BL755 for AV-8B/NA - Page 2 - ED Forums


Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-11-2019, 07:37 PM   #11
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 799

IMHO, if the weapon is compatible with the fire control system then we should include it to represent other countries even if it isn't used by the U.S. in its version of the aircraft. For instance, the CF-188/CF-18 is almost identical to the F/A-18 version modelled, but uses a CRV-7 rocket pod.

If we include skins, then why not include weapons?
Avimimus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2019, 11:43 PM   #12
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Northbrook, Ill USA. Haifa, Israel
Posts: 236

I am prior service, US Army 13A MOS(Field Artillery Officer). As long as ordinance adhered to NATO standards, it could be used. Programming ballistic tables is a line replaceable item. I grant , that I have never seen a Marine Corps HarrierII with BL755 in real life, but it is not an out of the ball park, and would make DCS: AV-8B more interesting. On YT there are plenty of vids showing Gr7/GR9 HarriersII for RAF/RN FAA/, Italian, and Spanish navies loaded with absurd amount of BL755. Something like 10-11 rounds. Including along ventral center pylon. With Harrier still able to take off in 500-700 feet. If, G*d forbid, modern war came to Europe, and USMC Harriers had to use ordinance from British, French, Italians, Belgians,and Germans they would. Training and budgeting and other real world ancilary details not withstanding. From my experience in FA, our M109A5/A6, M198, M102, and M119 guns, could use 155mm and 105mm ordinance manufactured by any NATO nation, or ally adhering to NATO standards. US forces in Vietnam used German,Canadian, British, and Australian supplied ordinance, when American allotted stocks for that theater went low. During Vietnam War, #1 funding and supply priority was Western and Central Europe Med included. Then Korea. Then Vietnam. then CONUS.
In a hypothetical European showdown, of US ran short on MK20, or CBU's, you can bet that BL755 would be used, if available. Obviously RAZBAM likely has more important priorities then expanding AV8B munition carriage. AV98BNA being my absolute favorite DCS module, I defer to RAZBAM developers as which functions to develop. Expanded weapon carriage is a great option to explore. LAser guided ZUNI would be killer. In DCS:AV8B, a single Zuni can kill a tank , with a direct hit. Since we don't have Brimstone for Harrier, a laser guided Zuni is next best thing.I am not certain what real world state of JHMQS and AIM-9X integration with Marine Harriers. Having JHMQS and AIM-9X from DCS: F/A-18C would be most pleasing. I am in favor of having expanded weapon carriage being as an optional addon at reasonable price.

I explore various scenarios in DCS, especially unusual ones.
What if there was no Tarawa available? Sunk, damaged? Basing Marine Harriers on Allied ships.
Pure unprepared FARP operations of Harriers, Apaches, and Cobras. VSTOL from ground.
Fields in range of enemy artillery and artillery rocket, under constant bombardment.
Air-ground combat under poor visibility.
Using Harriers in unsuitable roles. In anti-submarine warfare for example. Hunting for SSKs on surface.
Fictional US-Russia alliance blue force , using Kuz, as quazi-LHA. With China as red force. Or Germany. Or China-Germany as Red coalition. Using Normandy map as stand in for Baltic. Where UK land is Scandanavia, Normandy is Central European coast, and right-most area is Poland and Baltic3. Left most area standing on for Straights Of Denmark. With initial conditions as being against Blue forces.
DmitriKozlowsky is online now   Reply With Quote

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 02:23 PM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.