Raviar Posted May 23, 2022 Share Posted May 23, 2022 is there any plan for MER 6 pod in order to carry 6 MK-82 ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VeeSPIKE Posted June 2, 2022 Share Posted June 2, 2022 There is a centerline option for 5 Mk82/SE's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raviar Posted June 2, 2022 Author Share Posted June 2, 2022 2 hours ago, VeeSPIKE said: There is a centerline option for 5 Mk82/SE's ofcourse but not 6, the 6x82 can be carry out on outer pylons too in A/B , not really sure about E Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solution twistking Posted June 2, 2022 Solution Share Posted June 2, 2022 10 hours ago, Raviar said: ofcourse but not 6, the 6x82 can be carry out on outer pylons too in A/B , not really sure about E i was advertising for that option time and time again, but i think the problem is, that there is no evidence that this setup is vaiable. there is a single old picture of an f-5 with an insane amount of mk82 on multiple MERs, but it was mentioned that this was probably just from a taxi-test, as that specific setup looked really unsafe for flight. If you have other information, please provide those, as i would love to see the hexa-MER on the wing pylons... 2 My personal wishlist after half a decade with DCS: https://forum.dcs.world/topic/184968-my-personal-wishlist-after-half-a-decade-with-dcs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raviar Posted June 3, 2022 Author Share Posted June 3, 2022 18 hours ago, twistking said: i was advertising for that option time and time again, but i think the problem is, that there is no evidence that this setup is vaiable. there is a single old picture of an f-5 with an insane amount of mk82 on multiple MERs, but it was mentioned that this was probably just from a taxi-test, as that specific setup looked really unsafe for flight. If you have other information, please provide those, as i would love to see the hexa-MER on the wing pylons... Thats right, I was wrong, there is not such config on F=5E/F manual null Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VZ_342 Posted June 7, 2022 Share Posted June 7, 2022 Was very curious about the heavy load F-5...found a pic that is linked to the DCS F-5E3 flight manual, don't know what page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raviar Posted June 10, 2022 Author Share Posted June 10, 2022 On 6/7/2022 at 4:44 AM, VZ_342 said: Was very curious about the heavy load F-5...found a pic that is linked to the DCS F-5E3 flight manual, don't know what page. On 6/2/2022 at 6:29 PM, twistking said: i was advertising for that option time and time again, but i think the problem is, that there is no evidence that this setup is vaiable. there is a single old picture of an f-5 with an insane amount of mk82 on multiple MERs, but it was mentioned that this was probably just from a taxi-test, as that specific setup looked really unsafe for flight. If you have other information, please provide those, as i would love to see the hexa-MER on the wing pylons... Thats F-5A as @twistkin mentioned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew8604 Posted August 21, 2022 Share Posted August 21, 2022 I'm thinking those might be Mk-81's on that F-5A. Publicity shot. Like..."See, it carries a LOT of bombs! Buy it!" The F-5E chart seems to only mention MER under the Centerline Pylon and then only 5 Mk-82's on the BRU-27/A (MER)...in the bottom, right corner of the chart. And I suspect the limit of 5 is for clearance at takeoff rotation. All the other inboard and outboard pylons would appear to only be single munitions or stores, no multi-bomb rack units...and must be symmetrical loadings, too, for takeoff. In flight, you can apparently have some asymmetrical loading. I think there are more charts in the manual that talk about in-flight carriage and sequencing limitations. It looks like only a single M117 or Mk-82 on the INBD/OUTBD pylons, no Mk-83's or Mk-84's. If you can't carry a single 2000-lb Mk-83 or Mk-84 on an INBD pylon, how could you be allowed to carry an MER with 2 or more Mk-82's on it? Then again, how can you carry a 275-gal (1900+ lbs) fuel tank on the INBD pylons? Hmm... Is it possible that a loaded MER could put too much twisting forces/moments on the wing? That chart is confusing to interpret, though. BRU = Bomb Rack Unit MER = Multiple Ejector Rack ... I think they have ejector feet that kick the bomb or store off of the bomb rack lugs to ensure separation. It's mechanically linked with the rack lugs release. I believe those ejector "feet" are powered by an explosive ejector cartridge...something similar to a shotgun shell but probably more powerful. When I saw bombs released during a dive-bombing demonstration at a naval weapons station back in 1981, I could see small puffs of smoke from the bomb racks as bombs separated, followed by a "pop" sound (delayed due to the distance). DCS doesn't simulate this, does it? When the bombs, Mk-82, Mk-83, Mk-84's hit the ground, a few miles away, it was a seemingly ground-shaking BOOM...when the sound arrived. (I don't think it really shook the ground, just seemed like it because you could feel the shockwave in your chest or abdomen, just a bit.) Dropped from A-4's, A-6's and A-7E's. The A-7E fired its M61 20mm gun, too. That was like a ripping or belching sound, but at a powerful volume. It IS cool that DCS has that sound delay for distance. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WinterH Posted August 21, 2022 Share Posted August 21, 2022 On 6/10/2022 at 7:37 PM, Raviar said: Thats F-5A as @twistkin mentioned. Actually, while I'm not %100 sure, I believe that's the N-156 prototype that was F-5A's forerunner. It's also only place I've seen MER 6s on F-5 (not saying that means it's the only place it existed though, I don't know whether it was a possibility or not IRL on operational birds) Wishlist: F-4E Block 53 +, MiG-27K, Su-17M3 or M4, AH-1F or W circa 80s or early 90s, J35 Draken, Kfir C7, Mirage III/V DCS-Dismounts Script Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zilch Posted August 22, 2022 Share Posted August 22, 2022 I can't cite my source on this, but I'm pretty sure it has to do with the physical space of it. As the F-5 rotates on takeoff, that 6th bomb on the MER would strike the ground, or get too close for comfort, at least. It's not a weight issue, but a geometry one. 1 [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Zilch79's YouTube Channel: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob1943 Posted August 23, 2022 Share Posted August 23, 2022 Quote I believe those ejector "feet" are powered by an explosive ejector cartridge...something similar to a shotgun shell but probably more powerful. When I saw bombs released during a dive-bombing demonstration at a naval weapons station back in 1981, I could see small puffs of smoke from the bomb racks as bombs separated, followed by a "pop" sound (delayed due to the distance). Yep, that is correct. I flew the F-100 in Vietnam and we used the same explosive charges to punch the bombs off our wing racks. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elf1606688794 Posted October 14, 2022 Share Posted October 14, 2022 On 8/21/2022 at 5:02 AM, Andrew8604 said: MER = Multiple Ejector Rack ... I think they have ejector feet that kick the bomb or store off of the bomb rack lugs to ensure separation. It's mechanically linked with the rack lugs release. I believe those ejector "feet" are powered by an explosive ejector cartridge...something similar to a shotgun shell but probably more powerful. When I saw bombs released during a dive-bombing demonstration at a naval weapons station back in 1981, I could see small puffs of smoke from the bomb racks as bombs separated, followed by a "pop" sound (delayed due to the distance). Bomb racks (pylon mounted MAU-12's, MER, TER) and some missile launchers use impulse cartridges to open the racks and kick the munitions clear of the aircraft. All of the ones I saw were electrically primed and produced gobs and gobs of gas for their size. It was that gas quickly expanding and filling the lines in the rack that forced the bomb rack lugs open and forced piston(s) down to kick the munition away from the aircraft. Which munition was loaded on the rack determined which impulse cartridge was used. All of the ones I saw were the same diameter but varied in height. Even the smallest ones had the equivalent power to a 12 ga shotgun shell. BDU-33's and Mk-106's (25 lb and 5 lb training munitions) used the shortest cartridges I personally worked with (about 3/4" tall). A bit of gee whiz info....due to the fact that the firing pin pressed in on the primer and left an indention we could only install a cartridge 10 times and each time we removed a live, unfired cartridge we scribed a line from the primer to the outside edge. When a cartridge had 10 scribe marks it was no longer usable and was destroyed by EOD. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elf1606688794 Posted October 15, 2022 Share Posted October 15, 2022 (edited) On 8/22/2022 at 10:03 PM, Bob1943 said: Yep, that is correct. I flew the F-100 in Vietnam and we used the same explosive charges to punch the bombs off our wing racks. They aren't explosives. They have pellets in them that when burned produce gas, LOTS of gas. The resulting gas pressure in the rack is what opens the lugs and forces the ejector pistons down. (Similar to how 'smokeless powder" in modern rifle and pistol cartridges work (and modern shotshells) as opposed to black powder. Black powder will explode when ignited, smokeless powder just burns and produces a lot of gas. It's that gas that pushes the projectile (bullet/shotshell wad) down the barrel.) That gas leaves a highly corrosive residue in the plumbing for the rack and that plumbing has to be cleaned every night after use. It was a dirty, smelly, job that Mike Rowe would just love. Edited October 15, 2022 by Elf1606688794 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts