Subferro Posted May 13, 2017 Posted May 13, 2017 Any chance for the GBU-54? It's the LJDAM. :D Asking the important questions (I know it's a plus, but still)
Zeus67 Posted May 13, 2017 Posted May 13, 2017 If you mean against aircraft radios, the assumption is safe. Against radars, it is not. This pod is a communications jamming device and there's no indication that it is used against radars. "The Intrepid Tiger II pod works by actively monitoring for enemy communications at certain bandwidths and then selectively jams frequencies that are being used by the bad guys once they start talking. This capability allows for a secondary communications intelligence ability, so the pod can be used to actually eavesdrop on the enemy's chatter as well as disrupting it. The pod can also actively jam known bandwidths that are commonly used to initiate IEDs, such as those used by cellular phones or garage door openers." From GlobalSecurity.org: The Marine Corps plans to upgrade its Intrepid Tiger II jamming pods to support both communications and radar jamming, and develop a system to integrate air and ground electronic warfare units with other payloads designed to be used on any platform. The Intrepid Tiger II (IT II) is a precision pod designed to provide Marine Corps fixed and rotary wing aircraft with a distributed, adaptable and networked Airborne Electronic Warfare capability that can be controlled from the cockpit or by a ground operator. Its open architecture design and rapid reprogrammability give IT II the flexibility and adaptability to meet current and future threats. IT II (V)1 is flown on the AV-8B and F/A-18 A++/C/D aircraft and currently deployed in support of Marine Corps operations worldwide. ... MEU commanders and the USMC fixed wing platforms now possess an organic electronic warfare capability. The Marines needed to secure Electronic Warfare as an organic capability for the MEU. That is why the AV-8B was the first platform to receive the Intrepid Tiger II capability. The MEU is the lowest level of the Marine Air-Ground Task Force. Using the Harrier with Intrepid Tiger II, the Marines continued close air support using a combination of offensive and defensive anti-air warfare, deep air support, conventional and specific weapons. In addition, they relied on combat air patrol, armed escort missions, and offensive missions against enemy ground-to-air defenses. Full article here: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/systems/an-alq-231.htm Page was modified in 2016 but it indicates that the Intrepid Tiger II has been used as an all spectrum jammer (radios and radar) in Afghanistan since 2014. Or at least that is how I read this article. "Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning." "The three most dangerous things in the world are a programmer with a soldering iron, a hardware type with a program patch and a user with an idea."
sirscorpion Posted May 13, 2017 Posted May 13, 2017 @zeus67, I really do hope we get the APKWS, "just fyi Polly dynamics is also considering it for the bo105 ROK" One question, will the harrier we are getting get a MAWS or MWS? all i found is that it uses the AN/ALR-67, though some newer sources indicate that the AAR-57 some time around 2004. "though i have never seen it on a harrier so far" Edit: yes LJDAM will be nice on triple racks
Zeus67 Posted May 13, 2017 Posted May 13, 2017 @zeus67, I really do hope we get the APKWS, "just fyi Polly dynamics is also considering it for the bo105 ROK" One question, will the harrier we are getting get a MAWS or MWS? all i found is that it uses the AN/ALR-67, though some newer sources indicate that the AAR-57 some time around 2004. "though i have never seen it on a harrier so far" Edit: yes LJDAM will be nice on triple racks No MAWS nor MWS. I have checked all available images for sensor locations and there are none. Without the sensors it is impossible to add those devices. "Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning." "The three most dangerous things in the world are a programmer with a soldering iron, a hardware type with a program patch and a user with an idea."
sirscorpion Posted May 14, 2017 Posted May 14, 2017 No MAWS nor MWS. I have checked all available images for sensor locations and there are none. Without the sensors it is impossible to add those devices. Thanks for the answer, yeah figured saw looked into hundreds of pics and could not find one, surprisingly i found that there was a study and budget for an MAWS some time around 1994 not sure what happened to it, another attempt was made in the early 2000s for the AAR57 also didn't seem to work out. I would assume its all down to the but the F35 is around the corner logic.
kubajs Posted May 14, 2017 Posted May 14, 2017 If you are thinking about APKWS try contacting Poly-Dynamics. They already showed some pictures of their renders of this weapon. Maybe they already have the much needed info :) PC Specs: i5-4690K (SilentiumPC Fera 2),MSI GTX-1070, MSI GAMING 5 Z97, 4x4Gb DDR3 1866Mhz CL9 Hyper X,ZALMAN 600W, 120Gb SSD, 240Gb SSD, 1Tb HDD, 1st 27´ BenQ GL2760 2nd ASUS VH222, HOTAS Warthog, Saitek rudder paddles Most hours (from most to least) on Mig-21Bis, Ka-50, F/A-18C, Mirage 2000C, A-10C, AJS-37, F-14B, UH-1H, Mi-8MTV2 and the rest
twistking Posted May 14, 2017 Posted May 14, 2017 (edited) what about the AIM-120 AMRAAM? we do get the APG-65 with the b variant harrier don't we? *edit* oh, i just read, that the non plus b variant did not have the radar. my bad! Edited May 14, 2017 by twistking My improved* wishlist after a decade with DCS *now with 17% more wishes compared to the original
sirscorpion Posted May 14, 2017 Posted May 14, 2017 what about the AIM-120 AMRAAM? we do get the APG-65 with the b variant harrier don't we? *edit* oh, i just read, that the non plus b variant did not have the radar. my bad! There is a plan for the AV8b II Plus when the f18c is out, "in other words when the new ED ground radar is ready"
twistking Posted May 14, 2017 Posted May 14, 2017 oh, cool. the APG-65 radar should give the harrier some multirole capability with the aim-120 and would make it even more appealing to me:) i would probably be an addition to the module and not a seperate module, right? My improved* wishlist after a decade with DCS *now with 17% more wishes compared to the original
Zeus67 Posted May 14, 2017 Posted May 14, 2017 oh, cool. the APG-65 radar should give the harrier some multirole capability with the aim-120 and would make it even more appealing to me:) i would probably be an addition to the module and not a seperate module, right? I cannot say anything beyond the fact that we will develop the PLUS when we get an AG radar. "Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning." "The three most dangerous things in the world are a programmer with a soldering iron, a hardware type with a program patch and a user with an idea."
twistking Posted May 14, 2017 Posted May 14, 2017 I cannot say anything beyond the fact that we will develop the PLUS when we get an AG radar. still good news to me:) My improved* wishlist after a decade with DCS *now with 17% more wishes compared to the original
Chrinik Posted May 17, 2017 Posted May 17, 2017 Very exited for the list of weapons and the possibility of the APKWS, it´s going to add a ton of capability and will probably be a favorite weapon for many. Being able to precision guide HEAT rockets into APCs and soft targets, and carrying tons of them, is going to be very deadly indeed. And it shouldn´t be too hard apart from the model...I mean code wise, since the needed mechanics are already in the sim. But don´t quote me on it. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] GCI: "Control to SEAD: Enemy SAM site 190 for 30, cleared to engage" Striker: "Copy, say Altitude?" GCI: "....Deck....it´s a SAM site..." Striker: "Oh...." Fighter: "Yeah, those pesky russian build, baloon based SAMs." -Red-Lyfe Best way to troll DCS community, make an F-16A, see how dedicated the fans really are :thumbup:
Silvern Posted May 18, 2017 Posted May 18, 2017 (edited) Does this variant of Harrier have the capability to carry AIM-9P and AIM-9P5 in RL? Edited May 18, 2017 by Silvern
Tirak Posted May 18, 2017 Posted May 18, 2017 Does this variant of Harrier have the capability to carry AIM-9P and AIM-9P5 in RL? I don't see why not, it can carry the AIM-9M which is more advanced than the P5. The P5 is just a P5 motor with an M head on it.
Vampyre Posted May 18, 2017 Posted May 18, 2017 Does this variant of Harrier have the capability to carry AIM-9P and AIM-9P5 in RL? AIM-9P and AIM-9P5 are Air Force missiles. In real life you will not see it on a Harrier. Truly superior pilots are those that use their superior judgment to avoid those situations where they might have to use their superior skills. If you ever find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck! "If at first you don't succeed, Carrier Landings are not for you!"
Tirak Posted May 18, 2017 Posted May 18, 2017 AIM-9P and AIM-9P5 are Air Force missiles. In real life you will not see it on a Harrier. The P4 and P5 weren't even used by the Air Force if I recall correctly. They were exports so the allied nations could get their hands on L and M type seekers.
Vampyre Posted May 18, 2017 Posted May 18, 2017 The P4 and P5 weren't even used by the Air Force if I recall correctly. They were exports so the allied nations could get their hands on L and M type seekers. Regardless of whether the USAF used them or not, NAVAIR never procured them. They were a missile developed for the USAF even if the USAF never actually used them. The AIM-9P and its iterations are based on the airframe of the AIM-9J and a lot of them were upgrades to the existing stocks of USAF AIM-9J's. Truly superior pilots are those that use their superior judgment to avoid those situations where they might have to use their superior skills. If you ever find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck! "If at first you don't succeed, Carrier Landings are not for you!"
Sealpup Posted May 30, 2017 Posted May 30, 2017 Can Intrepid Tiger jam missile data-link signals? Would be interesting if the thing could force a WVR engagement by causing all Fox-3 shots to go maddog.
WinterH Posted May 30, 2017 Posted May 30, 2017 Regardless of whether the USAF used them or not, NAVAIR never procured them. They were a missile developed for the USAF even if the USAF never actually used them. The AIM-9P and its iterations are based on the airframe of the AIM-9J and a lot of them were upgrades to the existing stocks of USAF AIM-9J's. Weren't Navy and Air Force Sidewinders two separate and mostly incompatible lines before the AIM-9L? I seem to recall reading they differed to the degree of requiring different launchers as one had coolant in the missile, and the other got it from the aircraft or the rack. 1 Wishlist: F-4E Block 53 +, MiG-27K, Su-17M3 or M4, AH-1F or W circa 80s or early 90s, J35 Draken, Kfir C7, Mirage III/V DCS-Dismounts Script
Automan Posted May 30, 2017 Posted May 30, 2017 (edited) You're right, after the joint develop of AIM-9B, USN and USAF choose a different approach and technology on their sidewinders: naval sidewinders were adopting Nitrogen coolant, while air force sidewinders were using Peltier thermoelectric cooling. The divergences were stopped with introduction of AIM-9L A good reading here: http://www.ausairpower.net/TE-Sidewinder-94.html Edited May 30, 2017 by Automan fixed link and typo ACER Predator Orion 9000: W10H | Intel i9-7900X OC@4.5Ghz | 8x16GB Crucial Ballistix Sport | Sapphire GTX1080TI | Intel 900P 480GB | Intel 600P 256GB | HP EX950 1TB | Seagate Firecuda 2TB ACER Predator XB281HK: 28" TN G-SYNC 4K@60hz ThrustMaster Warthog Hotas, TPR, MFD Cougar Pack, HP Reverb Pro
Vampyre Posted May 30, 2017 Posted May 30, 2017 Weren't Navy and Air Force Sidewinders two separate and mostly incompatible lines before the AIM-9L? I seem to recall reading they differed to the degree of requiring different launchers as one had coolant in the missile, and the other got it from the aircraft or the rack. Yes, and the J, N, and P were developed within the USAF line. Truly superior pilots are those that use their superior judgment to avoid those situations where they might have to use their superior skills. If you ever find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck! "If at first you don't succeed, Carrier Landings are not for you!"
Shrike88 Posted February 9, 2018 Posted February 9, 2018 what about these munitions Greetings, Have been reading as well as seeing in the NATOPS manual as well as referencing on STRATFOR and wiki. that there were several other types of munitions that are not added, Zeus are you planning on adding in the future ? most ideally the CBU-87 and CBU-97 GATOR ? These are already in the game for the A-10 and would love to have them on the harrier. Also the BLU-100 series family of incendiary bombs Thanks
GGTharos Posted February 9, 2018 Posted February 9, 2018 You're more likely to jam a receiver that's actually attempting to receive a signal from that direction - ie. the guiding radar. The data-link itself, I'd say 'good luck with that', but it's easy to be wrong here :) Can Intrepid Tiger jam missile data-link signals? Would be interesting if the thing could force a WVR engagement by causing all Fox-3 shots to go maddog. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
Jenrick Posted February 10, 2018 Posted February 10, 2018 Also the BLU-100 series family of incendiary bombs IIRC that's on hold until ED/DCS gets incendiaries in general. it's on the list, but not until ED adds it to the actual engine. -Jenrick
MustanGrande Posted February 11, 2018 Posted February 11, 2018 These are the weapons available to the AV-8B N/A: AIM-9M MK-81 MK-82 LD MK-82 Snakeye MK-82 AIR MK-83 LD MK-20 Rockeye GBU-12 GBU-16 GBU-38 (JDAM) BDU-33 AGM-65D Maverick (IR) AGM-65E Maverick (Laser) AGM-65K Maverick (CCD) AGM-65H (Training) AGM-122 Sidearm (Sidewinder based Anti-radiation missile. To be developed by us) LAU-10 (FFAR x 4 HE) LAU61C (FFAR x 19 HE) LAU61C (FFAR x 19 WP) LAU68D (FFAR x 7 Practice) LAU68D (FFAR x 7 HE) LAU68D (FFAR x 7 WP) LAU68D (FFAR x 7 Parachute illumination) LAU68D (FFAR x 7 Practice smoke) FFR = Free Flying Rocket HE = High Explosive WP = White Phosphorous We are considering the following: APKWS (Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System): basically a laser guided Hydra rocket. I cannot find a US military designation for it yet. ALQ-231 Intrepid Tiger II Electronic Warfare pod. This one is fairly new since it seems it has been used by the USMC since 2012. From what I have read it does more than just jamming enemy radars. It can actually jam radio communications, including cellphones. It has been used in Afghanistan and Iraq to jam radio detonators frequencies. It does not need a systems officer on board the aircraft, since it can be remotely controlled from the ground. From this 2012 article: https://www.dvidshub.net/news/86489/yuma-hosts-first-flight-new-electronic-warfare-system#.U3fPSPldXNk Very cool! It's a shame not seeing the Mk-77 on the list, though. I'm told it'll be included on the F/A-18, though. You know. In case you wanted to pinch some off of them. lol
Recommended Posts