Missing ordinance and Lack of ordinance for Innerl Pylobns - Page 3 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-15-2017, 10:25 AM   #21
Lunatic98
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 836
Reputation power: 6
Lunatic98 is a jewel in the roughLunatic98 is a jewel in the roughLunatic98 is a jewel in the roughLunatic98 is a jewel in the roughLunatic98 is a jewel in the roughLunatic98 is a jewel in the rough
Default

Yes SUNTSAG! That is exactly the kind of post I was looking for

Quote:
Originally Posted by SUNTSAG View Post
...Of course there are images of RAF aircraft firing rocket based weapons, as payloads have to be tested prior to being rated or clearance, as well as to support export sales for BAE...
Regarding this, nevertheless the Hawk T.1A was in fact able to employ these weapons (The SNEB 68 & Matra 155 as well as the CBLS units carrying practice bombs, they weren't specially modified to do so? Is this correct?

Quote:
Originally Posted by SUNTSAG View Post
...Yes the T1A carried out range practice using both bombs and its Aden cannon pod as well as A to A simulated engagements...
This kind of answers my first question minus the SNEB 68 and Matra 155 rocket pods. But really just to clarify that these are Hawk T.1As in UK service using said weapons/stores (though we already have the ADEN pod) it is cleared to use these weapons/stores, we have those weapons/stores in UK inventory (whether currently or historically) so long as it could or did and not just cleared to use but also actually did use (like for practice on air weapons ranges) though you also say that they may only have been used for the purpose of testing for clearance, either way if the Hawk used it in UK service, for whatever reason shouldn't our one have the same capability?

Seeing as our T.1A has an armament selector for rockets, bombs, practice bombs and what have you I'm assuming it still has the ability to use the weapons even if they were only used for the purpose of testing weapons for clearance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SUNTSAG View Post
On a final note everyone has the option to Mod the Hawks load out if they so wish and if you feel very strongly about having the ability to carry alternative weapons that the RAF did not clear for use then visit the relevant section of the forums; they are very helpful and informative. It's an option to explore.
Yes this is an option, however for me personally I'm only interested in what explicitly the UK Hawk T.1As actually did carry and actually have the capability to fire/have fired which from my knowledge, from what I've seen, from the information available to me is: the ADEN gunpod (which yep, we've got), the Matra 155 rocket pods holding 18 SNEB 68mm rockets each and CBLS 100 and/or CBLS 200 units which can hold any light practice bomb that is cleared for it to carry. You mentioned the BL755 cluster munition but so far I've unable to find any UK documentation or picture of it actually being deployed, but I will take your word for it.

The reason I feel strongly about it is for the sake of realism for the Hawk we've got, the same way I'd feel if the F-5E we have had an R-33 Amos available to it (okay, over exaggeration but you get my point).

But what were discussing above is really 3/4 of the story, as previously mentioned in DCS our Hawk has a total of 5 stations (excluding the fictional smoke pod station, as we don't have access to the Hawk's real life smoke pod) now the outer wing pylons can only carry the Mk82s on a TER (which looks very peculiar to say the least), the BDU-33 practice bombs on a TER and the LAU-61 holding 19 either FFAR or Hydra 70 rockets (somebody correct me, but I think it's Hydra 70 in DCS). The inner pylons however can only carry the AIM-9M (which isn't too far away from being an AIM-9L), surely it makes more sense for the inner pylons to be able to carry the air-to-ground weapons as well as the AIM-9M we have now? Because like I said having 3 Mk82s hanging off of pretty much the end of the wing looks very peculiar but that's just my opinion.

Personally though I don't really see what difference it will make, as VEAO have stated that they won't be giving the Hawk realistic payloads UK or otherwise which is a real shame, but understandable. I feel like a lot of energy is being wasted on something that is unlikely to happen.

Ollie
__________________
Spoiler:
PC Specs: AMD FX-6300, Gigabyte GA-970A-DS3, Patriot Viper 3 8GB (2x4GB) Sapphire Radeon 7870XT, Seagate Barracuda 1TB HDD, Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit Saitek X52 Pro, Track IR 5 with Track Clip Pro

Modules I own: AJS-37, F-5E, MiG-21Bis, MiG-15Bis, Ka-50, Mi-8MTV2, A-10C, UH-1H, FC3, Hawk, C-101, P-51D

Last edited by Lunatic98; 10-15-2017 at 10:36 AM.
Lunatic98 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2017, 12:51 PM   #22
Buzzles
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Northern Europe
Posts: 2,299
Reputation power: 16
Buzzles is just really niceBuzzles is just really niceBuzzles is just really niceBuzzles is just really niceBuzzles is just really niceBuzzles is just really niceBuzzles is just really niceBuzzles is just really niceBuzzles is just really niceBuzzles is just really niceBuzzles is just really nice
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lunatic98 View Post
The reason I feel strongly about it is for the sake of realism for the Hawk we've got
If you felt that strongly about realism regarding the Hawk that VEAO have modelled (aka, RAF T.1A), you'd be fighting for the removal of the two extra pylons
Buzzles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2017, 01:59 PM   #23
Lunatic98
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 836
Reputation power: 6
Lunatic98 is a jewel in the roughLunatic98 is a jewel in the roughLunatic98 is a jewel in the roughLunatic98 is a jewel in the roughLunatic98 is a jewel in the roughLunatic98 is a jewel in the rough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Buzzles View Post
If you felt that strongly about realism regarding the Hawk that VEAO have modelled (aka, RAF T.1A), you'd be fighting for the removal of the two extra pylons
True, though the simple option around that is just not carry stuff on the outer pylons downside to that is no A-G weapons. The Hawk AFAIK are fitted for but not with the 2 pylons under each wing, they're just not fitted to UK Hawk T.1A, plus VEAO have justified having 2 pylons under each wing so in that regard I'm satisfied. The real issue is that I can't put anything other than AIM-9Ms on the inner pylons when we should be able to put the other A-G weapons on the inner pylons not just the outer pylons (and having 3 Mk82s on a TER dangling from what's nearly the end of the wings looks pretty peculiar if you ask me).

So in that respect I feel more strongly about the inaccurate weapons as they're more a discrepancy, whereas the extra pylons - real Hawks can do this, it's just not done in UK service whereas AFAIK, from what I've seen, from evidence Hawks certainly do not carry anything on TERs, certainly not Mk82s. See this pdf. page 45, though this is more every single possible weapon that could be fitted to the Hawk not just in UK service. https://www.aerosociety.com/media/48...hawk-story.pdf though not sure how accurate this is (it refers to AIM-7 Sparrow/Skyflash as AMRAAM). AFAIK UK Hawks T.1A can carry an ADEN gun pod, Matra 155 rocket pods containing 18 SNEB 68mm rockets and CBLS 100 and/or CBLS 200 carrying practice bombs

Thing is though VEAO have said they wouldn't be giving the Hawk a its full UK payload so I guess this discussion should bring to a close. However it still would be nice if we could mount the A-G weapons on the inner pylons as well as the outer.
__________________
Spoiler:
PC Specs: AMD FX-6300, Gigabyte GA-970A-DS3, Patriot Viper 3 8GB (2x4GB) Sapphire Radeon 7870XT, Seagate Barracuda 1TB HDD, Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit Saitek X52 Pro, Track IR 5 with Track Clip Pro

Modules I own: AJS-37, F-5E, MiG-21Bis, MiG-15Bis, Ka-50, Mi-8MTV2, A-10C, UH-1H, FC3, Hawk, C-101, P-51D

Last edited by Lunatic98; 10-18-2017 at 01:58 PM.
Lunatic98 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-17-2017, 04:24 AM   #24
Kev2go
Senior Member
 
Kev2go's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,499
Reputation power: 6
Kev2go is a jewel in the roughKev2go is a jewel in the roughKev2go is a jewel in the roughKev2go is a jewel in the roughKev2go is a jewel in the roughKev2go is a jewel in the rough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lunatic98 View Post
Personally though I don't really see what difference it will make, as VEAO have stated that they won't be giving the Hawk realistic payloads UK or otherwise which is a real shame, but understandable. I feel like a lot of energy is being wasted on something that is unlikely to happen.

Ollie
I agree

thats a shame though. However then Why bother developing a full fledged module for DCS if they cant fully complete what is still right now their 1st and only module?

That doesn't really paint a good image about future expected products for potential buyers from some more complex modules that they may develop.
__________________





Build:

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z370- E Motherboard, Intel Core i7 8700k ( Nctua NH14S ),Crucial Ballistix DDR4 16gb ram (2400 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia Gtx 1080 8gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; WD 1TB HDD, samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD, Samsing evo 850 pro 512 gb SSD
Kev2go is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-18-2017, 01:54 PM   #25
Lunatic98
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 836
Reputation power: 6
Lunatic98 is a jewel in the roughLunatic98 is a jewel in the roughLunatic98 is a jewel in the roughLunatic98 is a jewel in the roughLunatic98 is a jewel in the roughLunatic98 is a jewel in the rough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kev2go View Post
I agree

thats a shame though. However then Why bother developing a full fledged module for DCS if they cant fully complete what is still right now their 1st and only module?

That doesn't really paint a good image about future expected products for potential buyers from some more complex modules that they may develop.
I'm just gonna take it easy - there's no need or call to get in their faces about it, I'm sure VEAO have their reasons, it's just a shame things haven't gone down too well for the Hawk - otherwise I still find it a relatively enjoyable module (it is after all the only UK module out there). Plus there are more pressing matters to deal with that weapon inaccuracies which I'm sure VEAO are doing their best to address.

Oh well...

Ollie
__________________
Spoiler:
PC Specs: AMD FX-6300, Gigabyte GA-970A-DS3, Patriot Viper 3 8GB (2x4GB) Sapphire Radeon 7870XT, Seagate Barracuda 1TB HDD, Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit Saitek X52 Pro, Track IR 5 with Track Clip Pro

Modules I own: AJS-37, F-5E, MiG-21Bis, MiG-15Bis, Ka-50, Mi-8MTV2, A-10C, UH-1H, FC3, Hawk, C-101, P-51D
Lunatic98 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-18-2017, 02:17 PM   #26
Schmidtfire
Member
 
Schmidtfire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 659
Reputation power: 6
Schmidtfire has a spectacular aura aboutSchmidtfire has a spectacular aura aboutSchmidtfire has a spectacular aura aboutSchmidtfire has a spectacular aura aboutSchmidtfire has a spectacular aura about
Default

It takes around 5min to mod and attach any bomb or rocketpod avalible in DCS. The downside is that it wont pass IC online. But what won't take 5min to fix is the weapon system and gunsight.
There will still be that strange delay fireing rockets, non adjustable depression on the gunsight, no volume adjustment on the sidewinder etc. Id rather like critical issues fixed first, even though adding more weapons can be done with minimal time and effort.

To simulate the Finnish Hawk i added R60 missiles and single mk82's and that only took me, a complete noob, roughly 5-10min of modding. Weapons fully working too.
Schmidtfire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-18-2017, 09:50 PM   #27
Kev2go
Senior Member
 
Kev2go's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,499
Reputation power: 6
Kev2go is a jewel in the roughKev2go is a jewel in the roughKev2go is a jewel in the roughKev2go is a jewel in the roughKev2go is a jewel in the roughKev2go is a jewel in the rough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Schmidtfire View Post
It takes around 5min to mod and attach any bomb or rocketpod avalible in DCS. The downside is that it wont pass IC online. But what won't take 5min to fix is the weapon system and gunsight.
There will still be that strange delay fireing rockets, non adjustable depression on the gunsight, no volume adjustment on the sidewinder etc. Id rather like critical issues fixed first, even though adding more weapons can be done with minimal time and effort.

To simulate the Finnish Hawk i added R60 missiles and single mk82's and that only took me, a complete noob, roughly 5-10min of modding. Weapons fully working too.
thats true. I am aware of some of those issues, but those are all documented. So cant really create more threads to dwell on that. hence why I created this thread, because i didnt' recall this being brought up before.
__________________





Build:

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z370- E Motherboard, Intel Core i7 8700k ( Nctua NH14S ),Crucial Ballistix DDR4 16gb ram (2400 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia Gtx 1080 8gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; WD 1TB HDD, samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD, Samsing evo 850 pro 512 gb SSD
Kev2go is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 04:01 AM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.