Vitormouraa

Chizh said it's planned, ED will eventually make APKWS. https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3264406&postcount=735 Also this: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3264426&postcount=737

6.5G here ;)

Yup, ED is getting there!

Thanks for the heads up!

Not sure if it's a typo but our Lot is 20, 21 would be Super Hornet already.

I have seen this before, thanks mvsgas. :)

Agreed. But the discussion was about the BRU-33 being able to carry and release GBUs. This kind of information is very important for ED as well. Another example is Two AGM-65s per pylon, this configuration isn't possible on the Hornet as far as I know.

That's exactly what I was thinking. The only 'connection' I can think of is the fuzing cable. Which would be from the arming safety switch to the bomb itself.

Even LGBs? I think LGBs can be mounted and released from BRU-33s

GBU-12 and 16s. I am not 100% sure about the JDAMs however, I have seen websites claiming that the BRU-33 is capable of carrying and employing GBU-38/32 and 54. As for the JSOW, I doubt it, we would need the BRU-55 in this case (AFAIK).

BRU-33 is already in the game (devs version). As for the BRU-55, I think Skate is right, it wasn't being used until 2010. But I'm already happy about the BRU-33 being in the game!

Agreed. It would be able to refuel A-10s, Harriers, F/A-18s, F-15s, Mirages etc with the same tanker.

Imagine the air density with those temps :D

What does that mean?

I agree with Lithion. Real life procedures or how they employ/use the weapons shouldn't have any impact on DCS: F/A-18C. The real capabilities is what matters here. We should be free to use/employ/carry whatever we want, and the way we want within the sim. That's how DCS is at the moment and I don't want it to be changed.

It looks so good...

Nice, I hope ED got what they were looking for.

Little comparison with the F-35.. difference is quite big :P

Also 32 and 54 (LJDAM).

Well, I disagree :) But looks like I am not winning here... :D

That afterburner mod looks cool, I can see more the shock diamonds.

I still think the Harrier isn't the ideal aircraft for SEAD'ing. DEAD, yes why not? Along with A-10s and F/A-18s? (IMHO DEAD is more fun :D) In terms of IR guided SAMs and AAA (SHORAD), you can do a pretty good job with the A-10C, it has MWS in case someone has the line of sight to shoot at you. A-10C has its own limitations too, speed, altitude recovery, ECM etc.. But it has an excellent combat range and payload. Which isn't really the case with the Harrier. The Harrier however, can land anywhere. Being the aircraft carrier or land itself. It can be refueled and rearmed in minutes. In case you need to penetrate an enemy airspace that is protected by SAMs, having an aircraft that needs to be refueled every Y minutes doesn't seem to be a great idea, since the Harrier does not have any good ARM, you need to get really close to the enemies to be able to shoot a missile. Being the Maverick or Sidearm. They aren't always effective, especially if the target can intercept your missiles. As said above, range is very important. Being able to shoot stand-off weapons is better, safer and easier. Harrier doesn't have any of that, same goes for the A-10C, simply because they don't have any medium-to-long range ARMs. F/A-18C is by far the best SEAD aircraft that we are officially getting as a module, until a F-16 arrives. (the Viper is even better because it has its own pod). The HTS pod not only can be used to shoot ARM missiles, but it can be used to employ JDAMs, JSOWs and others. Harrier is good for many other things, such as CAS, strike missions etc. Not for SEAD though. (Obviously I am talking about our Harrier).

Having the AGM-122 missile doesn't make the Harrier a SEAD aircraft. It really doesn't IMO. AGM-122 is very limited, in terms of range and operational capabilities. AGM-65 can be more effective depending on the situation.

Late November if everything goes well.

That's the A-29 (EMB-314) Super Tucano though. Which is being developed by the other team. We were working on the AT-27 Tucano (EMB-312). Even though the AT-27 was canceled, we are getting something better. ;)