AV-8B Harrier Thread

[microvax]

Maybe we have a misunderstanding here.

The nozzles are hot no doubt, but in a typical turn fight, the heatseeker looks at the wings and flaps if dropped. Now the only "heat" visible is the hot air dispersing under the flaps... It won't be a 100% and likely less effective against modern all aspect seekers, but in a dogfight together with viffing, it gives you an advantage.

 

Ye sure, like a topdown would be again more similar to a side aspect on a plane with a "normal" engine config.

 

And that should be modelled if it can, my question still is, is it even possible in DCS. :D

[Esac_mirmidon]

Currently i dont think so. But its a very interesting debate.

[Karon]

A quick one for Zeus&Team: do you have any news about the APKWS? Last time I checked (r/hoggit) it was being developed by ED / common effort.

Thanks!

[Vitormouraa]

Chizh said it's planned, ED will eventually make APKWS.

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3264406&postcount=735

 

Also this:

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3264426&postcount=737

[Isegrim]

Iam a little bit Confused about the flight model of the AV-8B.

I always thought we are getting an EFM for this module but now there is written AFM to the Product description.

 

So how good is the Flight model ?

[joey45]

EFM - External Flight Model is 3rd party

 

It's probably to AFM standard.

 

on ma mobile

[Esac_mirmidon]

AFM, EFM and PFM are different words for the same result.

 

Advance Flight Model and External Flight Model are synonimous and used by third parties.

 

Profesional Flight Model is the word used by ED.

 

The result is the same.

[WarHawk72]

Found this not sure if it's been posted all ready, from the Shoreham Airshow 2000 a pilots perspective of a routine combined with commentary from within the cockpit.

 

 

Could not work out how to embed it.

Edited November 2, 2017 by WarHawk72

[Tyrant07]

Found this not sure if it's been posted all ready, from the Shoreham Airshow 2000 a pilots perspective of a routine combined with commentary from within the cockpit.

 

 

Could not work out how to embed it.

 

Really great video, that man is a master at his craft.

[dhevans79]

Really great video, that man is a master at his craft.

Yeah, it's great to hear him talk through the turns, gives an impression of the g-forces. Something I don't really have any feedback on from dcs lol...

 

Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk

[Temp89]

AFM, EFM and PFM are different words for the same result.

 

Advance Flight Model and External Flight Model are synonimous and used by third parties.

 

Profesional Flight Model is the word used by ED.

 

The result is the same.

 

No it isn't. They have clear definitions and impact the plane's performance.

 

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/support/faq/505/

 

It goes PFM > AFM+ > AFM > SFM.

 

EFM just means "not built in-house" and quality can range from PFM to SFM, but reduces the odds of having a PFM due to full SDK access issues.

[Esac_mirmidon]

Thanks for the clear description.

[microvax]

I think they just meant its an advanced EFM and didn't mean the AFM TM standard.

 

Its bad though in terms of unclarity for sure.

[comie1]

Found this not sure if it's been posted all ready, from the Shoreham Airshow 2000 a pilots perspective of a routine combined with commentary from within the cockpit.

 

 

Could not work out how to embed it.

 

Awesome vid find man :thumbup:

[Chris1012]

I am refering to "Sea Harrier over the Falklands" by Commander "Sharkey" Ward, As CO of 801 Sqd. he most likely knows what he is talking about.

 

There must be a reason the boys called him "Mr. Sea Harrier".

The details are in the chapter were they train with the USAF Aggressors and the F-15 squadron. By the way, they did pretty well against both...and that was without the Blue Fox radar, which was installed later that year.

 

I'm not sure Sharkey's book should be relied upon as Gospel, for fairly obvious reasons for those who have read it - the combination of his constant (I'm re-reading it now and highlighting, it's literally every page) criticism of every person and decision who didn't see his way of thinking and his set of priorities and self promotion as the best pilot in the task force, if not the Fleet Air Arm (recall how he immediately dismisses assessments by SHAR pilots back in the UK as "not exactly the aces of the base") really makes it hard to consider it a credible account, which is a shame because I'm sure a lot of it is a truthful retelling.

[shagrat]

He seems to have an issue with some egghead decisions. And the one thing with the radar being "useless", which obviously pisses him off.

There may be different views on these things, but when it came to getting soldiers killed through "bad decisions" he has a point.

 

He is definitely negatively biased against the brass, but never when it comes to the Harrier and his work with it.

 

There are other mentions beside Cmd. Ward that refer to the AV-8 (though the older A) and it seems the Marines found as well, that it's a neat little fighting machine that can challenge supposedly "superior" platforms, easily.

 

What we need to take into account is the fact, that Ward refers to the 80ies Sea Harrier and F-15C. The standard armament would have been AIM-7 Sparrows and AIM-9L at that time, as well as the AIM-9L on the SHar at the time.

 

Still the nozzles are pretty much masked when rotated down and the flaps are at 25° or more... Which will reduce the "hotspot" of the nozzle. Something normal jet engine nozzles won't. Helicopters and ultra-modern as stealth jets/bombers use diffusion and dispersion to mask exhaust plumes, but not 80ies/90ies fighter jets.

[uscstaylor]

Very Cool vid Hawk Thanks

 

Here's my contribution. The Real VMA-231 Harrier pilots....Salute to all of our men and women of the armed forces.

 

 

Edited November 2, 2017 by uscstaylor

[WarHawk72]

Very Cool vid Hawk Thanks

 

Here's my contribution. The Real VMA-231 Harrier pilots....Salute to all of our men and women of the armed forces.

 

 

Great video thanks for posting that :thumbup:

 

I should stop watching and searching for these videos as it make the wait feel longer, soon though :pilotfly:

[some1]

There are other mentions beside Cmd. Ward that refer to the AV-8 (though the older A) and it seems the Marines found as well, that it's a neat little fighting machine that can challenge supposedly "superior" platforms, easily.

 

.

 

To be honest, I haven't found much praise about the Harrier from the pilots of different aircraft types that flew against it, and even Harrier pilots give mixed opinions.

 

"Roger ball!" book has a detailed account of a dogfight between Harrier and F4. The Phantom pilot was initially surprised by the little jet agility, but then he just separated thanks to superior engine thrust and reentered the fight on his terms.

 

While the exhaust nozzles in the Harrier are somewhat masked from above, which may be an advantage in a dogfight, they are nicely exposed form below. They are also located in the middle of the fuselage, so a SAM exploding nearby has a higher chance to damage something vital, than in a conventional aircraft that has the exhaust far back.

[Dudikoff]

To be honest, I haven't found much praise about the Harrier from the pilots of different aircraft types that flew against it, and even Harrier pilots give mixed opinions.

 

"Roger ball!" book has a detailed account of a dogfight between Harrier and F4. The Phantom pilot was initially surprised by the little jet agility, but then he just separated thanks to superior engine thrust and reentered the fight on his terms.

 

Yeah, that sounds more likely, IMHO. I'd expect the Harrier might surprise more capable aircraft if they are careless enough to tangle with it at low altitudes and slow speeds, but otherwise I wouldn't give it much chance.

 

The visitors were fully equipped with their radar and were simulating Sparrow AIM-7E missiles, Sidewinders and guns. The SHARS were without radar but were fitted with their radar warning receivers and were simulating Sidewinders and guns. The two combat sessions were set up over North Devon and the Bristol Channel, with the dissimilar pairs running in towards each other from a distance of about 40 nautical miles. My team were given radar direction from ground radar by a brilliant Direction Officer of many years' experience named Harry O'Grady Having spent years flying the Phantom and using the Sparrow missile, which has an excellent head-on firing capability, I knew how to deny the F15 a valid Sparrow shot from head-on and had briefed my pilots accordingly. The tactic worked well. There were no head-on claims from the F-l5s as they ran in and, as the two aircraft types entered the same airspace, fully developed combat began.

 

I presume he's referring to notching to deny a BVR lock here? I can't find the dates so perhaps only rear-aspect Sidewinders were available back then which would certainly play into Harrier's favor to deny a lock to the zooming F-15's.

 

Though I'm suprised by the AIM-7E reference. I wouldn't expect that F-15's carried those since the AIM-7F was available since 1976.

Edited November 3, 2017 by Dudikoff

[NeilWillis]

The Harrier would never come off best against a dedicated air superiority fighter. But why would they? You might however struggle to engage with an F-15 if your runway was cratered enough that it denied you the use of it.

 

Comparing the Harrier's dogfighting attributes like that is tantamount to comparing the boxing skills of Mohammed Ali with Mr Bean. If you want a sardine sandwich made fresh while sitting on a park bench however...

 

The Harrier has a very specific role, and at that there isn't a single aircraft ever to fly that can best it.

 

It's a bit like expecting a Jeep to win the Le Mans 24 hour. But of course a Corvette wouldn't be much use in climbing a mountain, so like this comparison, it's utterly pointless.

[shagrat]

Yeah, that sounds more likely, IMHO. I'd expect the Harrier might surprise more capable aircraft if they are careless enough to tangle with it at low altitudes and slow speeds, but otherwise I wouldn't give it much chance.

 

 

 

I presume he's referring to notching to deny a BVR lock here? I can't find the dates so perhaps only rear-aspect Sidewinders were available back then which would certainly play into Harrier's favor to deny a lock to the zooming F-15's.

 

Though I'm suprised by the AIM-7E reference. I wouldn't expect that F-15's carried those since the AIM-7F was available since 1976.

Yep, most likely AIM-9L as they received the AIM-9M shortly before the Falklands.

 

As I said it has an "advantage" in a dogfight, but not a magic "win-the-match" button.

 

It depends on how DCS can/will model the heat signature, as well as on how pilots can/learn to use this to their advantage, together with the option to viffing (thrust-vectoring)... Unfortunately it is very hard to find videos, or documents describing parameters etc. for these specific maneuvers.

 

Keep in mind we get a ground attack plane, not the SeaHarrier II or a AV-8B+, which have a radar and AIM-120 Amraam, at least the SeaHarrier being built with fleet defense in mind.

 

It will be interesting to see, what DCS pilots will try and achieve with this little bird.

It definitely has some cards up his sleeves...

 

And if we ever get the AV-8B+ and/or a SeaHarrier II that may be interesting from a BVR perspective.

[shagrat]

The Harrier would never come off best against a dedicated air superiority fighter. But why would they? You might however struggle to engage with an F-15 if your runway was cratered enough that it denied you the use of it.

 

Comparing the Harrier's dogfighting attributes like that is tantamount to comparing the boxing skills of Mohammed Ali with Mr Bean. If you want a sardine sandwich made fresh while sitting on a park bench however...

 

The Harrier has a very specific role, and at that there isn't a single aircraft ever to fly that can best it.

 

It's a bit like expecting a Jeep to win the Le Mans 24 hour. But of course a Corvette wouldn't be much use in climbing a mountain, so like this comparison, it's utterly pointless.

Actually they did against the F-15C... Just saying. ;)

 

And they also were pretty good against the more agile USAF Aggressors in their F-5, before that. Which would from my point of view rules out the option of "being lucky against inexperienced pilots", as the Aggressors are usually top notch.

 

Only factor may being surprised by the SHar's agility, but that would only count for the first or maybe second match.

Pilots like the Aggressors will quickly adapt and not underestimate their partners after one or two mock engagements.

 

The point is, the SeaHarrier's role is the one of Fleet Defense and Multi-Role attack as a secondary.

As the airframe (SeaHarrier II is more or less an AV-8B+/Gr.9 with different Radar) hasn't been modified, the capabilities excluding the radar for A-A combat is the same in the AV-8B.

[NastyFruit]

Is it just me / the NV, or does it look like the engine in the harrier that is landing @2:10 in the vid, is having a really bad night? (Looks like the compressor blades are touching the housing and making lots of sparks?)

 

I don't know much about jet engines, but surely those blades should not touch the housing?

 

Would be interesting to hear from some of our more experienced members :)

 

Cheers

 

Edit: Sorry if this is considered off topic.

 

 

Very Cool vid Hawk Thanks

 

Here's my contribution. The Real VMA-231 Harrier pilots....Salute to all of our men and women of the armed forces.

 

 

Edited November 3, 2017 by NastyFruit
Disclaimer for possibly being off topic :)

[Chrinik]

Guys, the true flightmodel ranking should look like this.

 

PFM

-

AFM+

-

-

AFM

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

SFM

 

Don´t be too scared because it is "only AFM", first of all, the SU-25T is AFM+, the SU-25 and A-10A are AFM, and I hear no complaints about their respective flight models.

 

AFM might be easier to work with, reducing the much dreaded "flight model bugs" that plague so many people with, for example, the Mirage, who then complain endlessly that tiny (or huge) details are off.

 

The PFM F-15C, Su-27 and new SU-33 have however all recieved criticism regarding their flight model accuracy, and I have personally witnessed these birds doing stuff that is just improbable...

 

And it doesn´t stop them from pushing a more advanced flight model later, but with solid ground work done. We witnessed the flight model testing and development, it looked to take into account lot´s of factors.

Edited November 3, 2017 by Chrinik