GBU-38 TER

[benargee]

Hi all I was wondering if A-10s or any aircraft can carry 3 GBU-38s on a single pylon in the same or similar way an A-10C can carry 3 MK82s, 3 MK-82 AIRs or 3 GBU-12s on a Triple Ejector Rack.

 

To me it just seems odd that its not in DCS when you can already do it with 3 other MK-82 variants.

 

Is this just a sim thing or also IRL, if so any other aircraft?

[Eddie]

No, not possible. The GBU-38 requires an electronic connection to the aircraft (MIL-STD-1760).

 

There is a 1760 compatible VER available for the Hornet, and TER for the Viper but the A-10C does not use either, and likely never will.

Edited April 7, 2013 by Eddie

[Nealius]

For the Viper it's limited to two GBU-38s per rack. I have a picture around somewhere of a 14th FS Viper with two GBU-12s under one wing and two GBU-38s on the other, except the -38s have this odd vanilla-colored bulb thing attached to the nose.

[Eddie]

That "odd vanilla-coloured bulb thing" would be a DSU-33 air burst fuse.

[joey45]

On a somewhat related noe..

Can we carry x2 GBU-12s on a TER instead of 3?

[Oznerol256]

On a somewhat related noe..

Can we carry x2 GBU-12s on a TER instead of 3?

 

I think it should be possible. I mean, why not? In flight you are going to carry 2 and even one GBU-12 on a TER. I cant find the option in the rearming menu or the mission editor menu. I would like to have them added. They are there for Mavericks. Why not for GBU-12s? Or for the iron bombs?

[Eddie]

In reality of course, in DCS, no. I don't know why though. hmmmmm.

[benargee]

In reality of course, in DCS, no. I don't know why though. hmmmmm.

 

well as an existing weapon and an existing rack hint hint, to a ED tester who may know a few people hint hint. maybe some strings could get pulled for a pretty simple update hint hint :smilewink::smilewink:

 

and also, why can we only use a fuel tank on the center hard point, when DSMS INV says otherwise

[Jona33]

well as an existing weapon and an existing rack hint hint, to a ED tester who may know a few people hint hint. maybe some strings could get pulled for a pretty simple update hint hint :smilewink::smilewink:

 

and also, why can we only use a fuel tank on the center hard point, when DSMS INV says otherwise

 

You can also use on them on 4/8 I think. Unless that's changed.

[159th_Viper]

If you really want to carry just two, then jettison one shortly after take-off. Can be done with 12's so I assume it's ok for 38's as well. Give it a go and see.

 

Edited April 7, 2013 by 159th_Viper

[benargee]

If you really want to carry just two, then jettison one shortly after take-off. Can be done with 12's so I assume it's ok for 38's as well. Give it a go and see.

 

 

and now i know why we are in the depression, viper think of the citizens!

 

and why do you have to jettison AFTER take off :D

 

but seriously your method works but shouldn't be necessary

[benargee]

You can also use on them on 4/8 I think. Unless that's changed.

 

yes i know that, im referring to the bombs the game doesnt let us carry on station 6 such as GPB, LGB, CBU.

[badger66]

On a somewhat related noe..

Can we carry x2 GBU-12s on a TER instead of 3?

 

Great idea , I would really appreciate that option .

[Sordsman]

I dont think you can do it because of the way the TER's step you would have to load the bottom position then the left position and the right position would be empty.

[joey45]

Bit like with the Mavs?

[Grimes]

Probably need to make an entry to the payload database to make it an option. But it should certainly be possible. I know there is a particular order used when loading weapons like this. For example if you have resource management on and only 2 GBU-12s are available and you select a TER with 3 GBU-12, it will only load what is available.

[Grimes]

Well that was easy. Is such a payload realistic to add to a feature request list to the devs?

[joey45]

Cool..

[Eddie]

Well that was easy. Is such a payload realistic to add to a feature request list to the devs?

 

More realistic than carrying 3 LGBs on a TER in actual fact.

 

Of course they need to be loaded on the correct points on the TER, with weapons on rack 1 & 2 on the TER, not 2 & 3 (i.e. as shown in your sceen shot, not as shown in Vipers).

 

The same should also be possible with Mk-82, Mk-82AIR, SUU-25, LAU-68/131, and any other TER mountable ordnance. Although that is everything the A-10C can carry on TERs.

[Grimes]

Yeah but the orientation in Vipers screenshot looks cooler and it has a +15% fear inducing bonus!

[benargee]

More realistic than carrying 3 LGBs on a TER in actual fact.

 

Of course they need to be loaded on the correct points on the TER, with weapons on rack 1 & 2 on the TER, not 2 & 3 (i.e. as shown in your sceen shot, not as shown in Vipers).

 

The same should also be possible with Mk-82, Mk-82AIR, SUU-25, LAU-68/131, and any other TER mountable ordnance. Although that is everything the A-10C can carry on TERs.

 

i also think the payload menus need to be cleaned up with all the options, how about this instead of

 

Pylon> Bombs> [Everything]

 

you make the menu like this

 

Pylon> Bombs> [bomb Type] > [bomb Quantity/ weapon holder]

-or-

Pylon> Bombs> [weapon holder] > [bomb type / Quantity]

 

same follows for missles and rockets, as the other classes dont have enough to justify

 

for rockets especially, the menu is huge

[badger66]

Take off over weight , and drop 2 GBU-12's ..... but it would be nicer to have that option in weapons setup .

Edited April 14, 2013 by badger66

[Nealius]

i also think the payload menus need to be cleaned up with all the options, how about this instead of

 

Pylon> Bombs> [Everything]

 

you make the menu like this

 

Pylon> Bombs> [bomb Type] > [bomb Quantity/ weapon holder]

-or-

Pylon> Bombs> [weapon holder] > [bomb type / Quantity]

 

same follows for missles and rockets, as the other classes dont have enough to justify

 

for rockets especially, the menu is huge

 

I think having the pylons listed in the menu is totally pointless. Aside from the fact that pylons are not ever mentioned for bombs, if you are loading multiple Mavericks they will always be on a LAU-88, and a single should always be on a LAU-117, although in the menu you can load a single on the LAU-88...what's the point in that? For the rockets the only difference between the LAU-131 and LAU-68 seems to be the color.

 

The names for the loadouts are long-winded too. I made my own set of realistic-ish loadouts using the 2003 PACAF SCLs as a guide, so all my loadout names are like "2A65X2GB38."

[benargee]

I think having the pylons listed in the menu is totally pointless. Aside from the fact that pylons are not ever mentioned for bombs, if you are loading multiple Mavericks they will always be on a LAU-88, and a single should always be on a LAU-117, although in the menu you can load a single on the LAU-88...what's the point in that? For the rockets the only difference between the LAU-131 and LAU-68 seems to be the color.

 

The names for the loadouts are long-winded too. I made my own set of realistic-ish loadouts using the 2003 PACAF SCLs as a guide, so all my loadout names are like "2A65X2GB38."

 

disagree, its so much simpler knowing were your weapons are going to be, for example what side i want my tgp on. showing the pylons lets you familiarize the payload before you enter the mission, as its displayed in your dsms. im here task for more features, not ask for them to be removed.

 

and what do you mean never mentioned for bombs? you can put them on every single pylon except the middle one, and of course by pylon i mean hardpoint

 

just because the airforce has basic weapon payload layouts, doesnt mean the a-10 is CAPABLE of carrying custom ones

 

you're basically wanting to have less control over your payloads! i enjoy this feature and i bet alot of others do to.

[Nealius]

I think we are having a semantic misunderstanding here. By "pylons" I thought you were talking about the launcher rails that go between the weapon and the station/hardpoint, i.e. LAU-88.

 

For our purposes we do not need to know that there is a AGM-65D fitted to station #3 via a LAU-88. All we need to know is that an AGM-65D is going on station #3.

Edited April 14, 2013 by Nealius