Per PaulK and as always sounds well-founded and appropriate.

 

"Here's the math on your problem:

 

fuel factor of 3.53kg/nm

145kts/240=0.6nm

Performance Effects

Altitude effect = 2.5 (just my way of stating 1/.4)

Throttle effect = 4

 

The "Performance Effects" are used to determine range equivalents (in terms of fuel expended) for aircraft that deviate from Clean loading, Cruise altitude and Cruise throttle setting parameters upon which the basic endurance numbers are based.

 

Range equivalent of fuel used based on Altitude (and load) effect = 0.6 X 2.5 = 1.5nm

 

Range equivalent of fuel used based on Throttle effect = 0.6 X 4 = 2.4nm

 

What this says is that if you were at cruise throttle you would have burned 1.5 nautical miles worth of fuel to travel that .6nm at low altitude and if you were at cruise altitude you would have burned 2.4nm worth of fuel to travel that .6nm at FMP. Since throttle setting has a greater impact use that equivalent range of 2.4nm to calculate fuel used.

 

Fuel factor of 3.53Kg/nm X 2.4nm = 8.472 Kg of fuel burned in that first movement phase to get .6nm away from the ship."

 

 

Cudos to TonyE as well, as I believe that he was on the right track despite all the chaff I was launching last night.

Naval SITREP #25 (Oct 2003) is the issue which discusses Harpoon Form 5 Aircraft mission Planning and contains the "official" Harpoon aircraft Endurance Rule change.

 

"In Rule 3.3.2 (page 3-6 of the 4.1 rules), in the second paragraph from the bottom, change "Aircraft must move 20% of their maximum speed..." to "Aircraft must move at least 50% of their speed at Full Military throttle...""

From NSR #28 - April 2005

 

In the H 4.1 rules (3.3.6.5,p.3-12), strike both formulas and replace them with the following:

 

(minutes at FMP/60)*FMP Speed (knots)*FMP Endurance Modifier = Cruise range needed

 

(minutes at Afterburner/60)* Afterburner Speed (knots)*Afterburner Endurance Modifier=Cruise range needed.