Please save the Mavs !

[Esac_mirmidon]

Thanks for the panties information.

 

Very useful

[Fri13]

I think this version of the Harrier is limited to E/F Mavericks, as has been stated. It is possible that the software literally won't be able to fire (or even detect) other versions on the pylons. I think most of the argument is around that little detail. Can it, or can it not?

 

The manual seems to say no, but that is by omission. It doesn't outrightly state that the others won't work. However, this is reasonable, the kind of maverick the plane they get is determined by A) what is available, B) The war planners' chosen target, C) the expected conditions at the target. The NATOPS for the USMC won't mention weapons the USMC never bought or used, but its not a definitive document about every little bit of weapons' compatibility. It only states the useful information the pilot needs to know.

 

If there is no statement "X and Y doesn't work" or "Only A and B works" then it is not valid conclusion that others don't work.

 

If you have in stock four kind missiles for different purposes. And you have multiple aircrafts for different purposes, and one of the aircrafts is designed for specific purposes and two of the four missiles fills the requirements for that, you can save lots of time, money, training, lower risks etc by simply writing the procedures to use those two missiles. It goes all the way from the supply line to servicing and ground crew training and tasks to pilots training, regardless can the airframe launch the other missiles than two.

 

It is very simple "Need to know" policy. And all is written in that mind. People who need to know and less they know, better. Less the pilots knows, then better.

As last thing you really want, is to get your pilots as prisoners as war or go to your enemy side and know every single secret detail there is in your aircrafts capabilities.

 

Like if you have already a flight instructors and normal pilots who has no experience of what so ever of launching a such basic counter measurement like a flare, so they would know how it behaves, how it looks, how it sounds, how it feels and training to use them, why they would have all the information of every single other thing?

 

There are pilots and then there are test pilots and then there are engineers and their own testers. Everyone having a different level of knowledge how things works. And such insight informations are not written in any easily available manual.

[Fri13]

Thanks for the panties information.

 

Very useful

 

[SUNTSAG]

Hi All,

 

I have watched this thread carefully and have decided to weigh in with just my humble opinion.

 

Talking of panties a few seem to have theirs in a knot over this LOL :megalol:

 

FWIW for me this is very straight forward....The USMC (Dept of the Navy or whomever)decided it would use only the E and F Maverick variants based upon their operational needs. (increased warhead penetration etc etc). So they will order and stock the items accordingly and the aircraft SMC would presumably be programmed/calibrated to cater for those specific weapon types.

 

Therefore for me it is fitting that we only have available the preferred USMC load out and this should apply to the USMC Bug too on release(will it???? I don't know).

 

Don't get me wrong I am sure if a major war took place and stock piles or manufacturing were interrupted, I am sure the SMC is reprogrammable to accept different Maverick types but that's not the point just because it could, does not necessarily mean it should.....it's a last resort option surely.

 

IRL I have spent time with the Harrier and I have loved this aircraft since I was a child. I too like many others fly the AV-8B as if it were an RAF variant having said that you don't see me shouting for outrigger pylons/brimstone missiles/Martin Baker ejection seat/Nose mounted recon sensor/Ferranti moving map and Aden cannons, even though they could be fitted. Why?? because that would make it an RAF Harrier II. I know this is a bit extreme but you can see where I am going with this.

 

I would love an RAF Harrier but I have a USMC AV-8B and I am happy to have its load out configuration based upon the USMCs actual operational needs and requirements. Some may call it restrictive I feel its pertinent to RL simulation of operations, so I build my missions accordingly. Isn't that what DCS strives to provide? I am not a purist by any stretch of the imagination (how can I be.... pretending my AV-8B is an RAF Harrier lol :megalol:). Just my humble thoughts on the subject at hand....we all have our own opinions and that's what makes life interesting.

[lemoen]

Totally. This variant doesn't seem to have been used by anyone else, so that's probably the end of it.