I don’t think pictures exist of the missiles mounted on any fixed wing aircraft yet, at least publicly.
The A-10C is mentioned by name in the AGM-187A’s Brochure and as a UAI Type 1 store, it can be mounted on the BRU-61/A with no additional work to the airframe, since it can already carry the GBU-39 / BRU-61 it would only require a software change at most.
There’s a few pictures of them mounted on an F-15 in the above the brochure.
3 Likes
Checked the dev server this morning. The A10C gets it’s GBU39s. Pretty dope. Still over Br’d in my opinion
On Four stations or Six?
Yeah, I think ideally it would have been 11.3, because we already have 11.7 and 12.0 options, but no 11.3 one (at least not anymore since the AV-8B NA moved, but I really don’t want to count event/premium vehicles because I don’t have infinite money to spend).
Seems that Gaijin is still trying to fix the 6x AGM-65D + TGP “bug”, unsuccesfully so far, and with max of 4 AGM-65s it’s hard to justify this thing at 12.0. GBU-39s are nice, as they get about 6km range tossed from sealevel altitude (the altittude you are forced to be in at 12.0 with the A-10 anyway), which is a big improvement over the nearly unuseable <2km of the GBU-31/38s in the same position. APKWS is otherwise still quite bad, especially since the rocket CCIP marker is still bugged due to the EEGS.
2 Likes
Agreed, I heavily use the SU39, and it’s by far the best cas experience I’ve had so far. It’s two KH29TE can reliably kill targets for up to 15km. the KH25L are good for clearing up IR spaa system and and the 16 vikhrs are good for taking out tanks. I don’t even play it at 11.3. I play it at 12.0.
We still have the SDB-II, JAGM-F, ( P-JDAM) and L-JDAM and other assorted stores (ATP-XR, ATP-SE etc.) as potential additions in future updates should the BR need to be adjusted or maintained.
So there is quite a bit in terms of reserve capability that could yet be implemented and that doesn’t even account for various configurations of (guided) CBUs and alternate warheads.
1 Like
Not having to face Pantsir does wonders for these slower CAS planes. Though one for one I guess you could argue the A-10C should roughly match the BR of the Su-25SM3 (though a bit lower, so 12.0 works), but having to face Pantsir changes the dynamic by a lot for something as slow as the A-10.
I do however have a bug report out which got acknowlegded, which may improve the Mavericks flight performance by a bit, because at least according to one real life test, it’s quite underperforming. So this may improve NATO CAS performance a little. But even in the best cases, it will still be worse than a Kh-29, and especially Kh-38s. But yeah, as of now even wtih 0 drag in-game performance of the Maverick apparently can not match the documentated performance, which is peculiar.
Fun fact.
There is a bug for Su-25BM that you can guide Kh-25ML with optic of KAB-500,which make it basically Su-25T in 11.0. literally the game changer.
There is a set of diagrams of maverick’s flight profile in AV-8B’s tactical manual,about the range,TOF,terminal angle/speed of the missile.
according to that file the maverick in game is underperforming a lot.
I thought they patched the bug allowing 6 65Ds and a tgp.
No, you can still force the TGP on by selecting a laser guided weapon, on live and on the dev server too still. It will prompt you to remake the loadout on each login though, or if you move the A-10C to a crewslot.
Huh interesting I thought they would have had that fixed now.
I guess there easier option would be to give the sniperpod and just allow the 6Ds
I see after update dev server
But gajin increase max BR to 12.3 or 12.7 for Ground RB & SB mode ?
In my opinion, A-10C from USA tech tree might equipped Sniper ATP-SE
I might hope gajin change to this targeting pod instead placeholder targeting pod (AN/AAQ-28 Litening II) winter major update this year or the major update 2025
In dev server A-10C lack GBU-54 LJDAM (not sure GBU-54(V)1/B or GBU-54B(V)1/B) ?
I don’t think it changed, but I expect it not to have changed, as GBU-39s especially on a platform as the A-10C would not warrant a BR increase imo. If anything, it’s what it should’ve had from the get go.
Also apparenlty GBU-49ss have been spotted in the game files, did the A-10C carry them? Or was it only the LJDAMs?
Gajin might no problem increase BR to 12.3 (Ground RB & SB)
Sadly, I never saw GBU-49 Enhanced Paveway II in the cdk file
Right 👍. A-10C access GBU-54 Laser JDAM (LJDAM) but not sure might be GBU-54(V)1/B or GBU-54B(V)1/B
You used to just have the regular TV camera for all your missiles, they changed that though sadly.
The ASSTA 1 got GBU-54 LJDAMs (currently WIP, copy paste of GBU-38), perhaps the A-10C gets them too then. Though I don’t think they would be terribly useful, again due to <2km range at low altittudes.
It might be too powerful for now, but I wonder if Gaijin considers adding the GBU-39B/B (GBU-39/B with LJDAM laser seeker) as well. It would make the A-10C, I think, a lot more worthy of being at its BR where it’s now at. Though I have never seen a picture of them actually being mounted to anything really, does anyone have a picture of the GBU-39B/B irl? It’s been fielded since 2014 and the only picture I have of it is from testing.
