why no 500 lbs for the Charlie?

[WildBillKelsoe]

I mean its stripped of cannon, 2 hardpoints, should carry 500 lbs of bombs..

[SFC Tako]

Had to double-check this in the Mission Editor...you're right!

And I concur, give Charlie a chance! ;)

[GeorgeLKMT]

The hardpoints on C have 130kg load limit.

[Ramsay]

why no 500 lbs for the Charlie?

I mean its stripped of cannon, 2 hardpoints, should carry 500 lbs of bombs..

The ZA has strengthened wings and landing gear, so can carry more than a L-39C .

Edited March 21, 2016 by Ramsay

[Yuya6104]

This will help alittle give some loadouts that was missing in the L-39ZA here: http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2688311&postcount=6

 

 

Ramsey is updateing it so can carry in the inner the 500kg FAB's & 500kg RBK Clusters and adding 250kg RBK Clusters aswell.

[SFC Tako]

Ramsey is updateing it so can carry in the inner the 500kg FAB's & 500kg RBK Clusters and adding 250kg RBK Clusters aswell.

 

BOOM! :pilotfly::thumbup::):thumbup::)

[OneBlueSky]

The ZA has strengthened wings and landing gear, so can carry more than a L-39C .

 

This. The C doesn't carry them because in real life, it doesn't carry them. The ZA is a different animal and was designed with carrying more in mind. It was upgraded in the necessary ways to add this capacity. The C is not structurally capable of safely doing it.

 

So, since the module simulates the real aircraft, it follows suit with reality. It's not about giving it a chance or not, they just made it true to real world. It's like when people wondered way back why the variant of the Su-27 in game didn't have a refueling probe. If the real life variant of a plane can't do it, the one in game is modeled the same.

[WildBillKelsoe]

makes sense

[Fri13]

I think people start finding C to be more limited than they thought, when ZA has "all the bells and whistles".

 

This is similar problem that if Su-27S gets behind if some day upgraded variant is released like Su-27SM, it means many doesn't want to fly Su-27S because SM has the new features than the older model and more (like the R-77 capability).

 

But then there are those who like to fly with "limited" aircrafts (like I do) like A-10A instead A-10C or Su-25A instead Su-25T. But when it comes to L-39C and L-39ZA, both are trainers and already very limited (could even be said incapable for semi-serious combat) and two hardpoints more, strengthened airframe and capability handle combat better makes ZA for that function, while C is better for aerobatics with its lower weight.

[Aginor]

To be honest I completely ignored any weapons capabilities the C version has. For me it is a basic trainer like the C-101EB, and when I want to do anything more than basic flight and navigation training I go to the ZA version anyway. :)

[msalama]

(could even be said incapable for semi-serious combat)

 

What's "semi-serious"? The ZA is actually a pretty capable COIN bird, provided that SEAD / SAM suppression is taken care of. And yes, it has been used as such IRL too; and that, in my book, is as semi-serious as it gets ;)

 

Yeah, it's a trainer. But not only.

[gospadin]

Does the L-39C model weapon pylon strength? (If someone added 500kg bombs on the C via a mod, would they shear off at high G loads?)

[UVPMechan]

:palec nahoru:

To be honest I completely ignored any weapons capabilities the C version has. For me it is a basic trainer like the C-101EB, and when I want to do anything more than basic flight and navigation training I go to the ZA version anyway. :)

 

:palec nahoru:

[Fri13]

What's "semi-serious"? The ZA is actually a pretty capable COIN bird, provided that SEAD / SAM suppression is taken care of. And yes, it has been used as such IRL too; and that, in my book, is as semi-serious as it gets ;)

 

Yeah, it's a trainer. But not only.

 

What is "semi-serious"? Enemy that doesn't have any serious AA capability basically and that means 12.7mm HMG or ZU-23-2 only.

If there is a single MANPADS, you are coming very likely down because you don't have flares.

If there is a SPAAG like ZSU-23-4 (Shilka) then you come down very easily as you don't even have chaffs to fool its range metering, nor you have RWR to detect such hidden somewhere.

 

So actually saying, any enemy that has IR or Radar capability, L-39C (or ZA) is seriously under heavy risk to get shot down and destroyed.

 

But for COIN missions, yes, it is a capable as you are not seeing those IR or Radar guided missiles or SPAAG. Even anti-cartel missions is possible to be done with it.

 

But still, I would avoid even those because 12.7mm or 23-2 are serious threats when handler has got little experience shooting targets.

[Chrinik]

But still, I would avoid even those because 12.7mm or 23-2 are serious threats when handler has got little experience shooting targets.

 

This sounds like a personal problem that can be easily fixed by training.

[Fri13]

This sounds like a personal problem that can be easily fixed by training.

I said, it can be fixed by training and shooters become very efficient to hit fast movers with so simple anti-aircraft weapons that forces aircrafts keep their distances and avoid bombing/rocket runs to be further than 1.5-2.5 and prepare to be strafing or otherways a maneuvering to engagement range.

 

And that would likely mean that either weapon is on moving platform changing its position on each engagement and not firing at the target but as well on its pathway causing mental pressure on pilot to avoid getting hit by a randomly fired burst with a large spread.

 

The AI in DCS doesn't really know how to fire those weapons as there isn't much spread and then AI is trying to fire at the target by following its estimated hit position, instead firing burst on the path to make pilot to avoid already in the existing projectiles and this way disabling the good easy runs.

 

In DCS we don't have example 12.7mm fire teams that would unmount from vehicles and scatter to air defence positions in 3 minutes after air assault warning is issued (and this 3min means assembling 12.7mm from its transport box) and then after each pass transferring that HMG to new location in time that it takes just to run there.

 

We don't either have ZU-23-2 on truck (or ZSU-23-4 etc) moving automatically after each engagement to keep pilot guessing locations.

 

And neither do we have a concealment capability to ground units to keep pilots detecting locations so easily, as now pilots can spot units easily if not placed inside a forest (from where those wouldn't be so easily seeing fighters and so on firing at them).

 

It would be nice to get AI to actually fire more randomly and correct bursts with correct spreads so that it would make pilots work harder as they can't avoid easily AI firing by changing slightly directions, because AI firing randomly at the estimated positions would cause pilot to actually look at the tracers and avoid to fly at them.

 

And if we would have AI to know how to control firing, meaning it wouldn't try to engage target that changes to be hit are small, it would as well make pilots job more difficult as they wouldn't see tracers to point where AA was at that pass.

 

And actually getting the humans in CA module doing those tactics vs human pilot flying and trying to get engaged to target, is different than training against AI at ground.

[msalama]

Can't be bothered with your walls of text TBH. But I said, provided that SAM suppression / SEAD is taken care of.

[splash]

I'd like to use L-39ZA for some CAS/COIN serious missions but IMHO, soldiers' marksmanship is overemphasized a lot!

[codefox]

Does the L-39C model weapon pylon strength? (If someone added 500kg bombs on the C via a mod, would they shear off at high G loads?)

Not modeled. I once took two RN-28s into the air with the L-39. High G turns didn't break anything, although I stalled easily which is reasonable.

[Fri13]

Can't be bothered with your walls of text TBH. But I said, provided that SAM suppression / SEAD is taken care of.

 

If you don't bother to read so short text, how did you ever get through a school?

Or do you even read DCS manuals at all?

 

As I said, L-39 is very capable when there is no anti-aircraft units on the ground....

Even a 12.7mm or even more dangerous 14.5mm or especially 23mm are poison to that aircraft when shooter has got little training to shoot moving targets, and they will learn it anyways quickly.

[msalama]

I wouldn't compare going through school with a willingness to read various ramblings in less that stellar English by some dumbo off the Internet if I were you.

 

Now, let's reiterate a bit. I said that the ZA is a capable COIN AC, provided that SEAD / SAM suppression has been taken care of. To which you responded by spouting about how various AA platforms are a deadly threat to it - AND to which I'll now respond, again, that it is a capable COIN platform, provided that SEAD / SAM suppression has been taken care of. So to explain it to you slow and easy once again: I know various AA and SAM platforms are deadly to it, but in order to use it effectively, one needs to provide some SEAD / SAM suppression support.

 

So what this all boils down to is as follows. Everything you said concerning this I already took into account originally by stating that you need to provide some SEAD / SAM suppression support if you want to use the bird effectively. So who's actually the one who can't read here?

Edited March 23, 2016 by msalama

[SFC Tako]

I think the Albatros is big fun in COIN-operations. Provided they're not taking place in hyper modern Tom Clancy-environments. I had a ball testing it in my Outremer-campaign (set in the "good old days"). Sure it's dangerous to get shot at but hey, that's combat for you ;)

[Chrinik]

Pro-Tip for Combat:

Getting shot at sucks.

Getting hit sucks even more.

Avoid both as best as possible.

[msalama]

A pro-tip for crazies: use the ZA as a divebomber. Works like a hose.

[SFC Tako]

Chrinik and msalama: You guys tellin' it like it is! [gang sign]