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

[Harlikwin]

@ Harlikwin.

 

 

I don't have the updated ASL and DTM yet. I'll give it a good look as soon as I get it.

 

 

..

 

Thanks, I upgraded from stable to beta for the 14 and "new features". I'll probably go back to stable after a while since nothing earth shattering is in the pipeline. The "fixed" ASL line will no doubt be quite helpful for your tossing deliveries, as long as there isn't wind/movement.

[davidp57]

Also, have you noticed the harrier bombing system compensating for wind at all on any unguided delivery? I haven't seen it do it so I'm not sure its actually implemented.

 

It most definitely does compensate.

When bombing with aerodynamically challenged ("retarded" is not politically correct) bombs like the Mk82-AIR, the fall line is often at 30 to 45 degrees out of the vertical.

[Harlikwin]

It most definitely does compensate.

When bombing with aerodynamically challenged ("retarded" is not politically correct) bombs like the Mk82-AIR, the fall line is often at 30 to 45 degrees out of the vertical.

 

I haven't tried snakes yet, but I'll give it a go, rockeyes don't seem to be, they land to the side (but still kill because they are CB's). I'm also not sure what you mean by the fall line being out of the vertical? My understanding is the ASL line should be to the left or right of the target to compensate for wind or movment when using the ARBS/INS correctly.

[Harlikwin]

Well update...

 

I tried snakeyes.

 

Set mission editor for the same 25kt wind at all altitudes.

 

What I do see now is that the whole pitch ladder and velocity vector do seem to move off center. I "think" this is correct for a wind correction for flight and landing and such. However bombs still are still falling right of the target so I'm not sure its actually compensating for bomb drop, just wind drift for the plane?

Edited April 3, 2019 by Harlikwin

[Holbeach]

Well update...

 

I tried snakeyes.

 

Set mission editor for the same 25kt wind at all altitudes.

 

What I do see now is that the whole pitch ladder and velocity vector do seem to move off center. I "think" this is correct for a wind correction for flight and landing and such. However bombs still are still falling right of the target so I'm not sure its actually compensating for bomb drop, just wind drift for the plane?

 

 

A few quick runs with slicks, 22000' and 20kts crosswind and I came to the same conclusion.

Without wind, the accuracy was as expected.

 

 

Toss bombing had a much further drift, which was as expected.

 

 

DMT worked OK, with a lock on a T-72 at about 6.5 nm. which could be useful with Mavericks.

 

 

The ASL will help with CCRP Dive Toss, but with about 10 to 15 deg pull up and diagonal attack, if there is any crosswind.

 

 

..

[Holbeach]

DCS, Harrier, CCRP, Low Level Toss Bombing, Grumble 10 target.

 

 

 

Toss bombing. Trying out the updated ASL, which is now fixed to the target marker. It's a great improvement.

SA-10 long range Grumble SAM site is protected by 2 x Osa and 2 x Igla, 1 x Shilka. A low entry toss is performed with 8 x Mk 83 1000 lb bombs, to surprise the defenders. Chucking them over a small mountain, is a good way to do it .

 

 

 

 

 

Notes: To turn off Betty. UFC, ALT. ODU GPWS turn off.

 

..

Edited April 13, 2019 by Holbeach

[Holbeach]

How do you solve a problem like a Grumble?

 

 

Easy enough when there is plenty of cover, as in the previous videos.

 

 

But, how do you kill a Grumble in the open?

3 radars and 32 missiles.

Fast, long range and deadly.

 

 

SEAD, low level training missions.

Notes.

 

SA-10 sites.

 

Krymsk.

 

Flat surrounding land with trees. Maintain alt between 100' and 40' AGL (below tree level) and the incoming missile will not lock, despite SA-10 radar lock.

For Sidearm, pop up at 11nm briefly, launch and hit the deck. Incoming missiles will lock and then break.

 

For Snakeyes, carry on to target at LL then increase height to 200' AGL for a CCRP drop. SN66M SR is 140' tall. 30N6 TR is 91' tall.

Site is completely disabled if 30N6 TR, Flap Lid, engagement radar is destroyed. If SN 66M SR is destroyed, site operates at a reduced level.

Conclusion: If the 30 N6 is destroyed first by Sidearm, (it decides which one to hit), as in this video, then site is dead. Or target it with Snakeye. This means that you can now plink the rest at your leisure.

So this SA-10 site is protected by 3 x Igla and 1 x Strella 10, plus 1 x SA-10 at Kraznodar-Center, which overlaps, to prevent that.

 

 

Here is part of a video showing the basic attack mission, before the local defence is added.

 

 

 

Vaziani.

 

 

This SA-10 site is protected by 3 x Igla and 1 x Strella 10, plus 1 x Kub 6 to the SW, which overlaps this site.

Undulating surrounding countryside with distant mountains. More difficult to maintain required low level and to get a Sidearm lock.

Destroy all 3 Grumble radars plus Strella 10 as a bonus.

Carry 4 x Sidearm plus 2 AGM-65G or Snakeyes, for both missions.

..

Edited April 14, 2019 by Holbeach

[Holbeach]

DCS, Harrier, SEAD, SA-10, Rockeye, LL CCRP attack.

 

 

Attacking a "Grumble" site, Krymsk, protected by 3 x Igla and 1 x Strella 10, plus 1 x SA-10 at Kraznodar-Center, which overlaps. Site has been moved into woods, where Sidearm can't get at it without hitting trees, when fired from a low height.

Target 30N6 TR engagement radar. Weapon 12 x Mk 82 Snakeye plus 2 x Sidearm.

CCRP bombs, when pre designated, will guarantee you attack the correct radar and stay low. Sidearm will go for any radar on the site and will require a pop up, thereby exposing yourself to the Grumble.

 

First take out TR engagement radar with Snakeys. This will disable site. Then 2 tracking radars can be attacked with Sidearms from a greater height to miss surrounding trees. (Beware Strella 10).

 

Stay low (about the height of a medium tree) and nothing can get you. Weight is at 100%, so handling is sluggish..

 

 

 

 

Video made with OBS, from 1 original and 2 replays from the same mission.

 

 

..

Edited April 17, 2019 by Holbeach

[Holbeach]

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

The problem with Sidearms, is they don't loft like they should. This means a launch from low level will simply hit trees, building, etc.

It should leave the rails and go high, then drop on to the target.

 

It also won't hit a moving target from the side due to lag pursuit, an obvious disadvantage, (a problem shared with the SA-2).

 

The SA 11 Buk system and 3 x Igla, are on the edge of a wooded area, with 2 mobile Strella 10,to the north.

 

 

..

Edited April 20, 2019 by Holbeach
Changed scenario.

[Harlikwin]

Half the time I can't sidearms to even lock... Then again I'm usually trying to hit AAA.

[Holbeach]

Half the time I can't sidearms to even lock... Then again I'm usually trying to hit AAA.

 

 

Yes, this happens quite a lot to me, so in my scenarios, I make the assumption that the operator has turned off the radar to avoid detection. :music_whistling:

It's a WIP, so one day it might get sorted.

In the above mission, the first missile hit, but it took 3 runs to get the next one to lock, each time I was chased off by SA13. The last one was finished with a Maverick. A check to see why the Kub 6 wasn't firing, showed them to be stopped in the road and were humping each other like a herd of cows.

 

 

Looking on the positive side, malfunctions can make a mission more interesting. :megalol:

[Holbeach]

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

 

 

SA-11 Buk mission.

 

The Buk 11 uses stronger missiles than the Kub 6, but the big difference is, the 6 system has 1 radar and if you kill it, the whole site is dead. With the Buk 11, if you kill the radar, each launcher has its own radar, which makes it a more deadly opponent.

This means that the launchers are more important than the radar in a Sidearm attack.

So here we have an artillery regiment, protected by BUK 11 SAM site on the edge of a wood, facing west, with the east, protected by 3 Iglas in the wood. To the north are 2 Strella 10 on airfields.

The Buk 11, has 1 command, search radar and 2 launch/radar vehicles with 8 missiles total, plus their support trucks and a Strella 1.

 

We have 4 X Sidearm plus 2 AGM-65G and 3 wingmen.

 

 

Mission: Take out radar & launch vehicles.

 

Notes:

 

Sidearm. 1st one always launches OK, so does 2,3 and 4, but all at the same target. Otherwise it's difficult to get a launch when re targeted.

For the first time ever, an a.i. Harrier launched a missile and got a kill.

It's easy to forget the SA 13 to the north and run into it, to finish your day.

Remember to switch EXP on, which is now off by default. (sometimes).

 

 

 

Update: Sidearm targets search radars first. When launchers have used all their missiles, they reload slowly. Sidearm at this time won't work, because their radar is not emitting, so use other means, while their pants are down.

 

So. Come in high and bait missiles. Destroy them with chaff. Close in and Sidearm radar. Launchers won't launch whilst re loading, so hit them with Mavericks.

 

 

Update:

 

That worked well. If you get close enough (11nm) before the launchers run out, you might get a crack with a SA on it, while it's still emitting, otherwise go for the Flat Face first. Make some distance and line up from the West to get the launchers with a Mav before they wake up. If they do, then change to SA, lock and get out. Hopefully you will still have chaff or you're dead.

 

Trolling a bait for SAMs works, but just like fishing it's a bit slow, so makes a rather dull video.

 

Or.

 

Come in low down river valley under radar, pop up for a lock, Sidearm radar. Break off right, use undulating countryside for cover and chaff, come round again, pop up and Sidearm launcher. Break off right and draw remaining missiles. Come back with Maverick for 2nd launcher.

Don't break left or you end up in SA-13 territory.

 

 

This one is more video worthy, as it has more action.

 

 

 

..

Edited May 7, 2019 by Holbeach
Added details.

[Harlikwin]

I hate those things in MP...

[Holbeach]

I hate those things in MP...

 

 

Yes, I'm starting to dislike them too.

 

Update: Now that I'm getting to know them, they're not such bad chaps.

 

..

Edited April 25, 2019 by Holbeach

[Holbeach]

Relaxing With a Beer, missions.

 

 

In 1983, an AV-8B flew trials from USNTC at Patuxent River, Maryland.

 

Mission 1.

 

7 x 570 lb bombs were dropped on a target 366 nm from base and returned at 42000' landing back at base with 800 lb fuel remaining. No external fuel was carried.

 

Mission 2.

On a low level mission, the aircraft dropped 12 x 530 lb bombs on a target 160 nm from base, which included nearly 1 hr low level loitering time.

 

It has been suggested that our Harrier has high fuel consumption.

 

There's only one way to find out.

 

Fly 'em. :pilotfly:

 

Mission 1.

Novorossiysk to Vazziani is the correct distance for the 366 nm mission. We don't have a centre pylon, so we'll use 6 x Mk 82 plus gun pod. CCRP drop from about 30000'.

 

 

T/O weight 27064 lb. 7759 lb fuel. Flight to the target at 30000' 84% 0.75 mach 276 IAS FF 092. Pickle Vazziani. 2500 lb fuel remain. 2 bombs on runway. Return, Climb to 42000'.

80% FF 058 0.78 mach return.

Ran out of fuel 90 nm from Novorossiysk. after 1 hr 34 min. 0800 lb fuel remaining point, was 190 nm short of base.

 

 

Mission 2a.

Alt 3000' 82% FF 156 TAS 370 M 0.57 12 x Mk 82. Fuel over target 3300 lb. 27' 0'' flight time. No loitering, no combat.

Return. 3000' 75% FF139 M 0.6 fuel ran out 21 nm from base. Flight time 51'49''.

 

 

2b.

Alt 3000' 94.5% FF 204 TAS 469 M 0.72 Fuel over target 3.200 lb. 21' 38'' No loiter. No combat.

Return. climb to 41000' 97% FF 087 M 0.86. 40 nm from base zero throttle descent 38% FF 040 landed at base with 0800 lb fuel remaining.

 

 

2c.

29,467 lb. Alt 3000' cruise IAS 300 kts. 77% FF141 M 0.48 Fuel over target 4000 lb. 25' 50''. No loiter No combat.

 

Return. 3000' IAS 300 kts 70% FF124 Land 0800 lb remaining. 52' 10''.

 

 

Perfect mission except that we missed out the nearly 1 hour low level loitering time and combat time, (I don't see how that could be done IRL compared to Natops).

It's hard not to conclude, our Harrier is using too much fuel.

 

..

Edited April 29, 2019 by Holbeach

[whiteladder]

Holbeach.

 

I think you should try it with strakes instead of the gun pod. The drag index for the gun pod is 6.7 and the weight is 1300lb. A mk82 and the centre line pylon have DI of 3 and weight about 600lb. Not sure you would get 90 miles and still have 800lb left but would be interesting to see what difference it would make.

 

 

The problem we have in game that the ff rates are off. To make the return leg the bingo fuel level would need to be 3000lb. At this you should get 352 miles at 44000 and .77mach. The ff for this should be 40lb with a descent to sl at 78 miles. This should allow 200lb for a vl and 600lb reserve, which would match the real world test.

Edited April 26, 2019 by whiteladder

[Holbeach]

Holbeach.

 

I think you should try it with strakes instead of the gun pod. The drag index for the gun pod is 6.7 and the weight is 1300lb. A mk82 and the centre line pylon have DI of 3 and weight about 600lb. Not sure you would get 90 miles and still have 800lb left but would be interesting to see what difference it would make.

 

 

The problem we have in game that the ff rates are off. To make the return leg the bingo fuel level would need to be 3000lb. At this you should get 352 miles at 44000 and .77mach. The ff for this should be 40lb with a descent to sl at 78 miles. This should allow 200lb for a vl and 600lb reserve, which would match the real world test.

 

 

At the 0800 lb mark, I was still short by 190 nm.

I did ponder the gun pod question, as pictures of these test aircraft show them with and without pods and the mission doesn't state the loadout, only the bombs dropped.

I will try it again without pod, but this will give me a 530 lb advantage and big drag reduction.

 

At the 1000 lb mark, I will do a closed throttle decent to 5000' and then see how far I get.

 

Edit: There is a mission that is nearly identical to this one.

6 x mk 82, gun pod, no loiter or combat, H-M-H, 366 mm. That will sort it.

 

I polished my method and died only 28 nm from base. (4 bombs on runway, CCRP 34000').

..

Edited May 15, 2019 by Holbeach
Added detail

[Holbeach]

My conclusion, after flying a number of tests, against real life missions, is our Harrier is too thirsty.

 

 

So what happens now?

 

 

..

[Harlikwin]

My conclusion, after flying a number of tests, against real life missions, is our Harrier is too thirsty.

 

 

So what happens now?

 

 

..

 

Post it in the bug section with supporting data I guess. They might look at it.

[Holbeach]

They require data which mere mortals don't possess.

 

It was fun while it lasted, but now it's over.

 

Back to blowing stuff up!

 

Weeee!

..

[Harlikwin]

They dont have burn rate numbers in the nato ops?

[Holbeach]

I haven't been able to find any, in any publications I have.

..

[JaBoG32_Herby]

@Holbeach

You’re looking for this manual?

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=171464&d=1509565602

[Holbeach]

That's the one.

Thanks.

..

[Holbeach]

Using the easiest chart to use, sea level, early indications show a very high fuel flow excess with our Harrier at the lower speeds, 300 kts @ 64%. FF 114 DI 40. 26000 lb with 6 x Mk 82.

 

As the speed increases the difference decreases until the imbalance flows in the other direction.

So at around 87%, FF is 185 which is less than the chart flow.

 

The big difference is at full power, where our Harrier is using FF 345, much more than chart suggest.

 

The plot thickens.

 

 

I'm guessing that most people are tending to use full throttle, hence the assumption that the fuel flow is too high, which it will be at that setting.

FF @ 102% is 290 and FF @ 107.5 (max) is 354, for a gain of 4 kts.

..

Edited May 15, 2019 by Holbeach