I had avoided this module....

Ikd why but I owned nearly every DCS Module but this one. I just never thought the Harrier would be all that fun... boy was I wrong. I'm having a blast with this thing. I was running around in MP doing some ground pounding with the A-10C but it's soooooo slow so I decided to give the Harrier a try.... This thing is badass! Thanks Razbam for making this one!!

I felt the same way. I was really disappointed with the Mirage and delayed flying the Harrier. Harrier is one of my favorite modules. I think it's in relatively great shape. Some days I do nothing but circuits on the Tarawa it's such a joy to fly.

Especially after the last few updates. It's a great little bomb truck. Fast and very capable with a laser pod. I love flying it low level penetration. Probably my favorite module.

My favorite too. And when it`ll have JDAM... :notworthy:

It would be better if the bombing systems compensated for wind and movers and terrain elevation like they should. Or the various bugs in the NAV system would get ironed out. But it usually drops GBU's well and fires L-mavs just fine.

It would be better if the bombing systems compensated for wind and movers and terrain elevation like they should. Or the various bugs in the NAV system would get ironed out. But it usually drops GBU's well and fires L-mavs just fine.

Agree. Would like to see things like this and the dive-toss mode implemented before the fancier stuff like JDAMS, but I'll take any excuse to try something new out in the Harrier.

Agree. Would like to see things like this and the dive-toss mode implemented before the fancier stuff like JDAMS, but I'll take any excuse to try something new out in the Harrier.

Forgot Dive toss.

But at least they are working on it these days so I'll take what they work on, eventually they will get to the other things.

Bombing modes don't compensate for wind? Granted, I haven't touched the Harrier since winter of '18, but back then CCIP certainly did compensate for wind.

Bombing modes don't compensate for wind? Granted, I haven't touched the Harrier since winter of '18, but back then CCIP certainly did compensate for wind.

Negative when I tested it in the winter of 18/19 after the AUTO mode was fixed.

IIRC the HUD symbology gets shifted for the flight (i.e. the flight vector moves as do the AOA bars). But if you have an Auto mode drop with 90 degree crosswind, it will miss every single time by a good margin. Same problem with CCIP as I recall, and CCIP still has the unrealistic magic altitude solution problem. It should be using the ARBS/INS to calculate wind drift and target motion relative to the plane.

Moreover it should also compensate for movers, and while the DMT does track movers now, again, but no moving target compensation, when I tested it after that feature started working.

Its a very easy set of tests to run. Maybe its been fixed in the last few months but I doubt it as nothing has shown up in the change log, I haven't flown the harrier much since the F18 got a TPOD.

The Harrier is great for the DCS audience and especially the multiplayer audience.

Why? Because:

- it has short legs, meaning you need to refuel often. Either in the air or on ground. That means a lot of air refueling performed or lots of landings and take-offs performed.

- It has speed, but capability to go slow. You are not a A-10C slow, meaning you get to feel the speed of a F/A-18C Hornet (You are not a Mach monster with loadout, only when empty), you are designed to fly at high or perform low altitude strikes. You do what all those do, but you can as well tilt the engines nozzles and fly low like a A-10C and admire the battlefield from your bubble cockpit, better view than in A-10C even!

- You are capable to do something that no other fixed wing can, hover and perform vertical take-off or landing. You can do missions with even less fuel and just two bombs/missiles and operate multiple sorties from transitory base from where you need to T/L vertically. You can as well perform jump take-offs, or perform nice short landings with heavier loads. This means you can do a lot of take-offs and landings at very close of the combat and have fun when doing it, insead fly 300 km to carrier or other country to rearm and refuel, continually checking your fuel and being careful not to fly too fast or too low and every sudden engagement means you run out the seconds you need to complete your primary sortie.

- You have extremely cool "office". You have almost all the same things that A-10C does have, and little more by simplicity and streamlined operations. And for some reason as you can be more nimble and agile, you have more freedom and safety to fly the sorties as required.

- Your weapon loadout ain't bad. If you are going to take-off and land from conventional airfield or you can jump, you can loadout a fairly heavy loads of weapons. The A-10C can technically carry a lot more, but that is stupid thing to do and no one in reality will do that because you lose the speed, you consume the fuel by doing so, and you drain your capabilities and safeties down faster than Harrier. So eventually you and Hog driver are there with the same weapon loadouts anyways, other is still just capable to be faster, has capability for loitering and to go slow, but can punch at any moment down on the ground quickly if required for reloading.

The AV-8B N/A IMHO is great example how a A-10 has overhyped and overstated purpose in the Air Force arsenal. Its greatest feature of the air force is the mythical moral promoter when ground troops want to hear "PRRRRRRRRRRRR" and see dust to raise. Something that no Harrier or Hornet can do visually, but effectively with their 20mm and 25mm cannons they can perform same tasks as effectively, with accuracy instead RPM.

And what is great thing that many doesn't value, the Hog pilot is a Air Force pilot, the Harrier pilot is a Marine. The Marine knows how to bleed, how to crawl and how to fight among the other marines, while Air Force pilot believes to be above others.

The Harrier greatest ally and foe, is the Hornet, not the Hog. The Hog is old, obsolete aircraft on modern battlefield, that Army just doesn't want to give up. And this is great reason why F-35 exist as it will be offering what is required and needed, capability of the Harrier, Hornet and A-10C in one package.

In 30 years from now when F-35 module comes to DCS (yeah, right). We get to feel what A-10C pilots were so afraid of. We already feel and see it with the Hornet and the Harrier... The days of hogs has come, it is butchered and everyone is having good time when eating hog meat.

And soon we get the new A-10 cockpit (hopefully we see same way the A-10A cockpit upgrade!) that will bring lots of reasons to fly it again, but many will likely return back to Hornet or Harrier to do the fun flying.

Negative when I tested it in the winter of 18/19 after the AUTO mode was fixed.

 

IIRC the HUD symbology gets shifted for the flight (i.e. the flight vector moves as do the AOA bars). But if you have an Auto mode drop with 90 degree crosswind, it will miss every single time by a good margin. Same problem with CCIP as I recall, and CCIP still has the unrealistic magic altitude solution problem. It should be using the ARBS/INS to calculate wind drift and target motion relative to the plane.

 

Moreover it should also compensate for movers, and while the DMT does track movers now, again, but no moving target compensation, when I tested it after that feature started working.

 

Its a very easy set of tests to run. Maybe its been fixed in the last few months but I doubt it as nothing has shown up in the change log, I haven't flown the harrier much since the F18 got a TPOD.

All those are reason what is holding Harrier back for me.

Not required to use DMT or TPOD for bombing and gun runs, as the aircraft magically again knows the altitude of target. There was the moment when it worked correctly, dropping bomb on target that was at different altitude than radar altimeter measuring below aircraft and you missed, a lot. But everytime you set the DMT on target, instantly higher accuracy over anything else out there in BluFor side.

Hopefully when the RAZBAM gets the Mirage 2000C fixed (and it has got great changes!), they will turn full effort to Harrier. After that I wait them to do that Mirage 2000-5 and we can say buy buy for the Hornet then.

Or we would actually get more capable AI on ground to laser targets, talk over radio etc etc...

The issue is and has been that alot of stuff is half finished in the bombing system still. Yes I know its EA. But why not just do the basic plane systems first, then add functionality on top of it. Its just an odd way to development to me.

The issue is and has been that alot of stuff is half finished in the bombing system still. Yes I know its EA. But why not just do the basic plane systems first, then add functionality on top of it. Its just an odd way to development to me.

This is my main gripe with these EA programs. I'm hopeful for the JF17 as it seems they went the opposite direction

@Fri13: Are you on some kind of crusade against the A-10?

The Harrier has the ability to operate from very confined spaces, which is the reason why it is only being operated by users that have such a requirment (USMC, Royal Navy, Spanish Navy, Italian Navy), and it is a bit faster than the A-10. Apart from these two things, the A-10C is better in pretty much any regard:

- it has short legs, meaning you need to refuel often. Either in the air or on ground. That means a lot of air refueling performed or lots of landings and take-offs performed.

The Harrier has very short legs indeed, while the A-10 can remain on station for quiet a while which is extremely important for ground support.

- It has speed, but capability to go slow. You are not a A-10C slow, meaning you get to feel the speed of a F/A-18C Hornet (You are not a Mach monster with loadout, only when empty), you are designed to fly at high or perform low altitude strikes. You do what all those do, but you can as well tilt the engines nozzles and fly low like a A-10C and admire the battlefield from your bubble cockpit, better view than in A-10C even!

No, realistically the Harrier can't really go slow as the A-10 can. Why? Because if you rotate the nozzles to be able to fly slower, your fuel usage increases dramatically which is not really an option for the Harrier with its already pretty bad endurance. Additionally the Harrier is much more vulnerable at low speeds than the A-10.

- You are capable to do something that no other fixed wing can, hover and perform vertical take-off or landing. You can do missions with even less fuel and just two bombs/missiles and operate multiple sorties from transitory base from where you need to T/L vertically. You can as well perform jump take-offs, or perform nice short landings with heavier loads. This means you can do a lot of take-offs and landings at very close of the combat and have fun when doing it, insead fly 300 km to carrier or other country to rearm and refuel, continually checking your fuel and being careful not to fly too fast or too low and every sudden engagement means you run out the seconds you need to complete your primary sortie.

Yeah, this and its speed are the only two real advantages over the A-10, although the A-10 is pretty well suited for austere field operations with it's broad landing gear and easy handling and robust engines.

- You have extremely cool "office". You have almost all the same things that A-10C does have, and little more by simplicity and streamlined operations. And for some reason as you can be more nimble and agile, you have more freedom and safety to fly the sorties as required.

As you said: The Harrier has almost the same things. The Harrier does indeed have a pretty good HOTAS implementation, but it's still way behind the A-10C where you can do pretty much everything without ever having to let go of the stick and throttle. Our Harrier also lacks things like data link and the SPi concept of the A-10C is much more versatile.

- Your weapon loadout ain't bad. If you are going to take-off and land from conventional airfield or you can jump, you can loadout a fairly heavy loads of weapons. The A-10C can technically carry a lot more, but that is stupid thing to do and no one in reality will do that because you lose the speed, you consume the fuel by doing so, and you drain your capabilities and safeties down faster than Harrier. So eventually you and Hog driver are there with the same weapon loadouts anyways, other is still just capable to be faster, has capability for loitering and to go slow, but can punch at any moment down on the ground quickly if required for reloading.

Yes, taking a full load is dumb, but that applies to both aircraft. Half the load of the A-10C is like a full load of the Harrier.

The AV-8B N/A IMHO is great example how a A-10 has overhyped and overstated purpose in the Air Force arsenal. Its greatest feature of the air force is the mythical moral promoter when ground troops want to hear "PRRRRRRRRRRRR" and see dust to raise. Something that no Harrier or Hornet can do visually, but effectively with their 20mm and 25mm cannons they can perform same tasks as effectively, with accuracy instead RPM.

Seriously? 20mm or 25mm have a much lesser effect than 30mm of depleted uranium, especially against armored targets! Despite the bigger calibre the Hog also has a much bigger load of rounds than the Harrier or the Hornet. But what i really don't understand is how you got the idea the Hornet or the Harrier would be able to employ there guns with more accuracy? Just one word: PAC (Precision Attitude Control)! An autopilot dedicated to the gun, that stabilizes the entire aircraft on the target!

And what is great thing that many doesn't value, the Hog pilot is a Air Force pilot, the Harrier pilot is a Marine. The Marine knows how to bleed, how to crawl and how to fight among the other marines, while Air Force pilot believes to be above others.

That applies to the usual air force jet jockeys, but Hawg drivers are like black sheeps among the air force fighter pilot community. They are laughed upon by Eagle and Viper pilots and so they have build a special bond with the grunts on the ground instead. They are like Marine aviatiors in this regard.

The Harrier greatest ally and foe, is the Hornet, not the Hog. The Hog is old, obsolete aircraft on modern battlefield, that Army just doesn't want to give up. And this is great reason why F-35 exist as it will be offering what is required and needed, capability of the Harrier, Hornet and A-10C in one package.

The Army doesn't want to give it up for good reasons. The F-35 is a jack of all trades, but a master of none. In the CAS role it is inferior to the A-10C in pretty much every aspect and so is the Harrier and thanks to all the upgrades it recieved it feels very much at home on the digital battlefield of the 21st century.

In 30 years from now when F-35 module comes to DCS (yeah, right). We get to feel what A-10C pilots were so afraid of. We already feel and see it with the Hornet and the Harrier... The days of hogs has come, it is butchered and everyone is having good time when eating hog meat.

Speak for yourself...

And soon we get the new A-10 cockpit (hopefully we see same way the A-10A cockpit upgrade!) that will bring lots of reasons to fly it again, but many will likely return back to Hornet or Harrier to do the fun flying.

I still prefer the A-10 over the Harrier any day, even without any update.

Before you compare the A-10 to the AV-8 you first have to put them both into the same environment -- and I don't mean weather and terrain.

Once you are able to support a MEU on invasion with an A-10, then you can start comparing. Before that, there is absolutely no point, because you are just treating the equipment of the modern battlefield like a toy box out of which you can pull anything you find any time you want.

The Harrier is great for the DCS audience and especially the multiplayer audience.

 

Why? Because:

- it has short legs, meaning you need to refuel often. Either in the air or on ground. That means a lot of air refueling performed or lots of landings and take-offs performed.

 

- It has speed, but capability to go slow. You are not a A-10C slow, meaning you get to feel the speed of a F/A-18C Hornet (You are not a Mach monster with loadout, only when empty), you are designed to fly at high or perform low altitude strikes. You do what all those do, but you can as well tilt the engines nozzles and fly low like a A-10C and admire the battlefield from your bubble cockpit, better view than in A-10C even!

 

- You are capable to do something that no other fixed wing can, hover and perform vertical take-off or landing. You can do missions with even less fuel and just two bombs/missiles and operate multiple sorties from transitory base from where you need to T/L vertically. You can as well perform jump take-offs, or perform nice short landings with heavier loads. This means you can do a lot of take-offs and landings at very close of the combat and have fun when doing it, insead fly 300 km to carrier or other country to rearm and refuel, continually checking your fuel and being careful not to fly too fast or too low and every sudden engagement means you run out the seconds you need to complete your primary sortie.

 

- You have extremely cool "office". You have almost all the same things that A-10C does have, and little more by simplicity and streamlined operations. And for some reason as you can be more nimble and agile, you have more freedom and safety to fly the sorties as required.

 

- Your weapon loadout ain't bad. If you are going to take-off and land from conventional airfield or you can jump, you can loadout a fairly heavy loads of weapons. The A-10C can technically carry a lot more, but that is stupid thing to do and no one in reality will do that because you lose the speed, you consume the fuel by doing so, and you drain your capabilities and safeties down faster than Harrier. So eventually you and Hog driver are there with the same weapon loadouts anyways, other is still just capable to be faster, has capability for loitering and to go slow, but can punch at any moment down on the ground quickly if required for reloading.

 

The AV-8B N/A IMHO is great example how a A-10 has overhyped and overstated purpose in the Air Force arsenal. Its greatest feature of the air force is the mythical moral promoter when ground troops want to hear "PRRRRRRRRRRRR" and see dust to raise. Something that no Harrier or Hornet can do visually, but effectively with their 20mm and 25mm cannons they can perform same tasks as effectively, with accuracy instead RPM.

 

And what is great thing that many doesn't value, the Hog pilot is a Air Force pilot, the Harrier pilot is a Marine. The Marine knows how to bleed, how to crawl and how to fight among the other marines, while Air Force pilot believes to be above others.

 

The Harrier greatest ally and foe, is the Hornet, not the Hog. The Hog is old, obsolete aircraft on modern battlefield, that Army just doesn't want to give up. And this is great reason why F-35 exist as it will be offering what is required and needed, capability of the Harrier, Hornet and A-10C in one package.

 

In 30 years from now when F-35 module comes to DCS (yeah, right). We get to feel what A-10C pilots were so afraid of. We already feel and see it with the Hornet and the Harrier... The days of hogs has come, it is butchered and everyone is having good time when eating hog meat.

 

And soon we get the new A-10 cockpit (hopefully we see same way the A-10A cockpit upgrade!) that will bring lots of reasons to fly it again, but many will likely return back to Hornet or Harrier to do the fun flying.

Not that the AV-8B isn't a good plane, but it has a multirole focus, unlike the A-10 who succeeded very well in its specific role.

EDIT and in 30 years the A-10 airframes are likely so far over the expected lifetime that they can't even takeoff. While the F-35 wasn't available from the 90ies to today to support the troops on the ground. As WW I biplanes were obsolete 30 years later in WW II... what a stupid argument. :doh:

LOL...

I love how this has turned into an A10 vs Harrier thread...

Both are good, but really the A10 is much more specialized for CAS than the Harrier. If you look at the mission space of the harrier its quite obvious that its much more of a multirole AC. Yes it's not gonna do CAS as well as the A10, but at the same time the A10 isn't going to be doing A/A missions (especially the compared to the AV8B+), or strike missions like you can with the harrier. Neither are ideal for SEAD/DEAD but the nod also goes to the Harrier in that regard.

The OP states how he's enjoying the Harrier and all of a sudden the A-10 pops in, a completely different aircraft in all respects.

How did that happen? No don't tell me.

Just to make it worse, it's about RL instead of IG.

Why not compare like for like.

..

I had avoided this module....

The issue is and has been that alot of stuff is half finished in the bombing system still. Yes I know its EA. But why not just do the basic plane systems first, then add functionality on top of it. Its just an odd way to development to me.

This. The main reason why I hardly fly it now. Their whole EA, specifically the developer, has the structure of a Picasso painting. Makes me wonder if it was rushed in the first place. It also makes me wonder if that’s why their fixes and implementations have been lacking. I don’t know. Just thoughts.

Addendum: When I meant “lacking”, that’s more of a summarization over the whole time it’s been released. I’m not saying that they haven’t done anything. Just seems very.....unorganized. Even though they did try to organize?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

Why not compare like for like.

 

 

..

Not sure what you mean there. Its not like there is another like VSTOL we can compare it to. I guess DCS F35 maybe. Or DCS Yak38 (LOFL, I would buy it just for the auto-eject). :megalol:

Most of the time I spend in DCS, I'm a Hog driver. I bought the AV-8 a few weeks ago and it's a lot of fun. VTOL is real fun and makes a lot of scenarios possible, that the Hog can't keep up with. Of corse, the Hog was built for other tasks.

The AV-8 is in EA, so I'm quite pleased with the functionalities that are available at the moment. There may be some problems, but it's still fun to fly. But with the Viper around the corner, I think I won't have much time left to fly the Harrier. :)

I had avoided this module....

I wish they would start fixing the stuff that really tells it’s still young into EA. (Even though it’s not) Small things like texture errors, incorrect systems simulation, like Harlikwin said, basic things. Still lots for them to fix that is yet to even be touched or may never be. Makes me very worried about the 15E.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Not sure what you mean there. Its not like there is another like VSTOL we can compare it to. I guess DCS F35 maybe. Or DCS Yak38 (LOFL, I would buy it just for the auto-eject). :megalol:

A-10/Su-25.

The Harrier is unique, there is no comparison. Comparing it to something twice the size and newer is pointless. Although conceived for the same RL war, they tackle it in a different way.

Interesting reading though, all the same. :)

..

I too recently discovered the Harrier. Now I don't want to fly anything else...

LOL...

 

I love how this has turned into an A10 vs Harrier thread...

Point was what OP stated about the A-10C and the AV-8B II. But some people just can't accept the truth about A-10C nor the AV-8B being better where it is meant to be used.

Both are good, but really the A10 is much more specialized for CAS than the Harrier. If you look at the mission space of the harrier its quite obvious that its much more of a multirole AC. Yes it's not gonna do CAS as well as the A10, but at the same time the A10 isn't going to be doing A/A missions (especially the compared to the AV8B+), or strike missions like you can with the harrier. Neither are ideal for SEAD/DEAD but the nod also goes to the Harrier in that regard.

It is not about A/A missions, it is about the invasion, landings, and close air support for the marines close to the combat where support is required. The A-10C is not there, it is requiring to have totally different capabilities as it can't be there landing, refueling and rearming and taking off again just tens of kilometers from the front line.

But as you mention the A/A missions, the Harrier is again there where A-10C can't be. One multi-purpose aircraft (AV-8B+) that does both, at day or night. Capability to stay on the station around the clock, in any weather, ready to support ground troops not just against ground forces but as well against enemy attack aircrafts, tactical bombers and other enemy CAS aircrafts, something that A-10C can't do.

Too many A-10 fans sees Harrier as just "A-10's little sister", as they do not fly even in semi-realistic scenarios in DCS.