Yeah thats a more apt comparison considering its a single warhead heat.
No, there is also a precursor and a main charge
really? i was told otherwise, is there something i can read to inform myself better on the bill? is it like on the tow2b to maximize damage? or is it to deal with era?
Just a tandem ATGM. To neutralize ERA. Probably JAGM can do that too.
ah i knew about the tandem, i worded it completely wrong.
I asked Gunjob after a week via DM, no update at that point. Three days ago I asked smin, got the following in response.
Still no update at this point.
2 Likes
wow, deny legit bug reports for no reason, and then say you will give the reason later but never get to it
why am I not surprised
1 Like
looking at their reply, its stupide that they deny this when less capable sensors an artillery shells are treated as proxy fuses
especially given that there are sources confirming that it was designed to fill a limited air to air and ground to air role
Ok, we’ve got a response to the Proximity fuse for JAGM report.
"The altitude sensor, which measures the distance to the ground, is not a non-contact target sensor capable of detonating the warhead if it misses an air target.
Against ground targets in the game, this type of detonation would be useless. As we do not have infantry in the game against which such a detonation method would be effective.
The method for obtaining altitude above the target is not specified. Given its image, we have no reason to assume that this sensor was capable of responding to an aerial target. Secondly, that it had a circular radiation pattern that would have allowed it to respond to a target while flying past it.
As such, with the current information, this is not considered a bug."
And It’s fairly flimsy, at best. I’ll take it apart in short order. Starting with the low hanging fruit.
Against ground targets in the game, this type of detonation would be useless. As we do not have infantry in the game against which such a detonation method would be effective.
Do I even need to point out that it’s there to increase blast effects, and its only down to how HE and Fragmentation are modeled in game that it has a limited effect(since the refraction wave and Fragmentation are simply modeled or non-existent), it’s not as if Light / unarmored vehicles; such as the M1097 / LAV-AD are unmodeled. And besides it’s only really there to deal with near misses not to make use of the multi-purpose warhead’s Blast-Frag detonation.
The method for obtaining altitude above the target is not specified. Given its image, we have no reason to assume that this sensor was capable of responding to an aerial target.
Did they forget that the JAGM has a MMW seeker, Also @Abyss_Revenant if you have a proper source for the excerpt, it may be useful, in getting this overturned.
[/quote]
Secondly, that it had a circular radiation pattern that would have allowed it to respond to a target while flying past it.
There are many examples of fusing not needing angular resolution due to sidelobes Take for example the AGM-45
The method for obtaining altitude above the target is not specified. Given its image, we have no reason to assume that this sensor was capable of responding to an aerial target.
A radar return, is in fact a radar return it won’t care what it actually is only that the fuse’s actioning requirements be satisfied. Why wouldn’t it be able to it’s not like any of these constraints are modeled for other fuses, why this one in particular be treated differently?
6 Likes
Oh wow that’s nonsense
So, as I said…
Proof that mmW seeker can be proximity if it needed. ERINT-1 (PAC-3)
As we can see JAGM-16K is used also for CUAS. APKWS also with HOB/prox fuze. XM1211 also can be used like HOB and like proximity for CUAS
Article that Apache used JAGMs for UAV interception Army Demonstrates Apache Counter-UAS Capabilities | Article | The United States Army
it really feels like a random mod showed up, said no without explanation
and the rest of the mod team didnt want to do what they should and fix it + ban them so had to bs an explanation
2 Likes
Is this not pretty much the Igla/Stinger thing all over again?
‘We don’t really have a RU equivalent so it must be impossible.’
Nobody tell them about BVs - hot running water and everything - else half the UK Tank Tree will be removed.
1 Like
they do though, vikhr is a similar missile in being designed for both anti armor and limited anti air
I’d similarly point to the AGM-114L-7 & -8A, as it specifically mentions all three elements of; Proximity fuse, a C-UAS role, and MMW seeker.
https://x.com/CENTCOM/status/1840877417591677141
1 Like
Is it worthwhile to make a new bug report with more evidence?
probably, even just proof that it has been tested against air targets should (if gaijin were reasonable) be enough to show that the MMW radar it uses for HOB can detect aircraft, especially because some of the drones it was tested against and intended to target might not be able to set off contact fuses due to their size and construction
1 Like
Probably, I just need to find evidence that contradicts the Dev’s responses.
With how much focus there is right now on marketing it as an anti-drone option, there will likely be a marketing video released within the next few months showing a detonation on a clear miss which is going to be irrefutable by the idiot devs.