Justification for GBU-12s on ITERs?

[mvsgas]

AFAIK, only the F/A-18C, the A-10C and hopefully the F-16C will be the only ones with a specific versions, specific year and specific software versions mention.

[schroedi]

[shagrat]

AFAIK, only the F/A-18C, the A-10C and hopefully the F-16C will be the only ones with a specific versions, specific year and specific software versions mention.

And this only to prevent this useless discussions about weapon loadout it "should, could, may, potentially, likely, under certain circumstances, on another plane/variant/version/built no., according to a/the/another manual/reliable source/photograph/video, _insert arguments here_ ..." definitely get to be realistic. ;)

[Shadow_1stVFW]

AFAIK, only the F/A-18C, the A-10C and hopefully the F-16C will be the only ones with a specific versions, specific year and specific software versions mention.

 

Right?! I mean, for me this isn't really an issue. I think it's fun finding the information. But folk are going to carry whatever the game lets them carry. (Think guys taking like 14 or whatever MK-82s on the soon to be Tomcat or 14 GBU-12s on the Harrier.) I sincerely doubt the in game loadouts will change.

 

I personally go with loadouts that make sense in terms of drag, performance and mission. So I'm not carrying more than 4 GBUs (MAYBE 6 in a pinch, but not likely).

 

Like I said, I think it's fun finding stuff out, but sometimes I think people get WAY to into finding out exactly how things are supposed to work.

 

In my head, this is a sim, at the end of the day, I want this experience to be believable or realistic. I guess it's a hard thing to explain, but I'd rather be able to believe I'm doing things realistically than actually do it realistically in some cases. I don't know, that sounds more dumb when I read it than in my head, I'm going to quit ranting, I'm way off topic.

[mvsgas]

Right?! I mean, for me this isn't really an issue. I think it's fun finding the information. But folk are going to carry whatever the game lets them carry. (Think guys taking like 14 or whatever MK-82s on the soon to be Tomcat or 14 GBU-12s on the Harrier.) I sincerely doubt the in game loadouts will change.

 

I personally go with loadouts that make sense in terms of drag, performance and mission. So I'm not carrying more than 4 GBUs (MAYBE 6 in a pinch, but not likely).

 

Like I said, I think it's fun finding stuff out, but sometimes I think people get WAY to into finding out exactly how things are supposed to work.

 

In my head, this is a sim, at the end of the day, I want this experience to be believable or realistic. I guess it's a hard thing to explain, but I'd rather be able to believe I'm doing things realistically than actually do it realistically in some cases. I don't know, that sounds more dumb when I read it than in my head, I'm going to quit ranting, I'm way off topic.

 

To me is amusing to see the guys that load everything they can, crash 3 or 4 time trying to take off. Finally get airborne, find something to shoot at, and go in for guns.

 

 

As for the modules:

I like it to match what ever aircraft they are modeling. Keep the cockpit to it native language, what ever it may be. I learn the KA-50 in Russian pit. I was even able to program the ABRISS and I can't speak a word of it. If it only has one skin, good by me, I don't need 20 versions. It can only be flown by one country, cool. If weapons are limited or not, if it is accurate good by me.

[Fangsout]

Hi all, fairly new to the Harrier and just got the NATOPS package for the aircraft. I am trying to find out where the ability to put GBU-12s on TERs is documented (actually I can't find justification for many of the loadouts available in DCS, but I figure this is an easy place to start).

 

Specifically, page XI-02-5 of A1-AV8BB-NFM-400 (Change 5/1 Feb 2003) shows that only one GBU-12 is authorized on both the inboard and intermediate pylon. This is backed up further by page 5-49 of the TAC-050 (Change 1/1 May 1998 ) I'm sure I'm missing something, but I can't find it. Where is it documented that we should be able to load GBU's on triple ejector racks?

 

Thanks.

 

 

 

The information you’re looking for isn’t listed in the NATOPS, it’s in another pub. GBU-12s on ITERs is a legal loadout though.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[The_Dan]

There are a few things to consider:

there are other load outs if it is a asymmetric air campaign (like these in RL the last 30 Years) or if it would be an all out war between similar opponents (like the pvp missions on most servers),

the AV-8B+ was/is most used with dumb bombs (because of it's unique accuracy) and the Harriers didn't exclusively operate from a boat or from FARPS. They also used airfields.

There may be comparable situations that fit with more or less realistic "what if" scenarios on MP servers where otherwise unrealistic load outs would fit with the military doctrines.

I think these "what if" scenarios (like for example Cold War got hot) do have a place in a realistic Simulation. As the most of us aren't real military pilots, i think a limitation to only fly scenarios that actually happend in RL is unnecessary.

[tom_19d]

The information you’re looking for isn’t listed in the NATOPS, it’s in another pub. GBU-12s on ITERs is a legal loadout though.

 

Thanks @Fangsout, missed this reply. What is the publication?