Posted January 11, 2009 Posted January 11, 2009 I am wondering about the weapon selection switches: o “ВНЕШН” – Outboard hardpoints [Y] o “ВНУТР” – Inboard hardpoints o “4П” – All hardpoints I don't see a difference when choosing "All hardpoints " vs. "Inboard hardpoints ". They both seem to select the Vikhr missiles. What am I missing? Thanks.
DarkWanderer Posted January 11, 2009 Posted January 11, 2009 I don't see a difference when choosing "All hardpoints " vs. "Inboard hardpoints ". They both seem to select the Vikhr missiles. What am I missing? "All hardpoints" is usable when you have 4 similar blocks, e.g. 4xS-8. You want the best? Here i am...
d0ppler Posted January 11, 2009 Posted January 11, 2009 (edited) Speaking of hardpoints and vikhr.. What's the reason why you can't have missiles on the inner hardpoints? It would be too easy? :P Just think of having 24 vikhrs on your chopper :D (If I'm EXTREMELY lucky I can hit 2 ground targets with 40 SA-8 ) EDIT : No complaints about the SA-8 though, it's just me who suck at firing them Edited January 11, 2009 by d0ppler A-10C, AV-8B, Ka-50, F-14B, F-16C, F-5E, F/A-18C, L-39, Mi-8, MiG-21, MiG-29, SA34, Spitfire, Su-27, Su-33, UH-1H
geogob Posted January 11, 2009 Posted January 11, 2009 The Vikhrs tilt to compensate for aircraft pitch. Maybe only the outer hardpoints can accommodate this system.
Obiwan Posted January 12, 2009 Posted January 12, 2009 Speaking of hardpoints and vikhr.. What's the reason why you can't have missiles on the inner hardpoints? It would be too easy? :P I'm sure you can, but you wouldn't want to put fueltanks or rocket pods on the outside rails. That's done for load and balance reasons (my guess at least). You want to keep the heaviest loads towards the center. There are probably also structural limitations, but my guess is load/balance.
geogob Posted January 12, 2009 Posted January 12, 2009 The load is always symmetrical, so it doesn't change anything regarding balance. Just look at the weight reduced configurations. Those are highly unbalanced and the bird can take it fine. It's probably just technical limitations. It could be as simple as limitations in the communication possibilities with the weapon systems that are different from outer to inner pylons. That would be a good reason to have guided weapon systems only on outer pylons (because the required data links are simply not present in the inner pylons). But there can be tons of reasons really. It could be as silly as "no one suggested it during the design phase". Seen that here before.
d0ppler Posted January 12, 2009 Posted January 12, 2009 I'm sure you can, but you wouldn't want to put fueltanks or rocket pods on the outside rails. That's done for load and balance reasons (my guess at least). You want to keep the heaviest loads towards the center. There are probably also structural limitations, but my guess is load/balance. Vikhrs are stored on the OUTER hardpoints, so your argument doesn't make any sense. :) The load is always symmetrical, so it doesn't change anything regarding balance. Just look at the weight reduced configurations. Those are highly unbalanced and the bird can take it fine. It's probably just technical limitations. It could be as simple as limitations in the communication possibilities with the weapon systems that are different from outer to inner pylons. That would be a good reason to have guided weapon systems only on outer pylons (because the required data links are simply not present in the inner pylons). But there can be tons of reasons really. It could be as silly as "no one suggested it during the design phase". Seen that here before. That sounds more correct ;) A-10C, AV-8B, Ka-50, F-14B, F-16C, F-5E, F/A-18C, L-39, Mi-8, MiG-21, MiG-29, SA34, Spitfire, Su-27, Su-33, UH-1H
Frederf Posted January 12, 2009 Posted January 12, 2009 (edited) I believe Vikhrs on the outer hardpoints only is a safety consideration. The danger in releasing a guided munition that close to the main body of the aircraft is too great. I also agree that there must be some link to the weapon launcher more complex than those used with the rockets, fuel tanks, or bombs since you can program the fuse for the Vihkr for headon A/A or A/A engagements. They might have just only put in those link channels to one of the hardpoints. Edited January 12, 2009 by Frederf
Boberro Posted January 12, 2009 Posted January 12, 2009 Speaking of hardpoints and vikhr.. What's the reason why you can't have missiles on the inner hardpoints? It would be too easy? :P Just think of having 24 vikhrs on your chopper :D (If I'm EXTREMELY lucky I can hit 2 ground targets with 40 SA-8 ) EDIT : No complaints about the SA-8 though, it's just me who suck at firing them Same we can ask why Su-25T can only handle 2 pair of Vikhrs - it could carry in on first inner pylons, second and third pair, couldn't it? But from some reasons it can't - same with Ka-50. Maybe it is aerodynamic problem, or weight trouble. Or simple in inner pylon there are no any electrical cables to provide support :D Reminder: Fighter pilots make movies. Bomber pilots make... HISTORY! :D | Also to be remembered: FRENCH TANKS HAVE ONE GEAR FORWARD AND FIVE BACKWARD :D ಠ_ಠ ツ
AlphaOneSix Posted January 12, 2009 Posted January 12, 2009 (edited) The answer is already in this thread. The outer hardpoints can pivot, the inner ones cannot. So Vikhrs go on the outboard. On the AH-64, all hardpoints pivot, which makes shooting rockets a breeze, all you have to do is line them up left and right, and the elevation will be taken care of for you. I don't think the Ka-50 supports elevation for anything other than the Vikhr. Edited January 12, 2009 by AlphaOneSix
Frederf Posted January 12, 2009 Posted January 12, 2009 I thought the pivoting mechanism is a function of the Vikhr launcher and not the pylon the launcher is attached to. Also the tilt function is not a requirement of Vihkr use, just a luxury.
AlphaOneSix Posted January 12, 2009 Posted January 12, 2009 It may be a function of the launcher itself (which, if true, would explain why you can't jettison the launcher, too expensive!). If it couldn't tilt, that would make it a huge pain to line up Vikhr launches, so while it may not be a strict requirement, it is certainly more than just a luxury.
Frederf Posted January 13, 2009 Posted January 13, 2009 I'm more than happy to chock it up to a doctrine thing. "Why?" "Because I said so!" Welcome to the military. Someone probably graphed the probability of being detected/targeted vs. the number of Vikhrs launched and found a steep upturn at the 8 missile mark.
geogob Posted January 13, 2009 Posted January 13, 2009 Someone probably graphed the probability of being detected/targeted vs. the number of Vikhrs launched and found a steep upturn at the 8 missile mark. Working in the field of military R&D, I can tell you that you are so close to the truth that it's probably starting to burn :megalol: I can't tell how often I seen analysis like this one. The KISS approach is very popular in the military... both in the designs and in the methods of design ;)
Recommended Posts