Standardize pylons on the FS-20.

[exotic pewter]

Im not sure why but the FS-20 has WEIRDLY unnatural pylons. No two pylons carry the same load which is weird. I believe that a few changes should be made:

GPO-500 carryable in the smaller internal weapons bay
Twin GPO-500s on the outboard pylons
Dual Scythes in the larger weapons bay that carries the dual MMRs
ARADS on the outboard pylons
AGM-68s in the smaller internal weapons bay

I do understand this would make the aircraft marginally more "powerful", but my main concern here is loadout consistency rather than strength. The pylons ALL carrying different stuff is very offputting and unnatural in my eyes, and having more consistency between pylons and leaving the aicraft weight as the main restriction would be an improvement.

TL;DR: I want consistent loadouts on the pylons in the FS-20.

[jagged wing]

I’d like to see it get canted heatseeker-only outer pylons, so you could mount MMR-S3s on the wings and have minimal stealth implications.

[slow cobalt]

i wish it could carry 6x Scythes internally, but apparently it physically doesnt fit, literally 1894

[exotic pewter]

yeah or just generic tipwinders

i just want more consistency. Why cant i carry four of the same bomb in my internal weapons bay, its a very odd restriction. Especially with the outboard pylon being so oddly limited. If its for balancing, i understand, but it is not fun to create loadouts with these unnatural, seemingly arbitrary restrictions.

[jagged wing]

6 internal Scythes is weird, because the F-35B is limited to 4 internal missiles total right now, but the Vortex can carry 6 (mixed load)… I think it makes sense for the 2070 setting to be able to carry 6 Scythes, and it would definitely make it more capable. I’m down for it, but if it doesn’t happen it doesn’t happen, I guess.

[slow cobalt]

every time it uses it i feel like it demands to be used in a stealth loadout but only having 2 Scythes is limiting

[exotic pewter]

pylons 2 and 7 are unnaturally stacked in terms of ordinance, 1 and 8 should be similar. And at minimum I want 4xGPOs in the internal bays. I can concede on the scythes (but carrying twin MMR racks is weird then), but this loadout assymetry is yucky. pylons 1,2,7, and 8 should carry almost identical loads.

loadout considerations >

[jagged wing]

AAA could fit 3 Scythes in the bay if the fins folded, seen in here https://discord.com/channels/909034158205059082/1354362924327637095

[exotic pewter]

im fairly firm on pylons 1 and 8 being near if not identical to 2 and 7 in terms of loadout. Im sure it can fit the ARHs in twin racks too, but if thats too OP ill drop it. The wing pylons are a must though, plus the internal bomb bay amelioration.

[slow cobalt]

unfortunately the 2070s era missile still uses canard control and not tail control so those canards take up extra space and you cant reduce the profile too much

[fervent bison]

Cold Option

[jagged wing]

Well, Mitch did say we are getting faction specific missiles down the road. Maybe BDF can get a smaller ARH missile designed to fit into internal bays in higher quantities in exchange for slightly less range. Would make sense for a faction trying to maximize the capability of their single carrier launched fighter.

[exotic pewter]

ill take anything tbh. Just standardize pylons 1-2-7-8 and ill be happy, and throw in the GPO / AGM in the internal weapons bay too. Thats all

[slow cobalt]

give me air launched ESSM style missile or give me death

[jagged wing]

Thread got locked, but the discussion about adding internal PAB-80LR got a lot of support (minus some vocal bad faith posters). The Vortex, Revoker, and Ifrit would probably carry 4 PAB-80LR plus a Scythe per bay in that instance.

[exotic pewter]

PAB80LR isnt bad, im not worried too much about that though. My LARGEST gripe was not being able to carry 4x internal GPO-500s. It feels so weird having to take 2 GPOs and 2 PABs.

Maybe its the autism, but I want uniform loadouts. Consistency.

4x Augers on wings, 4x ARADs on wings, 4x GPOs in weapons bay, whatever it is. Standardize it and im happy. Those internal bays feel WAY underutilized.

[jagged wing]

Can the F-35B carry that IRL? That’s what the bay capacity is pretty explicitly based on

[exotic pewter]

F35 can carry 2x 2000lb bombs, so yeah easily. If it was modeled 1:1 with the F35 this thing should be able to carry like 4 GPOs internal PLUS two ARHs

[jagged wing]

I think it’s an issue of weapon carriages, but I don’t know if the Vortex has a similar intended design for that. But the 35 can only carry a single JDAM per bay

[exotic pewter]

Not to mention the AMRAAM inside the weapons bay as at an angle when stowed (pointed towards the nose), which opens up more room.

[jagged wing]

I don’t think you can put bombs on the AMRAAM pylons, which could have informed the restriction on which loadout slot the Vortex could equip bombs in

[exotic pewter]

Maybe, but if thats the case the inboard pylon shouldnt be able to carry a PAB250 at all. Either drop the PAB250 or add the GPO. Model it after the F35 or dont.

id be happy with either as long as its standardized. Its not the capability im worried about, its the uniformity.

[jagged wing]

That’s a fair criticism IMO.

[exotic pewter]

this cutout view I can totally see two 1klb paveways in a dual config. Its also slightly innacurate with the amraam carriage. The nose of the ammram shoukld be tucked in more, its not straight when stowed.

either way, points stand, solid info passed

[lone walrus]

Bump

[unreal anvil]

Are pylons 1 & 8 the outermost wing pylons? Because I thought heavier ordinance needs to be closer to the wing's base, due to leverage.

[exotic pewter]

yes they are, and no it doesnt have to, depends on the airframe but generally modern airframes are strong enough to handle the same weight

the biggest issue with outboard pylons is when pulling Gs you can get wingbend

they should be built to handle it, it just makes your turning have higher effect on the wings

[fervent bison]

Feel like the vortex doesn't rlly have to worry since it can be a bit of a brick lol

[exotic pewter]

yeah, its a brick, and it has short wings

[jagged wing]

Would be cool to see the Vortex get the Revoker’s triple Scythe pylons as well. Would bring the total possible Scythe loadout to 12, same as the Revoker.

[livid lotus]

concerning what someone said earlier, there is actually an upgrade to the F35 A/C (not B, as specified by CosmicCactus) that is supposed to allow it to carry 2x AMRAAMs inside the bays in addition to the 2x on the doors. so a total of 6 internally. i think canada is one of the countries that will use this config. would lake sense for the revoker to be able to do the same i's say, like it can with 2x2 IR missiles atm.

[jagged wing]

The sidekick upgrade only applies to the F-35A/C, not the B, because of the weapon bay size difference. However, the Vortex already overperforms compared to the B- if it makes it a better balanced fighter, I see no issue with cramming an extra Scythe in per bay.

[unreal anvil]

Not sure if this has been suggested already, but the larger inner mounts in the weapons bay can take a pair of GPO-500s or PAB250s. If they have enough space for a GPO-500, I would think that 2x PAB80s could fit as well. Might be nice to have that added as an option assuming it won't be horribly imbalanced.

[jagged wing]

There was a thread about this, but the internal quad pack of glide bombs would give all fighters with weapon bays significantly better internal strike capability

[hallow bay]

Yeah the higher moment arm creates issues with controllability and wing bending

[hallow bay]

Sounds like you have a poor understanding of moment arms and the effects they can have, particularly when asymmetric loads are involved. Ignoring for a second the potential structural issues with having a heavy object attached far out on a tapered wing, controllability can be a real problem when you expend the weapon on one wing (near the tip) and not the other. The current loadout system seems mostly fine to me. I could understand adding a couple of extra AAMs to the Vortex's internal bays, but large bombs on the outer wing pylons seems like too much.

[slow cobalt]

though AMRAAMs are usually placed on the wingtips of F-16s in order to alleviate pressure on the wing because weight on the wing is caused by it having to lift up the fuselage which causes bending forces at the root, probably more of a thing for aircraft with relatively higher wing loading

[hallow bay]

Correct, there are certain situations where it's actually useful to have a significant weight at or near the wing tip, but only to a certain extent. And it sounds like OP is asking for a 500kg bomb on the Vortex's outermost pylons. That's very different from having an AMRAAM (or in NO a Scythe) on the wingtip

[slow cobalt]

thats fair

[exotic pewter]

then let the player suffer the consequences of their loadouts. Dont coddle them unecesssarily at the expense of possible effectiveness.

unless my wing is actively falling off or incapable of takeoff or normal flight, there should be much less restrictions.

[versed trail]

just looking at this thread, i think there are a few things that are being overlooked

• firstly, the vortex is rather small, and a lot of space is taken up by the plane itself and its engine, so the bays are quite cramped and flat in shape. They basically form a compressed 'U' shape, and cannot realistically fit anything larger than an AGM-68 in the lower section or a2a missiles in the upper section. This is not for balance, but because of design - it is simply not able to fit that much inside. taking a look at the models makes this very apparent, it's a miracle an agm-68 can fit in there at all
• secondly, the vortex must have its roll ducts unblocked by ordinance, meaning that the outer pylons can only ever carry 1x of anything, otherwise the mount would block roll control and you would be unable to roll while taking off vtol or stol. this is a rather realistic precaution. additionally, the revoker and ifrit, the only other afterburner-capable fighters, can also only carry 1x arad on their inner pylon. personally i would say this is also just for balance as medusa is the true arad truck (8x max)

[exotic pewter]

i say your last point is only slightly nullified by the fact that if you're taking that much ordinance you arent taking off in VTOL anyways because you cant

[versed trail]

in that case it's more of an issue with ai, then, since they would just die when attempting to take off from an annex

[exotic pewter]

VTOL ends at 0.94 TWR roughly, and 4xGPO500s with a regular load already brings you down below VTOL limit, so covering the roll ducts would be irrelevant. In the case of AI, yeah you'd need better AI guess.

0.94 twr is possible but agonizing, in reality 0.95-0.96 is operationally useful

in the case of the internal weapons bay, my argument is consistency. Remove the ground ordinance from the dedicated air to air pylon in there and focus more on the external pylons such as above and id be more content.

using vtol with wing ordinance is 9 times out of 10 infeasible as it stands, so basing that off of its solely vtol performance seems shortsighted to me.