Holbeach

No I haven't seen that doc, (OK, found it. Bare in mind it uses the early 406 engine), but I've just completed a L-L-L mission, 4,000' (3000') 300 kt DI 40 No loiter, but 5 min combat at max thrust, for 158 nm radius. Predicted cruise flow is (082) and actual flow 120 on the outward leg start, with 69% at 300 kts Combat @ sea level. 5 min at 102% FF 295 (206) M 0.84. Pickle, 3,500 lb 27' 42''. Return. 4000' (3000') 300 kt 62% FF 105 (075) M 0.5 0800 at 22 nm land 0200 lb remain. 58' 41''. ( As ever, comments are welcome). Conclusion. Consumption is higher at the lower levels, 33% and very high at full thrust continuous. If I'd have used full thrust max, which is very very high consumption, I wouldn't have made it back. I'm guessing that these are the areas where most people will be, with their Harrier. ..

@ Whiteladder. That steady climb, rather than my optimum constant altitude speed, does indeed give that lower fuel burn, which would have given me enough left to get back to base. Good job! As Harlikwin said, the 1983 model had a lower power 406 engine and it had one more bomb, but it does show that our Harrier could have done it, given that we don't know if the jet dropped to a lower altitude to drop its bombs or had a gun. So the question is. Do you think the Razbam Harrier has a fuel burn that represents the real life version? And. Have you tried direct comparisons between predicted and actual fuel burn? Thanks..

I've heard of DMT camera and DSL and DIR mode. So what is DMS mode? ..

Real life 1983 Mission 1, 26,000 lb. 6 x Mk 82, (actually 7 x mk 82, but we can't do that), no gun. DI 30. 366 nm to Vaziani. Return at 42,000', land back at base with 0800 lb remaining. Method. T/O Novorossiysk, climb at 300 kts then M 0.68 102% to 33,000'. 1000lb fuel used. Cruise M 0.76 @ 0.108 miles per pound. Drop bombs CCRP diagonal on runway. Return. 18,000 lb. DI 20. at 42.000' @ M 0.75 0.18 MPP Start descent at close throttle, 230 kt, 70 nm from base. Land back at base with 0800 lb fuel remaining. Result with DCS Harrier, using Natops charts. Climb. 300 kt M 0.68 1000 lb fuel used. Cruise, 33,000' M 0.76 87% FF 085 Fuel over target, 2,700 lb. Time 52' 0''. Return. 42,000' M 0.75 74% FF 052 Critical 0800 fuel point, was 140 nm from base. Fuel ran out 5 nm from runway. Time 1 hr 48'. Fuel usage. 33,000'. Actual, .088 nm per lb. Predicted .108 nm per lb.......... FF actual 085 ppm. FF Predicted 072 ppm. 42,000'. Actual, .141 nm per ib. Predicted .180 NM per lb...........FF actual 052 ppm. FF predicted 045 ppm. Conclusion. Feel free to check my figures. This result makes it clear why this mission cannot work. It simply uses too much fuel compared to the real Harrier. ..

Using the easiest chart to use, sea level, early indications show a very high fuel flow excess with our Harrier at the lower speeds, 300 kts @ 64%. FF 114 DI 40. 26000 lb with 6 x Mk 82. As the speed increases the difference decreases until the imbalance flows in the other direction. So at around 87%, FF is 185 which is less than the chart flow. The big difference is at full power, where our Harrier is using FF 345, much more than chart suggest. The plot thickens. I'm guessing that most people are tending to use full throttle, hence the assumption that the fuel flow is too high, which it will be at that setting. FF @ 102% is 290 and FF @ 107.5 (max) is 354, for a gain of 4 kts. ..

That's the one. Thanks. ..

I haven't been able to find any, in any publications I have. ..

They require data which mere mortals don't possess. It was fun while it lasted, but now it's over. Back to blowing stuff up! Weeee! ..

My conclusion, after flying a number of tests, against real life missions, is our Harrier is too thirsty. So what happens now? ..

At the 0800 lb mark, I was still short by 190 nm. I did ponder the gun pod question, as pictures of these test aircraft show them with and without pods and the mission doesn't state the loadout, only the bombs dropped. I will try it again without pod, but this will give me a 530 lb advantage and big drag reduction. At the 1000 lb mark, I will do a closed throttle decent to 5000' and then see how far I get. Edit: There is a mission that is nearly identical to this one. 6 x mk 82, gun pod, no loiter or combat, H-M-H, 366 mm. That will sort it. I polished my method and died only 28 nm from base. (4 bombs on runway, CCRP 34000'). ..

Relaxing With a Beer, missions. In 1983, an AV-8B flew trials from USNTC at Patuxent River, Maryland. Mission 1. 7 x 570 lb bombs were dropped on a target 366 nm from base and returned at 42000' landing back at base with 800 lb fuel remaining. No external fuel was carried. Mission 2. On a low level mission, the aircraft dropped 12 x 530 lb bombs on a target 160 nm from base, which included nearly 1 hr low level loitering time. It has been suggested that our Harrier has high fuel consumption. There's only one way to find out. Fly 'em. :pilotfly: Mission 1. Novorossiysk to Vazziani is the correct distance for the 366 nm mission. We don't have a centre pylon, so we'll use 6 x Mk 82 plus gun pod. CCRP drop from about 30000'. T/O weight 27064 lb. 7759 lb fuel. Flight to the target at 30000' 84% 0.75 mach 276 IAS FF 092. Pickle Vazziani. 2500 lb fuel remain. 2 bombs on runway. Return, Climb to 42000'. 80% FF 058 0.78 mach return. Ran out of fuel 90 nm from Novorossiysk. after 1 hr 34 min. 0800 lb fuel remaining point, was 190 nm short of base. Mission 2a. Alt 3000' 82% FF 156 TAS 370 M 0.57 12 x Mk 82. Fuel over target 3300 lb. 27' 0'' flight time. No loitering, no combat. Return. 3000' 75% FF139 M 0.6 fuel ran out 21 nm from base. Flight time 51'49''. 2b. Alt 3000' 94.5% FF 204 TAS 469 M 0.72 Fuel over target 3.200 lb. 21' 38'' No loiter. No combat. Return. climb to 41000' 97% FF 087 M 0.86. 40 nm from base zero throttle descent 38% FF 040 landed at base with 0800 lb fuel remaining. 2c. 29,467 lb. Alt 3000' cruise IAS 300 kts. 77% FF141 M 0.48 Fuel over target 4000 lb. 25' 50''. No loiter No combat. Return. 3000' IAS 300 kts 70% FF124 Land 0800 lb remaining. 52' 10''. Perfect mission except that we missed out the nearly 1 hour low level loitering time and combat time, (I don't see how that could be done IRL compared to Natops). It's hard not to conclude, our Harrier is using too much fuel. ..

Make sure you're not using the training Mav. (TGM-65G). Is the target locked and the INRNG showing in the HUD. (AGM-65G). Then it must launch. It wont launch if not locked. ..

I have already found the 3 files that were corrupt and renamed the folders they were in and allowed DCS repair to replace them. This worked, but was a rather long winded way to do it. It also left the bad files installed for ever. On your advice, I used scan to see if it could find them, which indeed it did and also removed them, so I am now clean. :thumbup: Thanks. ..

Yes, thanks, I had already tried that among other stuff, but had started thinking about re installing, until I found a fix. ..

OK. Fixed it. :) For future reference:- An earlier post by C3PO......... gave me the clue. I renamed the folder that the corrupt file was in and restarted the repair function, which then gave me the next corrupt file and repeated this until all files were replaced. Luckily it was only 3. Simple but it took me several hours to find this. Update: The correct way to do it, by FOXFIRE TWOONE:- "Try rgt click drive, click properties, tools, check now. Wait for scan to finish. It will tell if error found or not". I have already found the 3 files that were corrupt and renamed the folders they were in and allowed DCS repair to replace them. This worked, but was a rather long winded way to do it. It also left the bad files installed for ever. On your advice, I used scan to see if it could find them, which indeed it did and also removed them, so I am now clean. Thanks. ..

Unable to load DCS or repair it. Or delete or change corrupt file Sochi.extra2.cfg Error 0x80070570 Thanks.. Attached Files New folder.zip (56.1 KB, 0 views)

Unable to load DCS or repair it. Or delete or change corrupt file Sochi.extra2.cfg Error 0x80070570 :helpsmilie: Thanks.. Relocated to bugs & problems

My rotaries, sliders etc all work perfectly well and have done for many years in DCS. So the problem is not at that end. ..

Yes, I'm starting to dislike them too. Update: Now that I'm getting to know them, they're not such bad chaps. ..

Samgori State Farm, SAM site, Vaziani. SEAD, Low Level Sidearm attack. SA-11 Buk mission. The Buk 11 uses stronger missiles than the Kub 6, but the big difference is, the 6 system has 1 radar and if you kill it, the whole site is dead. With the Buk 11, if you kill the radar, each launcher has its own radar, which makes it a more deadly opponent. This means that the launchers are more important than the radar in a Sidearm attack. So here we have an artillery regiment, protected by BUK 11 SAM site on the edge of a wood, facing west, with the east, protected by 3 Iglas in the wood. To the north are 2 Strella 10 on airfields. The Buk 11, has 1 command, search radar and 2 launch/radar vehicles with 8 missiles total, plus their support trucks and a Strella 1. We have 4 X Sidearm plus 2 AGM-65G and 3 wingmen. Mission: Take out radar & launch vehicles. Notes: Sidearm. 1st one always launches OK, so does 2,3 and 4, but all at the same target. Otherwise it's difficult to get a launch when re targeted. For the first time ever, an a.i. Harrier launched a missile and got a kill. It's easy to forget the SA 13 to the north and run into it, to finish your day. Remember to switch EXP on, which is now off by default. (sometimes). Update: Sidearm targets search radars first. When launchers have used all their missiles, they reload slowly. Sidearm at this time won't work, because their radar is not emitting, so use other means, while their pants are down. So. Come in high and bait missiles. Destroy them with chaff. Close in and Sidearm radar. Launchers won't launch whilst re loading, so hit them with Mavericks. Update: That worked well. If you get close enough (11nm) before the launchers run out, you might get a crack with a SA on it, while it's still emitting, otherwise go for the Flat Face first. Make some distance and line up from the West to get the launchers with a Mav before they wake up. If they do, then change to SA, lock and get out. Hopefully you will still have chaff or you're dead. Trolling a bait for SAMs works, but just like fishing it's a bit slow, so makes a rather dull video. Or. Come in low down river valley under radar, pop up for a lock, Sidearm radar. Break off right, use undulating countryside for cover and chaff, come round again, pop up and Sidearm launcher. Break off right and draw remaining missiles. Come back with Maverick for 2nd launcher. Don't break left or you end up in SA-13 territory. This one is more video worthy, as it has more action. ..

Yes, this happens quite a lot to me, so in my scenarios, I make the assumption that the operator has turned off the radar to avoid detection. :music_whistling: It's a WIP, so one day it might get sorted. In the above mission, the first missile hit, but it took 3 runs to get the next one to lock, each time I was chased off by SA13. The last one was finished with a Maverick. A check to see why the Kub 6 wasn't firing, showed them to be stopped in the road and were humping each other like a herd of cows. Looking on the positive side, malfunctions can make a mission more interesting. :megalol:

I use, EXP to auto, then "0" chaff/flare, mapped to stick button..

Samgori State Farm, SAM site, Vaziani. SEAD, Low Level Sidearm attack. The problem with Sidearms, is they don't loft like they should. This means a launch from low level will simply hit trees, building, etc. It should leave the rails and go high, then drop on to the target. It also won't hit a moving target from the side due to lag pursuit, an obvious disadvantage, (a problem shared with the SA-2). The SA 11 Buk system and 3 x Igla, are on the edge of a wooded area, with 2 mobile Strella 10,to the north. ..

AG mode is Lalt + 3, but I didn't think it had a course knob assignment. ..

DCS, Harrier, SEAD, SA-10, Rockeye, LL CCRP attack. Attacking a "Grumble" site, Krymsk, protected by 3 x Igla and 1 x Strella 10, plus 1 x SA-10 at Kraznodar-Center, which overlaps. Site has been moved into woods, where Sidearm can't get at it without hitting trees, when fired from a low height. Target 30N6 TR engagement radar. Weapon 12 x Mk 82 Snakeye plus 2 x Sidearm. CCRP bombs, when pre designated, will guarantee you attack the correct radar and stay low. Sidearm will go for any radar on the site and will require a pop up, thereby exposing yourself to the Grumble. First take out TR engagement radar with Snakeys. This will disable site. Then 2 tracking radars can be attacked with Sidearms from a greater height to miss surrounding trees. (Beware Strella 10). Stay low (about the height of a medium tree) and nothing can get you. Weight is at 100%, so handling is sluggish.. Video made with OBS, from 1 original and 2 replays from the same mission. ..