DCS, AV-8B Harrier, CCRP Dive Toss.

[Holbeach]

Real life 1983 Mission 1,

 

26,000 lb. 6 x Mk 82, (actually 7 x mk 82, but we can't do that), no gun. DI 30. 366 nm to Vaziani. Return at 42,000', land back at base with 0800 lb remaining.

 

Method.

T/O Novorossiysk, climb at 300 kts then M 0.68 102% to 33,000'. 1000lb fuel used.

Cruise M 0.76 @ 0.108 miles per pound. Drop bombs CCRP diagonal on runway.

 

Return.

 

18,000 lb. DI 20. at 42.000' @ M 0.75 0.18 MPP Start descent at close throttle, 230 kt, 70 nm from base. Land back at base with 0800 lb fuel remaining.

 

 

 

Result with DCS Harrier, using Natops charts.

 

 

Climb. 300 kt M 0.68 1000 lb fuel used.

Cruise, 33,000' M 0.76 87% FF 085 Fuel over target, 2,700 lb. Time 52' 0''.

 

Return. 42,000' M 0.75 74% FF 052

 

Critical 0800 fuel point, was 140 nm from base. Fuel ran out 5 nm from runway. Time 1 hr 48'.

 

 

Fuel usage.

 

 

33,000'. Actual, .088 nm per lb. Predicted .108 nm per lb.......... FF actual 085 ppm. FF Predicted 072 ppm.

 

 

42,000'. Actual, .141 nm per ib. Predicted .180 NM per lb...........FF actual 052 ppm. FF predicted 045 ppm.

 

Conclusion.

Feel free to check my figures.

 

This result makes it clear why this mission cannot work. It simply uses too much fuel compared to the real Harrier.

 

 

 

..

Edited May 1, 2019 by Holbeach

[whiteladder]

Just flew this and you can just about do it, but its very tight on the margins.

 

 

I broke the outward leg like this

 

 

Total fuel

7700

taxi 200lb total 7500

W/P 1 Climb to 30000 800lb total 6700

W/P 2 Cruise 13 mins at 71lb 923 total 5777

W/P 3 Cruise 13 Mins at 71lb 923 total 4854

W/P 4 Cruise 13 Mins at 71 lb 923 Total 3931

W/P 5 Cruise 11 Mins at 71lb 781 Total 3150

W/P 6 Cruise 40 Mins at 71 lb 2840 Total 310

W/P7 Land

 

 

Climb to about 32000 and then trimmed it so that it had a steady climb of about 250fpm.

 

 

The actual burn to start with is about 88lb, but as the fuel burns off and it creeps up in altitude by about WP4 the burn rate has dropped to about 69lb, at that point you are in front of the curve. Wp 5 is the Target and I reached that with about 3100 lb left.

 

 

On the return leg the Wp 6 is the descent point at 77 miles flew most of this at about 45 Lb , I reached this with 1400 lb, I pressed on at 44000 past this point until I was at 1100lb, then cut to idle

 

 

Landed with 707lb left in the tank , The trk file attached below.

deepstrike.zip

[Harlikwin]

Just a comment. The 1983 harrier had a different engine and wing/aerodynamics.

[Holbeach]

@ Whiteladder.

 

 

That steady climb, rather than my optimum constant altitude speed, does indeed give that lower fuel burn, which would have given me enough left to get back to base.

 

 

Good job!

 

 

As Harlikwin said, the 1983 model had a lower power 406 engine and it had one more bomb, but it does show that our Harrier could have done it, given that we don't know if the jet dropped to a lower altitude to drop its bombs or had a gun.

 

So the question is. Do you think the Razbam Harrier has a fuel burn that represents the real life version?

And. Have you tried direct comparisons between predicted and actual fuel burn?

 

 

Thanks..

Edited May 15, 2019 by Holbeach

[whiteladder]

@ Whiteladder.

 

 

That steady climb, rather than my optimum constant altitude speed, does indeed give that lower fuel burn, which would have given me enough left to get back to base. (Natops profile charts show that climb).

 

 

Good job!

 

 

As Harlikwin said, the 1983 model had a lower power 406 engine and it had one more bomb, but it does show that our Harrier could have done it, given that we don't know if the jet dropped to a lower altitude to drop its bombs or had a gun.

 

So the question is. Do you think the Razbam Harrier has a fuel burn that represents the real life version?

And. Have you tried direct comparisons between predicted and actual fuel burn?

 

 

Thanks..

 

 

I think the answer is yes and no, I think in parts of the envelope it matches quite closely and in others parts its way off.

 

 

My test isn`t a good test of accuracy, because I tried to fly the most fuel efficient profile, it wasn`t a tactical profile. Although think I could have saved another 300lb of fuel with a better descent, if I had flown a proper Hi Lo HI profile I think I would have struggled to make it.

 

 

Also I had no wind in the mission, that would make a big difference.

 

 

Have you seen the following document AV-8B_Harrier_II_SAC_-_October_1986?

 

 

This has a range of profiles and weapons loads with the specific ranges for each.

 

 

I might try one of these with the fuel plan from the natop and see what it comes out like.

[Holbeach]

No I haven't seen that doc, (OK, found it. Bare in mind it uses the early 406 engine), but I've just completed a L-L-L mission, 4,000' (3000') 300 kt DI 40 No loiter, but 5 min combat at max thrust, for 158 nm radius.

 

 

Predicted cruise flow is (082) and actual flow 120 on the outward leg start, with 69% at 300 kts

 

 

Combat @ sea level. 5 min at 102% FF 295 (206) M 0.84. Pickle, 3,500 lb 27' 42''.

Return. 4000' (3000') 300 kt 62% FF 105 (075) M 0.5 0800 at 22 nm land 0200 lb remain. 58' 41''.

( As ever, comments are welcome).

 

Conclusion.

 

Consumption is higher at the lower levels, 33% and very high at full thrust continuous. If I'd have used full thrust max, which is very very high consumption, I wouldn't have made it back.

I'm guessing that these are the areas where most people will be, with their Harrier.

..

Edited May 15, 2019 by Holbeach

[Holbeach]

Here is an updated version of my previous SAM SA-11 Gadfly SEAD practice/training mission.

 

 

I find the Maverick seeker movement too fast (coarse) when trying to lock it. It's supposed to have a 2 speed rate, but I haven't been able to find out how.

 

Pay attention to the HUD 11 indicator. If it goes out, it's probably reloading and a Sidearm won't work. Use a Maverick.

 

 

Don't get too close to the Gadfly site. It's easy to forget the 3 Strella 10.

 

 

Samgori State Farm, SAM site, Vaziani. SEAD, Low Level Sidearm attack.

Edited May 9, 2019 by Holbeach
Added details.

[Holbeach]

Trying the F-86, as a comparison for fuel burn accuracy, with the Harrier.

 

 

1st test. Max endurance loiter clean.

Actual, on the gauge flow, in brackets

 

Predicted. 25000' 72% PPH 1250 (800lb)

..............20000' 69% 1300lb (500lb)

..............10000' 66% 1500 (500lb)

...............5000' 64% 1650 (600lb)

 

The fuel flow a lower altitudes is way below prediction.

As the alt increases, the rpm is increased to maintain CAS and the predicted fuel flow decreases. The actual flow increases. They come together at 45000'.

 

CAS 185kt M.69 PPH 1000 lb. 87% RPM (1000 PPH)

At 50000' I couldn't maintain CAS of 185 kts.

 

Harrier (too high) and F-86 (too low) are equally inaccurate as each other, but in different directions.

 

 

 

 

TBC.

..

Edited May 13, 2019 by Holbeach

[Harlikwin]

Sounds like you might have new calling in DCS, I'll bet its not the only one with a fuel flow thats off. Orrr, there might some issue with the whole engine. Though at a guess, as the FM's got tweaked drag values got tweaked, engine values got tweaked, and no one bothered to go back and tweak the fuel flow.

[Holbeach]

Studying graphs. So much information contained on a single sheet of paper. :book:

 

 

To be fair to the F-86, I've shown the fuel flow at the very low loiter rpm, where very few are likely to be at, so I'll try mission fuel flows next, where the power requirement is much higher.

 

 

Yes, it seems to be more of a DCS thing, which might have drifted over time.

..

[Vfa-81 Fix]

Yes, it seems to be more of a DCS thing, which might have drifted over time.

..

 

Back then when ED implemented the PFM for the F-15 I made a 90+ mins roundtrip at different speeds and altitudes and came home within 300 pounds of what I´ve calculated (which might be down to my sloppy flying).

 

I know they made some adjustments to the performance and power output after that and I have never tested again, but at least at one time, and for the F-15, it was pretty much spot on.

[Holbeach]

Back then when ED implemented the PFM for the F-15 I made a 90+ mins roundtrip at different speeds and altitudes and came home within 300 pounds of what I´ve calculated (which might be down to my sloppy flying).

 

I know they made some adjustments to the performance and power output after that and I have never tested again, but at least at one time, and for the F-15, it was pretty much spot on.

 

OK, Thanks.

 

 

Back in 2014 I made a F-15 video, 0 - Mach 2.5, which clearly shows the fuel burn at full AB. I will check to see if it is still the same, as there have been changes made to the FM since then.

 

2014: 40000' 95% M 2.561 FF 41800 pph.

 

2019: 40000' 95% M 2.606 FF 40450 pph.

 

No significant difference.

 

(I don't have any fuel burn graphs for the C, so I can't go any further).

 

..

Edited May 15, 2019 by Holbeach

[Holbeach]

Checking my F-86 vids from 2015 against today, showed no change whatsoever at all power settings, from 64% to 100%. So there is no drift over time.

 

It simply remains, that fuel flow is too low at the power settings that I've checked, mainly in the max loiter/range area.

E.G. 30000' 74% 1200pph (0800pph). 35000' 77% 1100pph (0900pph). It gets more accurate the higher you go.

 

As I'm only really interested to see if the Harrier fuel flow inaccuracy is unique, I conclude that it isn't.

 

 

..

Edited May 15, 2019 by Holbeach

[Holbeach]

"C" drive SSD O/S failure. Reference.

 

PC completely dead. (2 days trying to kiss life into it).

 

Installed.

New 500 gb SSD. £53.

New 10 pro O/S £12.

New net dongle £5.

 

 

O/S installed on new SSD "C" drive.

DCS still works on "D" HDD drive, but all Saved games file entries lost from C drive. Missions, tracks, screenies, etc, all gone.

Switch Assignments lost for X-52.

Repair/Update lost for DCS.

Programs on 3 HHDs still work, but are not recognised by the O/S. (register lost).

Steam. 24 games, most needed work. 2 don't work. Warthunder, WoWS, work OK.

 

 

D/L Logitek driver for X-52.

X-52 pinky switch shift.

 

No. 6 is the pinkie.

 

You have to assign it in the Saitek programmer before it will work in DCS.

 

Open profile editor, switch to grid view. Delete the Mode 1 + Pinkie, Mode 2 + Pinkie, Mode 3 + Pinkie. Save the profile with a name and close. Enable the saved profile for DCS.

 

This will enable your pinkey to be used as a modifier in DCS. (It sometimes gets corrupted with updates).

 

Downloading DCS to SSD. ( about 20 hours plus). HTTP failed with 4 gb to go. (85083.077 ERROR: Server capacity may be limited at the moment. Please, try again later).. Tranferred to the slower torrent load, (desparately slow). Torrent ground to a halt, so back to HTTP @ 350kbs. This is hard work!

 

Can the plane modules be transferred from "D" to "C" or do they need to be downloaded aswell?

 

 

This question has now become academic, as the "D" HDD has just failed, wiping out all of my remaining games (about 40 including 24 Steam). Plus all the other stuff that makes up 800 gb.

 

DCS download complete. About 26 hours.

 

 

Now starting Harrier download . 966 mb.

 

Installation was faultless. No activation required.

 

DCS opening time now about 16 seconds. With 1 mod (Harrier) installed, everything is zip fast, compared to what I've been use to.

 

Added Spitfire and L39. Apart from long DCS download, (my slow net), everything has been very easy to install.

 

At ingame opening screen.

Modules list: choose which Install, to start download.

 

Installed list: Click, serial number/clipboard/DRM/activate/.

 

Took about a month to get most stuff back and installed, mostly from backups.

..

Edited June 11, 2019 by Holbeach

[Holbeach]

My 1st encounter, after a lay up, with the mighty "Hermes" and my favourite airplane.

 

My thanks to joey45, for the perfect complement to the Harrier.

..

[Harlikwin]

Its a good mod. I just wish ED would import some of the carriers into the base game so it could be used online.

[westr]

My 1st encounter, after a lay up, with the mighty "Hermes" and my favourite airplane.

 

My thanks to joey45, for the perfect complement to the Harrier.

..

 

It’s a great MOD.

[Holbeach]

GCIP Dive Toss.

 

This is a 1st attempt at exploring the possibilities of using Dive Toss, with the Harrier CCIP to CCRP mode.

 

 

A simple mission to practice Take off from the Hermes, attack a group of troop carriers, protected by 2 Shilka and 3 Igla. No pre designation of target. No DMT. 12 Mk 82 slicks. Shallow dive. Late pull up. Hard left break to avoid Igla launch. Land back on the carrier.

 

 

 

 

 

..

Edited August 8, 2019 by Holbeach

[Harlikwin]

This is a 1st attempt at exploring the possibilities of using Dive Toss, with the Harrier CCIP to CCRP mode.

 

 

A simple mission to practice Take off from the Hermes, attack a group of troop carriers, protected by 2 Shilka and 3 Igla. No pre designation of target. No DMT. 12 Mk 82 slicks. Shallow dive. Late pull up. Hard left break to avoid Igla launch. Land back on the carrier.

 

 

 

 

 

..

 

Awful nice of them to bunch up like that in the open for you ;)

 

Technically the plane did use the ARBS for the weapons rlease calc when you switched from CCIP to CCRP.

 

Also where did you get that skin?

[Holbeach]

They're 50 mtr apart, spread randomly, no lines. If I make the spread larger, it just makes the target bigger and easier to hit. It favoures this type of none precision bombing.

 

No cover in Crimea!

 

 

This is just a proof of concept, first shot. There are 220 targets to choose from in this mission.

 

 

DMT doesn't work, so I can't use it 'till it gets fixed.

 

 

The skin................. is by, TheOneAndOnlyFrenchie, in the User Downloads.

 

 

..

Edited July 17, 2019 by Holbeach

[Harlikwin]

50m spacing is ok for built up areas or administrative travel for tanks. But its your mission.

[Holbeach]

50m spacing is ok for built up areas or administrative travel for tanks. But its your mission.

 

 

Try to suspend reality and technicallity for a minuit.

 

 

This is a dartboard, purely for test purposes, 950' alt, 450' across and evenly spread with targets to give an indication of fall of shot. They could be anything. It is for practice only.

 

 

 

It has 3 Igla and 2 Strella 13 to prevent close in CCIP.

 

 

The video shows 10000' pickle, 7500' Toss release at 3 nm. no DMT.

 

 

I am now exploring other approaches, which at the moment is, CCIP pickle at 20000', 18 deg dive for release at 15000' and so on, with different variations. Result is a very satisfying splat and would be ideal for a bridge.

 

 

Regards.

..

[Vfa-81 Fix]

Why do you even think you have to defend yourself here?

[Holbeach]

It seems to be that way, right from the start of this thread.

 

 

..

[Harlikwin]

Sorry if you took like that. Not my intent. Just figured I'd get a conversation going.