drPhibes

How high? With a 3° GP angle your height above the ground when crossing the threshold should be around 15-20m (45-60-ish feet). The GP aiming point is usually 3-400m from the threshold, depending on the RWY length.

Using a FLIR image isn't really that accurate as far as missile seekers go. FLIR systems typically operate in the far infrared region (8-12µm wavelength), while the seeker on an AIM-9 is sensitive to mid-infrared (2-6µm). Or TL;DR: FLIRs can detect lower temperatures than the missile seekers. If the missile seeker was able to display an image like that (which most of them aren't; focal plane array seekers in missiles are still quite rare, IRIS-T and AIM-9X being some of the exceptions), you would basically just see parts of the jet efflux and the puffer jets.

Outside the major cities, the sand and sea looks no different today than it did hundreds of years ago. It's all up to the creativity of the mission designers.

Yup. GBU-38.

Except that the adapter can't be mounted or dismounted in flight, making the tanker unusable for any F15s/A10s that also need a drop or two of extra fuel. Mk.32B wing pods is the only practical solution.

Is there any specific reason why you can't check it yourself?

But any potential acquisition of BL755s by the DDR would have been blocked faster than you can say "COCOM violation", so the only German air force to have both 755s and MIG-21s at the same time would be the post-reunification Luftwaffe. But this is highly OT as far as the AV-8B goes. Technically speaking, the AV-8B can probably carry and drop 755s (I assume the suspension lugs are pretty standardized for NATO dumb bombs), but any ballistic calculations in CCRP/CCIP modes would be way off.

Through the magical medium of electromagnetic waves, i.e. television.

Since it's just a minor modification of the regular AI C-130 mesh you can probably use the template that's already available without having to change too much.

Nothing, according to the manuals. The only AGMs mentioned there are the 65-series and the 122. Wikipedia claims that it can carry the AGM-88, but without any official info I'd be sceptical of these claims.

A-10 tutorials for NTTR would be great (at least for those of us who only fly in 2.1), but I guess §4.1c in the EULA comes into play here, so you should ask ED before publishing anything.

TACAN or manual vectoring for finding find the carrier, with the option of using AWLS for the landing part when you get there.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3245183&postcount=108 But, as always, everything is subject to change.

Do they? IIRC, fusing and laser codes can be set by the ground crew, and I cant find any pictures showing an umbilical between the seeker/guidance section of a GBU-12 and the pylon, so I'm pretty sure that a GBU-12 can be dropped from any Mk-82 compatible pylon. But I have been wrong once or twice before, so if you have any technical documentation that says otherwise, feel free to post a link here.

Thanks a lot :) Here's an other interesting Harrier documentary, focusing on the first generation aircraft: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxzpKtbNKQ0

No. Belsimtek doesn't owe you anything.

Nope. This one: Here's the only cockpit shot I could find:

Copied from the TAC manual: Regarding A/A gunnery: don't know. Here's a link to the manuals: http://aviationarchives.blogspot.no/2016/05/av-8-harrier-tactical-manuals.html

The IMU is quite fragile, so it might have something to do with that. But that's just speculation.

Presumably that you shouldn't do multiple continuous axial rolls.

What are your sources? I'm pretty sure the antenna in the AGM-122 is practically useless at VHF/UHF frequencies. Here's a sectioned view of the AGM-122 seeker: (borrowed from ) The body diameter of an AIM-9 is approximately 5" / 127mm, so let's say the antenna diameter is approximately 110mm. By using a simple parabolic antenna gain calculator, with ideal conditions (100% efficiency), we get an approximation of how well the antenna works at different frequencies: VHF/UHF: 100MHz: -18,8dB 200MHz: -12,7dB 300MHz: -9,2dB Negative gain = a really terrible antenna at these frequencies. J band: 10GHz: +21,2dB 15GHz: +24,7dB 20GHz: +27,2dB So the antenna is about 4000 times (36dB) as effective at 15GHz than it is at 200MHz. This combined with the fact that it is pretty unlikely that the RF receiver is wideband enough to detect anything at these low frequencies leads me to conclude that it is unlikely that the AGM-122 can detect, track and intercept VHF/UHF EWR radars. But if anyone has actual technical data (no, wikipedia etc. is not a reliable source) that says otherwise, feel free to post it here.

The TDD part of the AGM-122 is described in volume 3 of the AV-8 TAC manuals, which isn't available online, so accurate information on the seeker specs might be a bit tricky to come by. But in general, building a seeker that is wideband enough to detect both VHF and J/Ku band radars (the latter operating at 100x the frequency of the former) and fits in the limited available space in the AIM-9 "host" is nearly impossible (at least using 1980-ies technology). It could however have several narrowband receiver channels tuned for different parts of the frequency spectrum. But without TAC vol 3 (or similar reputable sources), we'll just have to guess what it can or cannot do.

Thanks for the correction regadring MDA. Being in the ILS business, I just automatically think and speak in "ILS terms".

Sorry to say so, but feelings and opinions are worthless unless they can be backed up in some way, either with technical evidence, or personal experience with the exact type of aircraft in question.

Just curious: what do you base this on?