Jump to content

ddwg72

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    47

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. ddwg72
    One of the upgrades to the NA included a wide area visible hud. The same upgrade with the 2+. Below is a shot of a 2+ trainer where you an see the circles you see in the above pic are gone as the items reach almost to the edge of the hud. You can tell if you are looking at the older huds by the prominent circles. Be glad of the upgrade, can you imagine what FLIR on hud would look like on that older style hud.
  2. ddwg72
    He didn't say it was resolved, it was marked as already reported. Makes sense so they do not have multiple bug reports for the same issue. As it is just cosmetic, I would assume it is on their list just not at the top.
  3. ddwg72
    no need for personal attacks. It is just not worth my time to continue with this.. we are at an impasse. Razbam should ask their SME and go with what he says as his knowledge is more than mine or yours.
  4. ddwg72
    hehe ya way to much reading.. I think I will go check out the new patch slotted for today instead.. Really wanting those Razbam updates they had slotted and hope they make it. BTW good job Razbam on taking care of some of those issues so quick.
  5. ddwg72
    well i guess we should take off the 6.2 6.1 and 6.0 updates, new mission computer, new tpod, new map, apkws, 54s, some function of auto filling cas page, ect as they are not in the NFM so must not be real and all speculation.
  6. ddwg72
    Sorry but the NFM is no longer valid for this as all the components and items have been changed and/or upgraded. Without recent documentation, it is just speculation that it is the same way. It needs to come from their SME to be valid as any current documentation would still be classified. The same goes for other areas of the harrier that have been updated but the publicly available documentation does not reflect it. If you have any documentation of the current version of the Harrier with the upgrades it could be used but then, it would be classified.
  7. ddwg72
    Problem is you are using old evidence considering valid. We know we are on a newer version which has different capabilities than what is in the NFM. There is ample evidence we are on a later upgrade (6.2 at a minimum). As the basis (a new wiring harness, new software (actually multiple updates) and a different pod) of your logic has all changed, your logic conclusion is invalid. In order to be valid you would have to account for the changes in the therom which you choose to ignore.
  8. ddwg72
    Actually had a whole thing up here but forget it. I assume we should never see you on a server with TPOD center pylon/APKWSs/GBU54s, ect.. as they are not in the NFM and according to some if it is not in an old NFM it must be wrong
  9. ddwg72
    Guess I don't know anything with all that time in 3rd MAW.
  10. ddwg72
    I haven't done it so wont comment but if you need a work around TOO waypoint 1 after INS and it should work as a stop gap fix for you. I got in the habit of it and have not had any crashes.
  11. ddwg72
    Well according to your documentation you cannot carry the tpod centerline. The upgrade for the harrier happened around 2013sh to allow the tpod to carry center line. If you look in the tac you are using and 400 that floats around you can see the tpod was only carried on certain pylons. You can also see many pictures of the harrier carrying it on other pylons. There have also been other upgrades not referenced in that NFM. NFMs are not the end all for documentation as people think. There are a lot of changes, other documentation and instruction you get once you hit the fleet and make it to your squadron. Also all recent documentation is still classified. Generally it is 20 years before something gets released to the public.
  12. ddwg72
    The wiring you are referencing in A1-AV8BB-TAC-000 is no longer applicable. You are using an old manual where many things are not like they are now. For instance, wiring was changed when the harrier was wired to center pylon. It used to be only mountable on 3. Then they went to 2 and 6 and now the standard is center. A1-AV8BB-TAC-000 was written 30 years ago and only had minor updates which are over 18 years.
  13. ddwg72
    That number is for casualty radius not kill radius. There is as kill radius and casualty radius for weapons. Kill radius is your are dead if you are that close if nothing is shielding you. Casualty radius is that is "can" cause serious injury up to that range if nothing shielding you. Not saying they don't need to be increased and really need it just that the kill radius is generally around 1/10th or so of casualty radius.
  14. ddwg72
    Cool video of the TAV-8 118/119 RPM on that move
  15. ddwg72
    I didn't think it was right either till I went to the charts. In the fleet, they almost never take off in a hover as they have to go up with so little fuel. It is usually a STO. You really have to look at the VRest pages now. If you want to know required rpm to take off you can look at NFM-400 based on weight.
×
×
  • Create New...