ChickenSim

Yeah, according to the public TACMAN you should be getting a 15 NM max range, but only if you're up high (33,000' HAT) and going fairly fast (M 0.9). Unknown whether the FM is actually modeled according to physics or just an approximation. It does, but visibility conditions being equal, a laser will still generally perform better than optical or infrared guidance. If the cloud or fog is thick enough to block laser energy, it's definitely thick enough to not be able to see through or get a good track either.

Lasers are going to offer better precision in general than something that's optically or infrared guided, moving target or stationary. Force correlate isn't the hack in real life that it is in DCS, so LMAVs also offer a more distant acquisition range, whereas with IR/CCD Mavericks you're typically well within the kinematic range of the missile by the time you get a good track. But also, rippling off a handful of air-to-ground missiles in a single pass isn't something done in reality so I don't think that was ever a consideration.

For as long as the AGM-65E has been around, it has not been reliable to self-lase for various reasons and has always relied on either a buddy-lase from your wingman or a third-party lase from a JTAC/JFO. My understanding is that when self-designating you ran a high risk of the exhaust plume either washing out the Litening pod image and breaking lock, or masking the laser from hitting the target when the weapon is critically looking for the spot. You'll notice in the Flight Syllabus Guide floating around that there is no self-designating LMAV Attack profile - the only example given is a buddy-lase for a reason. There wasn't a lot of impetus to change this for many years because having a JTAC hosting your weapon for you speeds up the correlation process in close air support (the weapon's primary use case), and the firing platform not having to continue driving toward the target for the duration of the slow missile's time of flight was seen as a good thing. The firer can stay more distant from a possible threat, and the guys on the ground are sure that the weapon will hit the target they intended it to. In 2014 they began developing the AGM-65E2 which when combined with aircraft and Litening pod software upgrades provided a self-designation capability. The Air Force is following suit with the AGM-65L. It's possible that the Harrier pilot referenced is too new to understand that this used to be a problem, and too inexperienced to understand the potential benefits of relying on outside lasers for Mavericks. Luckily, the DCS engine doesn't cause the AGM-65E the same problems it faced in real life so you can self-lase to your heart's content.

Unfortunately there are still some systems, tests, indications, and MPCD pages that need to be implemented before an accurate cold and dark start or takeoff lesson can be built.

Yeah it's called the Pull-Up Cue (PUC). You set it for your attack run on the UFC/ODU and it will slowly rise up to the VV to indicate when you should begin pulling up from your dive and depending on how you have it set, flash to indicate that you're behind on your pull-up maneuver. Useful so that you don't frag yourself with shrapnel or ricochets.

Little bit of additional cocktail trivia, during High-G flight the weight of the nose gear could also overcome the hydraulic pressure keeping the doors shut, causing them to open a bit in flight until the pilot let the G off.

Water is the bane of infrared sensors due to its absorption and scattering properties. Whether it's high absolute humidity or actual visible moisture, it's going to severely degrade the capability of your IR sensors, which usually look into the 3-5μm (MWIR) or 8-12μm (LWIR) portions of the spectrum specifically to get around the worst effects between 5-8μm. You shouldn't expect to be able to see through fog or clouds even after the IR rework.

It doesn't have a gun funnel, and helo escort has nothing to do with how fast, slow, high, or low you're flying, much less what you're shooting at (and with what) to protect those helicopters.

APKWS aren't fired in multiples, but also, nothing precludes you from doing it for either APK or LMAVs so I can't see that being any different. That said, there are specific differences in seeker (gimbal vs. DASALS), flight model (loft vs. direct), loss of track logic (loft/safe vs. just loft), and guidance criteria (mandatory LOBL vs. mandatory LOAL) that I imagine complicate things pretty quickly.

That sounds about right. It's definitely not the latest version though. The current models have some minor cockpit differences, such as the DECS switch being upside down (both switches go down to turn on), different manual fuel system switch, different landing gear lights, an extra circuit breaker, probably a few other things.

That said, both AV-8B NA and Radar aircraft have the ability to transmit and receive digital messages via their ARC-210 radios, using a system called Automatic Target Handoff System (ATHS). Ground units equipped with a Target Location, Designation and Hand-off System (TLDHS) are able to generate and transmit digital CAS attack briefs that will auto-populate information on the AMPCD CAS and EHSD pages, and in turn the aircraft are able to transmit digital readbacks and "In" calls. So while you won't necessarily be able to link up with other aircraft, you should expect some pseudo-datalink functionality.

A weapon being "hit or miss" is fairly definitionally SEAD. The goal (or desired effect) is to deter the enemy from radiating, firing, or supporting their weapons to impact. Destruction, the desired effect of DEAD, would just be a welcome bonus. What's missing is any of this deterrence really being represented in the sim. Firing the weapons right before or during a friendly attack run doesn't really deter them from attempting a kill anyway like it might in reality.

The combination of high-mounted, swept wings actually results in an overall positive dihedral effect despite the anhedral angle, FCS notwithstanding.

Not quite, all level turns will have some G required to maintain level flight. otherwise they would be slipping or "slicing" into a descent. The bank angle and amount of G pulled to maintain level flight are going to be related (Load Factor), but if you banked 90° you'd likely need more G than you could possibly pull to keep from descending.

IMN is your Indicated Mach Number on the HUD. A loaded roll is when you're pulling G during the roll itself, so don't pull until the roll is complete and you've captured the desired bank angle for the turn. That's not to say you should never perform loaded rolls, just pay particular attention to doing them at high airspeeds. The aircraft is considered "Mach limited" at high altitude (>15,000' don't do loaded rolls > ~0.8 IMN) and "AOA limited" at the bands described above. At lower altitude and lower speeds the aircraft is "G limited" and you're more likely to over-G the airplane than depart controlled flight.

This coupling behavior is accurate. The AV-8B is fairly susceptible to adverse yaw (yaw in the opposite direction of a roll due to increased drag on the upward-moving wing), and the SAAHS applies rudder in the direction of the roll to counteract the worst of these effects (I haven't tested whether this is true in DCS yet). This affects the AV-8B's NATOPS roll limitations and it's important to make your rolls unloaded at higher IMN. At airspeeds < ~500 KCAS > 15,000' MSL or < ~400 KCAS < 15,000' MSL, rapid onset of AOA in a loaded roll can cause a wing rock condition or departure. Disabling SAAHS doesn't increase roll performance at all, it just makes you more susceptible to departure.

Thanks Kev2go, I understand the physical models are AMPCDs but a lot of their documentation (both published and referenced in building the Harrier) only refers to them as MPCDs and they're missing some of the functionality of the AMPCDs right now (the color-changing OSB 17, OSB 18 not displaying the system time instead of "MENU", etc.). Needless to say there's some confusion. I'll add it to the list. :)

On AMPCDs for both the Hornet and Harrier (note that the DCS: AV-8B NA only has MPCDs), you have the option to cycle between a few different colors for symbology with OSB 17.

This actually shows what the HUD is supposed to look like in V/STOL mode, as opposed to other modes. You'll notice that the airspeed, altitude, and heading tape are all lower in the HUD (you can see portions of the pitch ladder above the heading tape in this mode), and the airspeed and altitude indicators compress together slightly compared with NAV, A2G, and A2A. This also shows the appropriate distance between the waterline (the horizontal centerline between the heading numbers and tickmarks in V/STOL mode) and the Witch's Hat.

When a Harrier detachment is attached to the MEU, all aircraft and personnel fold into the host HMM (now VMM) squadron. The aircraft assume the squadron insignia, markings, and tail codes of the host squadron. 1. Nose numbers are called "Modex numbers" and are internally generated and vary from squadron to squadron. Sometimes they go in serial/BuNo order and sometimes they have alternative conventions. A MEU might have all UH-1s begin with 0X, all Cobras begin with 1X, and all Harriers begin with 5X, etc. These conventions vary. 2. Tail codes are assigned to individual squadrons. HMM-365 (now VMM-365) has a Tail Code of YM, as you've discovered, so AV-8Bs attached to VMM-365 would show YM on their tails. 3. Pilots fly both AV-8B II+ (radar) and NA variants. There aren't any day-only aircraft left. The numbers of each also vary from squadron to squadron but there are generally an equal or greater amount of II+ aircraft as compared to NA aircraft at each squadron.

It's called "depressed" because it's supposed to sit 8° below the actual waterline of the aircraft, but it doesn't quite show you that just yet. In NAV or A/G modes the waterline is supposed to be level with the tops of the airspeed and altitude readouts, and in V/STOL the waterline is supposed to run through the middle of the heading tape (meaning the Witch's Hat is supposed to be fixed 8° below the center of the heading tape).

1511-1788, in fact. 1775 and 1776 are common training codes for laughs. :) Setting LGBs (and eventually APKWS) via the kneeboard sounds like an elegant workaround for ensuring they are properly coded and aren't adjustable in flight.

Can't speak to whether the switch is bugged but keep in mind that the aircraft will dump fuel and automatically shut off the dump switches at the desired BINGO state or once the wing and external tanks are depleted, whichever comes first. It won't dump fuel from any of the 5 internal fuselage tanks so setting a BINGO below that won't have an effect.

There may be some differences between the RAF Harriers and the AV-8Bs, I'm going off the NATOPS on this one.

Harriers flying from the boat during OIF also made use of Ahmad al-Jaber, the cratered Al/An Numaniyah airfield, and a section of highway south of Baghdad as FARPs for both fuel and ordnance. Numaniyah ("Three Rivers") was used more than 200 times. In current operations, those locations are called "main air bases," "air facilities," "air sites," and "air points" (which can be FARPs or lager points), each providing different parking, refueling, and rearming capabilities.