Spurts

It IS underpowered against the mk60, the mk60 has the biggest motor.

Also, the Lightning pods are different models. Harrier has the G4 which has the best optics.

For the second part you can tell him to go QDES I think. Then he should slew to what you designated.

still waiting on the weapon select wheel for the RIO.

I hear you. I have broken wings off a Harrier in a loaded roll, so yeah it's modeled. If they came off in a light plane with no roll at less than 9G is sounds like there was a random number generator bug. Can you reproduce it?

110% true.

it says 50-54, and notice that at higher speeds it says pull 7G. My upper lift limit with 150% margin for 54,000lb comes to 9.35G, so 10G is banking on the strength of the structure to survive beyond 150%, which is not unreasonable and could even be because the structural test showed a 160% margin (150% is the minimum and the goal, but the structure going above that is normal). Now, as to 9.2G on a clean low fuel airplane. Were you rolling by chance? Asymmetric load limits are lower. Just trying to rule out other possible failure modes.

At what weight? That matters. The Original F-15A was rated for 7.33G at 37,400lb and that rating remained though the early 90s. (look up F-15 Standard Aircraft Characteristics) Now, the reason it's only 7.33G is because that was the rating at a critical flight condition. 9G was available for most the envelope and the OWS was programmed to know what the limit was based on the current condition, thus the aural "Over-G". The weight limit still applies though. So you really need to think about it in terms of you have 336,600lb of lift available when not at critical condition and 274,142lb of lift at critical condition. Even with a 150% failure margin if you are 6x2 loaded and full internal fuel (~49,000lb) you should see failure between 8.4 and 10.3G depending on how close you are to critical condition. 5.6 to 6.9G is the rated lift limit for that weight.

I can assure you that in the USAF, even back in the F-4 days, a WSO was indeed a pilot. Not in the trained and titled sense nor in the crew duty sense, but there are redundant flight controls in the back for a reason and backseaters did practice landings just in case.

Heatblur would make it too accurate. They would model the entire Mk1A internal structure and how the massive switchboards operated.

Sounds like the missile transonic wave drag rearing it's ugly head again. And apparently the tanks have little/no transonic wave drag? only way I can account for the difference in time being smaller when adding tanks, unless it's just a deviation in test as we are not professional test pilots here.

12 dps is with the -406 motor in CBT thrust, which is listed as 99% RPM. The -408 motor in CBT rating is 111%, higher than the -406 short lift wet by a large margin. We don't have turn charts for a -408 powered harrier, so AFAIK the closest you could get to running the test is dropping RPM to 99%.

Skip to 10:00 for acceleration

I tested acceleration in the 0/4/4 55.6k 5,000ft configuration for the B and there was nowhere that it over performed. .7-1.1 it definitely underperformed. Used the EM plot Ps values. And as far as I am aware there is a transonic drag bug for weapons, which is why you see the dismal performance around M1.

On the deck STR peaks around .45M at 20 units AoA based on my own testing. Maneuver flaps are out already, so no point in trying to drop them further.

Correct, and when that happens you are killing yourself with excess drag. Again, if your BFM plan is to hit a rate speed and try to out-rate your opponent then what you need is a broader BFM toolbox (practice), not an extra degree per second of rate. At low speeds the Tomcat already holds a turn rate advantage, and thus also a radius advantage, both in sustained turn capability and transient turn capability. Trying to use flaps at 0.7M+ is the wrong plan.

At certain speeds, not all speeds. Plus not long after you are too fast for maneuver flaps you are also getting fast enough the wings will start sweeping. I've used them for better control under 180kts and to help go over the top. My rule of thumb is if I am nose up under 200 I'll consider putting them out, if I'm nose down over 180 I pull them up no questions asked.

L/D is the Lift to Drag ratio. If the L/D gets worse than for a given G load at a given speed you will have worse acceleration/deceleration performance, i.e. a worse sustained turn rate. There is so much more to BFM than just hitting a turn rate speed.

at higher speeds having flaps deployed is going to make L/D worse, not better.

I fail to see any purpose to that when Maneuver flaps are in play, but that's just me I guess.

I just want that extra Sidewinder rail. Why oh why did the USMC not use that?

Not sure what you are asking. Maneuver flaps are automatically scheduled so adjusting them manually is not going to provide real benefit. Landing flaps are currently, afaik, realistically set up currently. Just don't use them over 200kts, just don't.

Agree, the Harrier is my go to plane for ground attack.

temperature?

oooh, +100 for spawn position.