Jump to content

HARM Loading Discussion


QuiGon
Go to solution Solved by QuiGon,

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Linx said:

Seems that 4x HARMs have not made it into this patch. 4 & 6 still can not be launched.

 

Has anyone else had any success with launching them?

 

I guess they haven't gone through, with their decision, I tried just now, it wont recognize 4 harm loaded.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Furiz said:

 

I guess they haven't gone through, with their decision, I tried just now, it wont recognize 4 harm loaded.

 

Just a bug probably. Maybe we ought to report it. 🙂

 

 

EDIT:

Seems it is coming next patch?


 

slika.png 

 

 


Edited by Linx
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Linx said:

 

Just a bug probably. Maybe we ought to report it. 🙂

 

 

EDIT:

Seems it is coming next patch?


 

slika.png 

 

 

 

Thank you for the update Linx! I was worried that ED changed their mind again lol. 

 

Could you please share an link to that post by BIGNEWY? Or let us know where you saw it? Thanks! 


Edited by SCPanda
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder, if a ship is wired for 4x HARMs, shouldn't it be able to carry and launch 4x Mavs, too? Now, unlike with HARMs, I have no idea if such a loadout was ever tested, and there might be separation/clearance issues, so maybe not, but I don't know.
That question has been asked in another thread. Can't remember if there was a conclusion.
I'm on my cell and don't have the link. Sorry!

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reenabling HARMs on 4 and 6 didn't make this patch, should be in the next one.

https://discord.com/channels/542985647502393346/543014378643914752/888507126241198122

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

REAPER 51 | Tholozor
VFA-136 (c.2007): https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3305981/
Arleigh Burke Destroyer Pack (2020): https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3313752/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Wags changed the title to HARM Loading Discussion
  • 2 weeks later...

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/news/changelog/
As I understand from DCS 2.7.6.13133 Open Beta - 2021·09·22

- Pylon 4 and 6 now got usable/launchable HARMS (no MAVs?) again for the F-16?

(So I guess there was a special workaround preventing equipt HARMs to launch from pylong 4&6 and MAVs were just restricted for loadout. Now this HARMs workaround got removed.)
and already since DCS 2.7.6.12852 Open Beta - 2021·09·17
- the mission editor tool for payload restrictions on individual pylons per plane was introduced.

 

So I guess the discussions about HARMs on stations 4 and 6 is finally over since the solution is already out for 7 days now and the mission designers take care of that. Added to my todo list. Wait.. What about just carrying for transport? 😂

[ ]  twitch.tv/eld0r — Chaos, dumme Sprüche, Chaos und keine Wiederholungen.  [ ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

After doing a fair bit of research, I cannot find one real life example of a F-16C Block 50 ever firing a AGM-88 from pylons 4 or 6.  I can't even find one manual that shows it was even possible.   I understand this is a game but if we are going to do fantasy why not let the MiG-29S use vikrs or laser guided bombs.  Or let the F-14 use jdams?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hodo said:

After doing a fair bit of research, I cannot find one real life example of a F-16C Block 50 ever firing a AGM-88 from pylons 4 or 6.  I can't even find one manual that shows it was even possible.   I understand this is a game but if we are going to do fantasy why not let the MiG-29S use vikrs or laser guided bombs.  Or let the F-14 use jdams?

Love these reverse psychology attempts😂

ED did their research and found out that some were able and some were not able to fire harm from 4 and 6 (this exact model, block and tape), not all of them were wired for HARM on 4 and 6, naming this fantasy module is really disrespectful to ED and their work.

 

Your post looks like a 12y/o not getting his candy.

You did a bit of research? where is that research? who did you speak to? where do they work, what rank/position in the US airforce do they have? which documents did you see, and how did you obtain those?

You don't have to tell us, tell that to ED, send them PMs, they are always open for new evidence.

Come to think of it, if you had some strong evidence you wouldn't come to the forum and insult someones work.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Hodo said:

After doing a fair bit of research, I cannot find one real life example of a F-16C Block 50 ever firing a AGM-88 from pylons 4 or 6.  I can't even find one manual that shows it was even possible.   I understand this is a game but if we are going to do fantasy why not let the MiG-29S use vikrs or laser guided bombs.  Or let the F-14 use jdams?

I don't really have a dog in this fight, certainly not going to loose sleep either way.... 

But reading your post just made me think of this ....

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well if we are going down this route,  then our viper should have APKWS and GBU 54/39 as they are and have used those in Afghanistan, Syria, Among other operational areas.  

 

https://theaviationist.com/2020/10/05/lets-have-a-look-at-the-gbu-39-sdb-and-apkws-markings-sported-by-the-f-16s-of-the-510th-fs-buzzards/

 

Something that is actually Operational.....

  • Like 1

Intel 8700k @5ghz, 32gb ram, 1080ti, Rift S

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Furiz said:

Love these reverse psychology attempts😂

ED did their research and found out that some were able and some were not able to fire harm from 4 and 6 (this exact model, block and tape), not all of them were wired for HARM on 4 and 6, naming this fantasy module is really disrespectful to ED and their work.

 

Your post looks like a 12y/o not getting his candy.

You did a bit of research? where is that research? who did you speak to? where do they work, what rank/position in the US airforce do they have? which documents did you see, and how did you obtain those?

You don't have to tell us, tell that to ED, send them PMs, they are always open for new evidence.

Come to think of it, if you had some strong evidence you wouldn't come to the forum and insult someones work.

Sorry you feel that way.  But did they post their resources?   

 

It is quite simple if the AGM-88 was able to be fired from stations 4 and 6 then they would use the same stations to utilize Amraams.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Furiz said:

Why would they do that?

To be transparent to their customers. Saying "we have proof" and not showing it, while there is no indication anywhere else that what they say is actually true, gives a shady impression.

Personally, I will give ED the benefit of the doubt and I'm willing to believe them to be correct, if they say they actually have proof, but it's not the best way to gain the trust of your customers to hold it back.


Edited by QuiGon

Intel i7-12700K @ 8x5GHz+4x3.8GHz + 32 GB DDR5 RAM + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit

 

DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

 

Tornado3 small.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...