Scorch00

That's a good idea I feel, especially with other early ARM missiles like the Shrike coming. I know there's the mention of the new fuse customization for weapons that's coming down the road, I feel this seeker tuning feature would likely fit better into that feature if and/when that gets here. As it's more in that same realm as setting up a weapon prior to taking off with it.

I'm not 100% sure what the max range is currently, but there are plenty of videos on youtube of gents lofting them 20+ nm. And well, the missile is capable of 9nm at 10,000 feet, Down low, it's like 5-6 nm. And really being employed low like they should be that missing loft features is kind of paramount. I know the frequency tuning is probably the most complicated part to implement. And not sure how all and how close replication is even allowed considering it's in that EW field of knowledge. But the lofting and range/guidance battery limitation are the biggest thing I thing about it. Regardless, I appreciate the work you all are doing and for taking a look at this.

Thank you. Much appreciated. I will look and try and locate them and PM them if/when found.

The Plus is coming in the distant future. Razbam has confirmed it multiple times. We just have to be patient. As far as it's capability goes. The USMC as of 2014 started carrying the AIM-120 on them now too. They do MV-22 Escort and CAP now with them from LHDs. They also have Link16 datalinks now as well.

The GR7/9s were originally looked at according what's been said, but due to UK MoD restrictions none of the modern UK Harriers can currently be done. Which is why the AV-8B NA became what we have now. The AV-8B NA at it's current state is largely feature complete, there are some things that remain with it, such as loft bombing mode and the huge designation logic rework they are doing on it currently. But the performance, weapons, etc are largely where they should be for the jet. But then there are other minor bugs they are trying to work through as DCS constantly gets updated and it breaks something. In terms of the Plus model, it's been confirmed it will be done and will be based largely off the NA which is why it needs to be polished and finished prior to them starting on the Plus variant. It will be it's own module simply because its more complex than the NA is. On paper they don't look dissimilar, but in application, they are quite different. Shoving a huge number of F/A-18 capabilities into it are fairly complex. Also depends on what variant in history of the Plus we'd get as well. Based on discussions I've seen with Razbam, the only UK Harrier that MIGHT be possible is the GR3. The Sea Harrier as a module was axed due to more UK MoD non-cooperation, but Prowler stated there will at least be an AI FRS1 at some point.

It would make the ability more useful if it were possible I"m sure. if it were put there like a lot of the codes as you mentioned are. I'm sure that would fall on Razbam to implement in the Harrier. Say mission briefing Intel says you may encounter certain threats in an area and those threats operate on "x" band, you have to put that into your Sidearm before launch. But I guess in the meantime restricting what all it can actually be used against would at least be helpful in keeping the missile more in line with how it was/could be used. There's not a whole lot of info that I could find, but the limitations of using it against rotating dishes was one thing the missile had problems with. But certain fixed antenna or dish type systems it could work against. The ZSU-23, SA-8, and I think early S-300 were things I've seen mentioned. Not sure where that falls into with other sites. I'm sure someone knows specifically the bandwith limitations of the missile and what sites emit what frequencies. These 3 things I feel are what most of us had talked about in the use of it. And thank you. I hope so too.

I know Razbam did what they could with it before control of weapons went to ED, but it seems to just have been thrown in a closet and forgotten about since the Harrier is the only aircraft that currently carries the AGM-122. A number of us have been discussing it in the AV-8B discord for some time, and came to the realization the reason the AGM-122 has never been fixed, is because nobody has reported just how inaccurate the current version of the missile is compared to the real missile. So I gathered a bit of things that had been mentioned in our conversations to post here. Hopefully more knowledgeable people can chime in on some of these that I list off. Although it may be unpopular to fix the missile. Based on how people currently use it, in a sense of it being a tiny HARM it needs to be properly fixed in comparison to all the other work done on other missiles in the sim. The AGM-122 is based off the very unsuccessful AIM-9C Sidewinder. The AGM-122 has a very limited range, limited usage window, and unique features that are missing from the missile even currently. The issues that should be addressed are some of the following; 1) Range: Currently the AGM-122 in DCS can be lofted to ranges of 20+nm. This is entirely inaccurate for this missile by a significant margin. This is based off the missile specifications as well as documentation of the missile being far less capable than it's being used currently. 2) Missing features of the missile. Self lofting feature of the missile is also missing. The AGM-122 was designed to be fired at very low altitudes. When the missile is fired at a certain altitude, it will, loft itself for a top down attack onto the targeted radar emitter. Also, a lesser documented option mode the Sidearm had, which allegedly was not used much if at all, was an automatic launch feature. 3) Limited Bandwith usage. I cannot speak to the this in great detail as I am not fully aware as to this specific limitation and how it’s put forward in DCS, but the AGM-122 has specific bandwith windows that have to be selected prior to take off for it to scan for in-mission. I know this feature isn’t available, but the scan range on what the 122 can engage I don’t believe is implemented either. It simply can be fired at any surface radar site, which is also allegedly inaccurate to the missile. Addressing the range issue which arguably is the largest issue with the missile currently. It is vastly out performing the real missile. Which is a short range, self defense ARM. The AGM-122 shares the entirety of the AIM-9C, except the seeker. The AGM-122/AIM-9C is equipped with a thermal battery that is powered off the exhaust gases when the missile is launched. Which stores heat to the battery and provides at a maximum, of 60 seconds of guidance time and a maximum range cited on paper of 18,044 yards, or about 9 nautical miles (8.9 and change). This is because of the thermal battery limitation. Once the 60 seconds is up, the missile is dead, as there is no longer guidance power. No more guidance, no more control surface control or detonation ability, it’s dead as a door nail. Therefore, lofting it 20+ nautical miles onto SAM sites is not possible with this missile. In numerous documents of use of the AGM-122 the paper cited range of 9nm is in best case scenario launched at high altitude. In typical launch at low altitude from helicopters or the Harrier, ranges were much lower, around 5-6nm at most. Again, it was a short range ARM. Documentation of the thermal battery guidance limit is noted in the NAVWEPS OP 3353 Declassified Document on the AIM-9C/Parent platform of the AGM-122. (which I wont link here for obvious reasons). It is publicly available. This article also cites the limited range of the AGM-122 being much lower than a cited 9nm. https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/12009/the-agm-122-sidearm-came-to-be-from-a-novel-missile-recycling-scheme Addressing the missing pop up feature. The missile was entirely designed to be launched from low altitudes aboard helicopters primarily and therefore, a “pop up” program was input into the programing of the Sidearm that if it was fired below a certain altitude it would pop up and attack the radar emitter in a top down attack. Similar to the Javelin missile. Currently the missile in DCS does not do this. If fired at low altitude the missile will nearly in all situations hit the ground or trees. This is precisely the reason why the missile was given the pop up feature in real life. The article cited above also describes this feature. As for the self launch feature. This I think “could” be left out given there’s not much documentation on it other than some tertiary sources from interviews talking about how pilots didn’t like that mode (link to an interview about that mode below), but it had it. But in this mode, if the missile picked up a threat on one of it’s 7 bands it would be set to prior to take off, if a threat passed in front of the seeker in range when the missiles were armed, the missile would automatically leave the aircraft and engage the site on it’s own. Addressing the limited bandwith the seeker could see. Coupling it with a considerably shorter range, the bandwith receiver on the missile had to be set on the ground prior to launch. Now we don’t have this feature in DCS. However, the limitations in what types of sites it can see I think should be implemented based on what bands it can see. The missile can detect and engage things like the ZSU-23 and other fixed site type emitting dishes/signals. However, given it's limited seeker, it had problems with rotating dishes, as anytime the radar beam pointed in a direction not in the cone of detection, the 122 would lose track of it. The missile based on sources is stated to be most effective against the ZSU-23 style radar and SA-8 sites. This has been discussed in detail in the discord by people that have a much better understanding of the restrictions in this category than I, but I wanted to at least mention it and anyone else who sees this can chime in on more detailed knowledge on the matter. The only other thing addressing the seeker on the 122 would be the fact of the limited seeker it was easily fooled by countermeasures.