Russian Heel -> RE: Stickied thread for minor database issues? (10/14/2013 9:00:00 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: emsoy quote:
ORIGINAL: Russian Heel B-52H loadouts for AGM-86s only have internal rotary launchers starting with the 1989-0 CALCM (entry 1909)The external 12 are unavailable nerfing the BUFF's AGM-86 payload by 60% from 20 to 8. The loadouts for the AGM-129 are listed as 8 on the internal rotary launcher. This was not the case. 12 129s were carried externally only. Source - I know the answer to the question "Why not Minot?" and 1014 > Balls 37. Thanks, you're right on the AGM-129, have updated these. It seems the full 20-ALCM loadout wasn't/isn't used operationally. In the early years it was common to carry 12 externally, but since the 1990s these have been carried internally. And so they do in the database. I could, as a compromise, also make the external loadout available post-1990s even though that's less realistic. Whatcha think? Ahh! Lost a long post because I tried to post a picture of a B-52 from 2010 loaded with 86s externally and couldn't. Short version, in the 1990s at Minot AFB during a nuclear sortie generation exercise every B-52 that was to be loaded with 86s was loaded with 20. I'm not trying to be argumentative, I know in Desert Fox and Allied Force the CALCMs were only carried internally but the 5th Bomb Wing's nuclear role had 20 as the loadout if the a/c was slated for 86s. Though I guess one could argue that they were loaded externally for training reasons since there was never an actual nuclear sortie. I guess really it doesn't matter, I don't suspect there will be too many scenarios built requiring a 3 ship of B-52s to launch 60 nuclear weapons. I can live with internal only, as long as you moved the 129 Advanced Gravity Bombs, oops! I mean Advanced Cruise Missiles to the pylons which you said you did.
|
|
|
|