AV-8B Harrier Thread

[otto]

Love it! Its the little features like this that do it for me. Super Immersive

 

Yea can't wait to get my hands on this one.

[ebabil]

CCIP bombsight is now operational.

The dotted cross indicates that the bombsight is below the HUD FOV

 

 

[kobeshow]

I would love to see that CCIP in action

[Vitormouraa]

I would love to see that CCIP in action

 

Agreed. +1

[Zilch]

That's a damn good looking cockpit. Every time I see it...

[1stBEAST]

i´m sooo ready for Harry :-D

coclpit looks stunning and its nice to see the process in vids and screens.

big thx to dev-team :-)

[Conroy]

Cockpit is very good, really amazing, i hope for an upgrade for the Mirage cockpit aswell, a bit more rounded. I would like have the same standard for both AV8B and Mirage. However this AV8B is a must, really amazing. I can't wait.

 

A promotional video for AV8B pilots recruiting.

Edited April 27, 2017 by Conroy

[Zeus67]

I wish I had better news, but I've spent the entire week struggling with the Armament Control Panel (ACP). This deceptively simple instrument is quite complex. It is the heart of the AV-8B N/A Air-to-Ground capabilities. It controls delivery modes, fuzing (for bombs), launch/release priority, jettison mode and of course it has a manual mode as well.

For starters: The AV-8B (D/A, N/A and Plus) have 5 different delivery modes:1 for AGMs, 2 Computed modes for AG weapons, including guns and rockets and 2 manual modes, one of which is a user controlled depressed sight the other is a standard iron sight. There are 24 fuzing options based on selected weapon. And then you have the basics: release quantity, multiplier and release interval (in feet, this is an American aircraft after all and everybody knows that America doesn't favor the metric system :) ).

There are four jettison modes.

It also has 4 different sensors to select in order to get the ballistic computations required for hitting the target with dumb iron bombs.

Like the A-10C it has a built-in laser spot detector that will lock the system to the selected target, enabling you to deliver plain old dumb bombs to service it.

And I am not even touching the LITENING Pod yet.

Quite a difference from the M-2000C, which is an interceptor with secondary AG capabilities and the AV-8B N/A, which is an attack aircraft with secondary AA capabilities.

So I'm working a week in this thing and yet I'm not getting to the point where I release bombs. Sigh! Well, I'll keep toiling to get there. I'll make a video as soon as bomb release is operational.

 

 

[Zeus67]

Gauge upgrades:

 

[609_Relentov]

Thanks for the update Zeus! Yes, it does look very complicated with all of the various weapon release states this instrument controls. I anticipate a whole chapter in the manual dedicated to explaining all of the weapon release features/modes/etc. this instrument implements in order for us to hit targets accurately :)

 

Keep up the good work, so looking forward to learning this aircraft.

[BIGNEWY]

Thanks for sharing Zeus67

[Paradox]

Nose/ Tail fusing is already featured for years

[shagrat]

It is not, at least not in the A-10C. There's the option of utilizing the N/T fuze or not, resulting in duds or low drag MK-82HDGPs depending on your setting. However, different fuzes and different settings are not modeled. There are no things like delayed fuzes or airburst fuzes, there's only instantaneous fuzes.

Hmm, delayed fuzing works in the WW II birds, shouldn't be difficult to adapt to a Harrier.

An airburst fuzing with proximity/height would be interesting though.

[Vitormouraa]

Hmm, delayed fuzing works in the WW II birds, shouldn't be difficult to adapt to a Harrier.

An airburst fuzing with proximity/height would be interesting though.

 

109 and 190, but I miss that so so much for the Mustang. :) How many times did I die trying to drop bombs? Lol.

 

Don't we have proximity sensor for AAM? I know we are talking about A/G here, but maybe they could do for A/G weapons, based on the A/A?

Edited April 29, 2017 by Vitormouraa

[shagrat]

109 and 190, but I miss that so so much for the Mustang. :)

Superior german technology... Well, actually a simple switch and, yes, a timed fuse. :megalol:

[shagrat]

@Zeus67 - fantastic work. The weapons ACP seems to be a hell more complex than the A-10As "old" switchboard...

[shagrat]

109 and 190, but I miss that so so much for the Mustang. :) How many times did I die trying to drop bombs? Lol.

 

Don't we have proximity sensor for AAM? I know we are talking about A/G here, but maybe they could do for A/G weapons, based on the A/A?

Depends on how it's coded internally, I guess.

But I am confident with Razbam here.

 

They made their own missiles with the Mirage, so why not push bombs to another level? ;)

[98abaile]

I can't imagine an airburst would be hard to implement, cluster bombs already dispense their munitions at altitude.

[Zeus67]

It is not, at least not in the A-10C. There's the option of utilizing the N/T fuze or not, resulting in duds or low drag MK-82HDGPs depending on your setting. However, different fuzes and different settings are not modeled. There are no things like delayed fuzes or airburst fuzes, there's only instantaneous fuzes.

 

Hmm, delayed fuzing works in the WW II birds, shouldn't be difficult to adapt to a Harrier.

An airburst fuzing with proximity/height would be interesting though.

 

Unfortunately, like many other things in DCS, fuzes are quite simple. There are a couple of parameters that can be handled by a developer, 2 for normal bombs and like 5 for cluster bombs, but still they are quite simple.

 

As for nose/tail fuzes, in real life they do have an impact because the few milliseconds in detonation delay due to using either noze or tail indicate how deep the bomb dig into the ground/target. But in a simulation they are one and the same, for all intent and purpose the explosion is instantaneous.

 

That is why we had to use unrealistic delay periods of 4 seconds in the M-2000C (The FW-190 uses 8 seconds delay) when using time delayed fuzes. So you can see the bomb hit and a couple seconds later explode. But for DCS it is irrelevant since it cannot detect how deep the bomb digs into the target. It can only detect bomb collision with target and act accordingly.

 

ED does have plans to include penetration control into their collision model but we don't know its status.

[iLOVEwindmills]

There are more pressing issues anyway when it comes to the effectiveness of bombs, which hopefully take priority over the modelling of additional fuses etc.

[ESAc_matador]

Unfortunately, like many other things in DCS, fuzes are quite simple. There are a couple of parameters that can be handled by a developer, 2 for normal bombs and like 5 for cluster bombs, but still they are quite simple.

 

As for nose/tail fuzes, in real life they do have an impact because the few milliseconds in detonation delay due to using either noze or tail indicate how deep the bomb dig into the ground/target. But in a simulation they are one and the same, for all intent and purpose the explosion is instantaneous.

 

That is why we had to use unrealistic delay periods of 4 seconds in the M-2000C (The FW-190 uses 8 seconds delay) when using time delayed fuzes. So you can see the bomb hit and a couple seconds later explode. But for DCS it is irrelevant since it cannot detect how deep the bomb digs into the target. It can only detect bomb collision with target and act accordingly.

 

ED does have plans to include penetration control into their collision model but we don't know its status.

 

I know a little about fuzes... (not to much). As you mentioned, the delay is used to achieve a penetration and then the explossion inside the targets. This is used for bunkers, bridges, runways etc. So, delayed fuse used against infantry or vehicles is worst.

 

One way to achive this is by reducing the lethal radius, but increasing the strengh of.. the detonation. This way you can simulate better their effects.

 

Example.

 

You have a bunker or a building... With lighr vehicles close to it. With an Mk82 without delay you damage the building but kill infantry that is longer from the bomb detonation. With delay you kill the building but you dont kill the infantry.

 

Same applies with our ground units when they are close to the enemy and we want to avoid blue on blue you put delayed fuze, or to reduce colateral effects. Using delayed fuze you reduce the shrapnel and the lethal radius but the effects are lower.

 

 

Also you just want to destroy ONE infrastructure without damaging the surrounding ones.

 

 

Opposingly, the proximity fuzes are very good for greater radius...

 

So if you can change the parameters of the bombs during the game, would be awesome, the use of different programable fuzes opens a full new field in the simulation.

Edited April 29, 2017 by ESAc_matador

[comie1]

[Chrinik]

I would love to see that CCIP in action

 

Your wish is my command, skipper:

 

[kobeshow]

yeah thanks, I've seen it (; and it showed exactly what I wanted to see, now I have to go into DCS and check if my observations were correct

[T_A]

From RAZBAM`s Facebook

 

 

 

 

Our latest cockpit upgrade as per specs..