Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Lordzarj

  • Birthday 12/30/1972

Personal Information

  • Flight Simulators
    DCS, BMS
  • Location
  1. It’s the Test/Pres switch below the HSI, it only displays the loadout while held.
  2. I don’t think CRV7 has been used on the Eurofighter?
  3. The Sea Harrier used 36 shot 2 inch pods vs the GR1/3s 2.75 inch 18 shot Matra SNEB pods. The GR.3s flying off the carriers in the Falklands had to use the Navy pods as the RAF ones weren’t cleared by the Navy for carrier use. Danger of the ship radars setting them off inadvertently apparently. Although the pods look very similar other than the RN one being fatter and having 3 rings of slightly smaller rockets the RN pods weren’t a Matra design, I’m not sure who made them.
  4. In theory it should but only Razbam can confirm. They weren’t mounted that often so it should be a crew chief/loadout option. We need a Victor to tank off though....
  5. Yep, Blue Fox radar on the FRS.1 rather than Blue Vixen. Expect AIM-9J/L (AIM-9M post-Falklands), 1000lb dumb bombs, BL.755 cluster bombs, 2in rocket pods, 30mm Aden cannon, possibly Lepus flares. Sea Eagle is a possibility if a post Falklands SHAR is modelled as are twin rail Sidewinders increasing the load from 2 to 4. WE.177 nukes seem unlikely... Pre-Falklands era SHARs had no defensive chaff or flares, unless Razbam model chaff stuffed behind the airbrake and released by extending it. These were added during the conflict, air dropped to the Task Force and then fitted. One other Falklands improvisation was stuffing the contents of an jammer pod into one of the Aden pods (losing a cannon) although it’s not clear they were used operationally.
  6. Well you can’t beat that for an eye witness account crazyeddie! Scary stuff indeed, thanks for your service. Whoever came up with the concept for Sea Cat should have been locked up. Hey let’s take a subsonic anti-tank missile and try using it to shoot down jets.......
  7. Well that’s made my Xmas! Cheers Decoy!
  8. Channel Islands Topology A follow up from https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=258351 but that thread is closed now. I'm not sure what is possible with the topology mesh or DCS's terrain engine. These might be due to resolution issues with the available topology. Jersey seems to be the one suffering from the weird texture issues mentioned in the linked post Additionally: Sark (at 4:19 in the linked video in the first post) is pretty much a consistent height including the area to the South (called Little Sark). The island essentially has cliffs all around the coast. Herm and Jethou (at 4:54) look pretty funky, they are not flat apart from the Northern most part of Herm. Guernsey (from 5:10) looks pretty good within the limitations of the resolution terrain mesh. Broadly beaches, cliffs and built up areas are in the right places. Alderney (9:00) again looks a bit weird with it's sandy beaches all around, in reality the West and most of the South Coast are cliffs. As mentioned in a wish in another post simple airfields in Guernsey and Jersey would also be appreciated. There are wartime photos of Bf.109, 190s, Do.17, Ju.88 operating from the islands. Sorry for the pedantry but I've lived in the Channel Islands all my life! Sark, Herm and Alderney are all tiny islands and probably not even noticeable to most players but if improvements could be made it would be appreciated. :thumbup:
  9. As a Guernsey resident, absolutely, yes please! There are war time pictures of 109s at Guernsey airport and I guess Jersey was used too.
  10. Only the Batch 3 Type 42s were lengthened, the Batch 2 was a fairly minor update mainly around sensor fit. As you say the Type 21s, 22s (Batch 1) and 42s were all built as small as possible for budget reasons and this turned out to be a false economy. The 21s and 42s suffered from hull cracking in heavy seas due to the light weight construction flexing and had to have external reinforcement to prevent it. At least lessons have now been learned and ships are built with spare capacity in terms of space, weight and power generating to accommodate upgrades.
  11. I don’t believe so, the device in the nose of the GR.3 was known as the Laser Ranger and Marked Target Seeker, so whilst it could emit it was only in terms of ranging as far as I am aware. It would be pretty inaccurate (and dangerous in combat) to have to point the whole aircraft at the target I would imagine. The marked target seeker would be somewhat like LSS on the ARBS although without the camera, perhaps Pave Penny on the A-10A is a better match. The LRMTS was also used on the Jaguar and Tornado. I’ve read Hostile Skies but it was a while ago, how is it worded? I thought that all GBU drops in the Falklands were ground designated. Happy to be wrong on all counts though! Edit: just found this looking for more info on LRMTS, it has nice details on the Falklands GBU drops and says they tried to guide the bombs with the laser ranger on one occasion but it wasn’t compatible with Paveway (you would think they would have known that beforehand). https://www.flightglobal.com/FlightPDFArchive/1982/1982%20-%202627.PDF
  12. No, none of the RAF Harriers ever had a radar, unless you count the altimeter of course ;) The Royal Navy Sea Harriers did, the Sea Harrier FA.2 had the Blue Vixen Radar and AMRAAM which was somewhat equivalent to the Plus in capability, but the airframe, wings etc. were from the original Harrier generation, there was also no TGP or FLIR so they were very different aircraft. Sea Harrier FA.2 Harrier GR.9
  13. The GR.7 and GR.9 are the NA equivalents, the GR.5 had no FLIR and was roughly the same as the base AV-8B other than the ECM and some avionics. The GR.7 and 9 both flew off the Invincible class initially alongside the Sea Harrier FA.2 and after its retirement.
  14. Sure, try these near the bottom of the page. https://razbamsimulations.com/index.php/dcs/south-atlantic-terrain-project There were some on their Facebook page too but I’m not a Facebook user so can’t search there.
  • Create New...