Additional weapons for AV-8B

[DaveRindner]

AV-8B is capable of carrying Harpoon and JDAMs. Those weapons are already in DCS. Would be nice of RAZBAM or 4th party to make those weapons available. Might even be worth a price of extension module, like NS430, but for weapons.

[ChickenSim]

The Harrier can't carry Harpoons. Wikipedia (and its cited source) is wrong about that one.

 

JDAMs (32/38/54) are in development, but given that the module is in early access other supporting avionics systems have to be completed before those weapons can be integrated.

Edited July 26, 2018 by ChickenSim

[Shadow_1stVFW]

I also wouldn't support opening the door for pay to carry weapons. That's a slippery slope that has no good end in sight.

 

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[DaveRindner]

I see, if I understand you right, having developers monetize minor expansions creates a 'online game token charge' where people use money to purchase cheats. It becomes addictive, especially in minors or immature adults.

OK, maybe. But it also opens doors for creativity and expansion of DCS sphere with well developed munitions and avionics, instead of Online community cheats.

 

For example, availability of JHMQS and AIM-9X variant, for Harrier.

Replacement of Litening TPOD with Sniper/XR.

 

There is an online DCS Mirage 2KC centered virtural squadrons. They have modded, I guess through LUA, for their DCS: M2KC to carry IRIS-T ASRAAM, AIM-120C. Munitions that are unavailable in stock DCS. I have no clue whether IRIS-T and ASRAAM have plausible RW performance, or their Mirage launched AIM-120C has similar performance to DCS stock AIM-120C.

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

DCS is a simulator: it is meant to simulate real life as much as possible within the limitations of what is possible on desktop computers.

 

Do what you want with mods for single player or your own multi-player server, but it will - and should- always break the Integrity Check and will be frowned upon by the vast majority of the DCS fanbase.

 

Other than that, what ChickenSim said.

[dimitrischal]

Do you really believe the harrier can carry harpoons? I mean ffs they would be inches from the ground just crying for an accident to happen. How would you target them without AG radar?

As for payable expansion weapons... well that would be a nightmare....

[jojo]

I also wouldn't support opening the door for pay to carry weapons. That's a slippery slope that has no good end in sight.

 

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

+1

 

We would en up paying real money for virtual fuel and ammunition on our virtual jets :doh:

[jojo]

Do you really believe the harrier can carry harpoons? I mean ffs they would be inches from the ground just crying for an accident to happen. How would you target them without AG radar?

As for payable expansion weapons... well that would be a nightmare....

 

While I surely don’t support Harpoon on Harrier idea, a lot of ASuW tactics depend on off board designation.

Ships can launch Exocet/ Harpoon missiles on helicopters/ planes information and other the horizon.

 

If the weapon system is properly done, fighters should be able to launch anti-ship missiles on coordinates too.

[DaveRindner]

HarrierII's inboard pylons carry a huge tanks. Harpoon with its pylon is about the same size. Given sensor fusion and offboard sensors, targeting information would come from another set of eyes. So it is plausible, however I don't know for certain, and go with whats available. Marines are part of Navy. Anti-surface warfare is part of Navy's mission. It would not be a surprise if Marine Harriers have a contingency anti-surface mission, and train for it. Do actual Harrier squadrons have a anti-surface tasking in a given OPPLAN? I don't know. But it is an interesting mission. Especially in littorals, against smaller surface combatants. Two Harriers launching launching 4 -65F/G, or Harpoons can put a Molnya or a Grisha on the bottom or out of fight for good. During Operation Preying mantis(1988), A-6E armed with various anti-surface weapons put a bunch of Iranian fast boats and small combatants on the bottom. Feat that was repeated three years later during ODS with Iraqi missile corvettes. Navy's SH-60R Seahawks carry AGM-119 Penguin IR/imaging seeker anti-surface weapon (brevity Bruiser). In regards to DCS; AV-8B, Sidearm is a weapon that was marginal, not that many were converted from old Sidewinders, and those stocks were used up long time ago. Probably even before 1990's.

 

Getting back to DCS World. In DCS A-10C, I have engaged Molnyas and Grisha's with -65G. First G impact disables Molnyas air defense, second sinks it. If one 65G hits and Molnyas air defense guns go silent, sink it with a long cannon burst. Lovely time. Harpoon packs more anti-ship punch then IRMAV , and is longer ranged.

Edited July 29, 2018 by DaveRindner

[_HUSKER_]

And how much different version of AB-8V N / a and PLUS , why not implement the version with radar. Or there is no data on the version of the AV-8V Plus to implement it. Do not have to look for fighter pilots to cover you on the flight route .

[DaveRindner]

Plus replaces ARBS with APG-65 radar (from F/A-18C). To give HarrierII some serious AirAir punch with AIM-120B/C/D and radar quieing for AIM-9M/X. F/A-18C/D/E/F definitely carry Harpoon, so it is likely that HarrierII + can carry Harpoon. But we have N/A with ARBS, which is for CAS and strike mission. But DCS AV-8B also has TPOD, which should be able to provide targeting solution to Harpoon with some stadoff. Emphasis on should, I don't know if it actually does, or if Marine aviators on N/A train for that mission, in real world.

If anyone knows of what anti-surface missions that RN FAA and RAF Joint Force Harrier squadrons trained and tasked with, please post.

[DaveRindner]

I 've been practicing Zuni for anti-tank work in AV-8B N/A. That is one hell of a weapon. A single hit takes out a T-55. But I have to get way too close for effective work. Way inside effective range of all sorts of nasty heavy MG and cannons on BTRs, BMPs, ZSUs. In real world, assuming similar performance and slant distance from launch to tgt, aviators using Zuni against armored targets must have had severe pucker factor rolling onto the target.

THere is a laser guided version of Zuni that is cleared for any platform that carries the quad launcher. Would be nice to have a laser Zuni.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zuni_(rocket)

 

Zuni is basically a sidewinder airframe without guidance, folding fins only, and AG optimized warhead. In DCS AV-8B it is really powerfull weapon. IMHO, a ZUNI to a HarrierII is what an AGM-114 Hellfire is to AH-64 and AH-1. One good hit kills a tank.

[jojo]

If AV-8B have to perform anti-ship strikes, they have to make do with AGM-65.

 

Maybe I missed something, but I didn’t spot any reference to Harpoon in available real world manuals.

 

Until now, I can’t find any evidence of Harpoon on AV-8B.

[baltic_dragon]

I 've been practicing Zuni for anti-tank work in AV-8B N/A. That is one hell of a weapon. A single hit takes out a T-55. But I have to get way too close for effective work. Way inside effective range of all sorts of nasty heavy MG and cannons on BTRs, BMPs, ZSUs. In real world, assuming similar performance and slant distance from launch to tgt, aviators using Zuni against armored targets must have had severe pucker factor rolling onto the target.

THere is a laser guided version of Zuni that is cleared for any platform that carries the quad launcher. Would be nice to have a laser Zuni.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zuni_(rocket)

 

Zuni is basically a sidewinder airframe without guidance, folding fins only, and AG optimized warhead. In DCS AV-8B it is really powerfull weapon. IMHO, a ZUNI to a HarrierII is what an AGM-114 Hellfire is to AH-64 and AH-1. One good hit kills a tank.

 

IIRC Razbam said they might include the laser - guided version, depending on the possibilities offered by the core DCS engine.

[joey45]

When we get the Sea Harrier we will get the Sea Eagle for anti shipping.

[ChickenSim]

F/A-18C/D/E/F definitely carry Harpoon, so it is likely that HarrierII + can carry Harpoon. But we have N/A with ARBS, which is for CAS and strike mission. But DCS AV-8B also has TPOD, which should be able to provide targeting solution to Harpoon with some stadoff. Emphasis on should, I don't know if it actually does, or if Marine aviators on N/A train for that mission, in real world.

 

I already told you in the second post in this thread that the Harrier does not carry the Harpoon.

 

Harpoons are mounted directly onto pylons that have BRU-32 suspension (SUU-63 in the Hornet's case) and appear to use the 30-inch suspension hooks (given they occupy about a quarter of the length of the 12' long missile). The Harrier pylons contain BRU-36s and only offer 14-inch suspension hooks.

 

That's not to say that it's impossible to perhaps create an adapter like they did with the F-16, but it also costs man-hours and money to integrate the weapon with the aircraft's electronics and avionics to allow the aircraft's computers to "see" the weapon and display the appropriate MPCD and HUD symbology, and also to conduct all the modeling and testing required to validate launch and safety envelopes, etc. It doesn't look like they did any of this with the Harrier.

 

Anti-surface warfare is not part of the Harrier's core mission set. Their core missions are to conduct Close Air Support, Air Interdiction, Armed Reconnaissance, and Strike Coordination and Reconnaissance from expeditionary shore-based sites. If a Harrier was asked to destroy a ship, it would fall under one of these missions.

 

The only reason Harriers eventually got the AIM-120 integrated despite having had the radar for many years prior was because it became a "core plus" mission to conduct Active Air Defense of amphibious ready groups and Sidewinders probably wouldn't cut the mustard for that.

 

IIRC Razbam said they might include the laser - guided version, depending on the possibilities offered by the core DCS engine.

 

I believe they were talking about the APKWS, which is the laser-guided version of the 2.75" Hydra 70 rockets.

 

I don't think the laser-guided Zunis ever saw fleet service with Harriers (or anyone else to my knowledge).

[jojo]

I don’t know if it’s true, but I read the AIM-120 was an export requirement from Italy at the beginning.

Italy and Spain have II+ and nothing else in their Navy wing to cover their task group.

[fragal]

We would need the Harrier II+ it carries the same radar as the hornet but would give the capability for Harpoons, Harms and 120's as well as an extra set of pylons for a larger weapons load. I think i read somewhere on the forums that the II+ (GR7/GR9) was being considered or already in development by razbam but on the back burner at the minute i suspect a lot of work is hinging on ED to complete the Hornet radar and it's associated ground modes before this can happen.

 

https://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/harrier/

 

and if we ever did get the II+ would it be included in the current harrier module or as a separate module (cough discount for current harrier owners? )

[Zadren]

Plus replaces ARBS with APG-65 radar (from F/A-18C). To give HarrierII some serious AirAir punch with AIM-120B/C/D and radar quieing for AIM-9M/X. F/A-18C/D/E/F definitely carry Harpoon, so it is likely that HarrierII + can carry Harpoon. But we have N/A with ARBS, which is for CAS and strike mission. But DCS AV-8B also has TPOD, which should be able to provide targeting solution to Harpoon with some stadoff. Emphasis on should, I don't know if it actually does, or if Marine aviators on N/A train for that mission, in real world.

If anyone knows of what anti-surface missions that RN FAA and RAF Joint Force Harrier squadrons trained and tasked with, please post.

 

My old GR7 Squadron used to train for anti-shipping raids. I believe their weapon of choice was the CRV7 rocket, and possibly 1000lb bombs.

Thinking about it now, it would seem like an act of lunacy to attack a warship, with a Harrier, carrying rockets.

Those boys seemed pretty sanguine about the whole affair though. :music_whistling:

[jojo]

We would need the Harrier II+ it carries the same radar as the hornet but would give the capability for Harpoons, Harms and 120's as well as an extra set of pylons for a larger weapons load. I think i read somewhere on the forums that the II+ (GR7/GR9) was being considered or already in development by razbam but on the back burner at the minute i suspect a lot of work is hinging on ED to complete the Hornet radar and it's associated ground modes before this can happen.

 

https://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/harrier/

 

and if we ever did get the II+ would it be included in the current harrier module or as a separate module (cough discount for current harrier owners? )

 

Ok, so you didn't read anything above...

 

No Harpoon on AV-8B, even the II+.

And I'm waiting to see anything to support the AGM-88 claim.

[joey45]

I can't find any pics of a harrier carrying and or firing a Harm or Harpoon missile.

 

That goes with the Sea Eagle as well.

[Simicro]

I would really love AGM-88 HARM for the Harrier however it seems that such a configuration does not exist.

 

From a Retired flight test / systems engineer / engineering lead:

 

I believe we could probably find a set of adaptors that would allow hanging an AGM-88 on a Harrier, but I don’t think that the Operational Flight Plan (OFP) software or Stores Management System (SMS) software has ever been set up to controls the setup and launch of tge HARM.

 

Iirc, the mission and stores management computers were near maxed out in the AV-8 so tgere may not be capacity to add the new weapon. On the other hand the F-A-18s (which the marines also fly) have a very strong HARM mechanization.

Source : click here

[Kozality]

Reading this, I got really curious about the Harpoon capability, since I've seen it referenced numerous places that it was supported. But I haven't seen a picture of it actually being carried, and nothing concrete akin to a manual stating it's a capability. I wondered if it was one of those instances where a claim was made somewhere, and a lot of other guides repeated it without doing an individual check.

 

 

I ducked on over to AirVectors to see what Greg said over there. Here's the bit on the Harrier II: http://airvectors.net/avav8_3.html

 

 

"The USMC ended up in some squabbles with the Spanish and Italians over Harrier II weapons qualification. Although the new AN/APG-65 radar of the AV-8B+ was capable of supporting BVR air combat using AMRAAM, or "over the horizon" surface attack using the AGM-84 Harpoon antiship missile, the Marines were slow to qualify AMRAAM and showed little interest in qualifying the Harpoon, antiship attack not being an ordinary USMC mission.

The Spaniards and Italians did want these capabilities, and in fact apparently believed when they helped fund the integration of the AN/APG-65 to the Harrier II that adding such capabilities was the specific point of the exercise. AMRAAM was finally qualified for use by Spanish and Italian Harrier IIs through a software upgrade to the AN/APG-65, and photos of their Harrier IIs carrying AMRAAMs are not unusual; the USMC didn't get around to announcing qualification of AMRAAM until 2009. Some sources claim the Harpoon was finally qualified, but if so details are hard to find, as are pictures of a Harrier II carrying Harpoons."

 

Regarding HARM, I haven't seen anything at all regarding it. HARM requires the HTS anyways though, yeah? I'd think that would be a lot farther fetched than AIM-120 or AGM-84 employment.

 

 

 

Sources for the article are at the bottom.

[Sierra99]

HarrierII's inboard pylons carry a huge tanks. Harpoon with its pylon is about the same size. Given sensor fusion and offboard sensors, targeting information would come from another set of eyes. So it is plausible,

 

No...it's not plausible. The Harrier cannot carry Hapoons. Period. The B-61 tactical nuke is smaller than a Harpoon AND a fuel tank...Harriers can't carry them. Why? because there is far more to "carrying a weapon" than whether or not it fits under the wing.

 

First, In the real world it takes more than modifying a .lua file to qualify a weapon for use on an aircraft. Those modifications cost money...lots of it.

 

Second, Every single unit in the military has a specific wartime mission. That is what they are manned for, that is what their training time is dedicated to and what they are proficient in. There are units specifically tasked with employing Harpoons during combat...they have training money and time allocated to make sure they can employ the harpoons effectively if necessary. If a unit has a different mission...say marine AV-8B harriers...there is no reason to

A. Spend the money modifying the aircraft to carry the harpoon...

B. Spend the money training AV-8 Crews to employ the harpoon...

[Fri13]

DCS is a simulator: it is meant to simulate real life as much as possible within the limitations of what is possible on desktop computers.

 

We are already in a slippery slope in that. As there are things that has been developed and tested and confirmed to be operational, but they have not been taken in operational use because the war situation they were designed didn't happen, so they just simply were not shipped or they are just not listed in the sheet of paper not to be loaded even when warehouse has them.

 

Do what you want with mods for single player or your own multi-player server, but it will - and should- always break the Integrity Check and will be frowned upon by the vast majority of the DCS fanbase.

 

Vast majority of the DCS fanbase (users) are Single Players, not Multiplayers that is vast minority.

But regardless, single players should be allowed to do what they want, and they do.