its side, from the oldest varients to the latest ones. Sad game facts…
Yes, and just to further complicate matter. The Harrier’s engine produces more thrust at lower air speeds. Meaning when in a dogfight or perhaps when you jink to defend against a missile, you are in fact increasing the temp of your harrier.
Me and Matrix were testing this. When near enough max speed in the Shar. 2x Flares was enough to decoy a R-60M fired from 3km in rear-aspect with no turning required. If fired at a SHar doing 420kts (which isnt an unreasonable speed to find yourself at quite often) 8x flares was not enough to defeat an R-60M fired in rear-aspect from 3km. It took throttling down and turning to actually defeat the missile.
Yeah, and its one thing when you are in something like the GR3 or FRS1e and are facing relatively trivial missiles to defaet. But its another in the FA2 or AV-8B+ against pretty much pure IRCCM missiles and with even more powerful engines. Especially with the BOL issues as well for the FA2. Its a rough time for the Harriers.
There is a slim hope though for a short term solution without them having to model anything. The F-117’s (and I also assume the Commanche) IR reduction, stealth stuff, is just a multiplier of I think 0.5x applied to the thrust-temp which greatly reduces the IR signature (though ironically, the F-117 is still hotter than an F-5 on reheat). This code could very easily be transplanted over to other notable aircraft such as the Harriers and F-14s and give them some short term relief. Just a bit of normalisation with the IR signatures (like roughly matching the IR signature with that of a Hunter or Buc for example) would do absolute wonders for us.
The Sea Harrier was considered a major change aircraft from the Gr.3 and had many of its components redesigned from the ground up.
Just like the strike eagle, but that is not a purebred strike jet is it?
What are you talking about, and the Typhoon is not 100% a British aircraft, the Sea Harrier was the last all British combat aircraft that filled the role of fighter. It filled this role well.
Alright?
Just because it was a VTOL bomb truck with a radar and sidewinders (later amraam) strapped to it, does not make it a purebred fighter
It also had an all new cockpit, with a raised position for better visibility and I think some wing tweaks. it was also extesnively modified for naval operations
The Harrier Gr1/Gr3 was design for mud moving
The Sea Harrier was design for Air-to-Air combat.
Yes, based upon the same airframe at its core and yes the Gr1/Gr3 came first, but that doesnt necessarily mean the Sea Harrier isn’t a fighter.
Where an Aircraft like the F3 was rather handicapped in its interceptor role by being based upon an aircraft designed for low level flight, the harriers had no such weakness.
It also had some of the best control in a dogfight in the world for a long time. Still having few aircraft designed for dogfighting capable of relibily defeating it
The FA.2 even went against Rafales in close combat and it was apparently a very “fruity” fight as Paul Trembling stated.
The fact that the Shars where engaged in prolong fighting with a plane as insane as the Rafale instead of straight up being curb stomped I think says enough.
Yes, they look the same yet like 70% of all parts where redesigned, and from the intakes forward it was a completely different aircraft with different (better) flying qualities.
You made a mistake. I think you swapped Rafale with Shar by accident
Lol not quite, the Harriers where very capable but by the time the 2000s came around they where in need of further improvements already.
Im very disappointed the devs have not addressed the Sea Harriers gunsight and EEGS this update.
This just felt super clean. Over the new Falklands map too.
In my humble opinion, EEGS should be implemented on all aircraft that have at least a radio sight. If the radio sight is not capable of only measuring distance and does not affect the gyro sight, then why was it installed on the aircraft at all?
Agreed, hunters, sabres and all that lot would have had a very primitive lead indicator.
However the Radar tracking present on later EEGS gunsights where much more informative to the ballistics computer and with a simple input of approximate wingspan, very accurate aiming data can be feed to the HUD.
Early planes did not have a HUD of this type.
Hello, are there any plans to fix the Harriers? Or any of their avionics this major?
Very nicely done
Thank you woulda been even cooler with the real VIFF.
Smin, “No. There is no plan to buff anything regarding the Harriers and they are British so they must be nerfed every update”