SPAAG are very capable, it requires skill you use them. You may be unfamiliar with that attribute.
1 Like
Thanks for adding tremendous value here…IGNORED!
Sure thing…As I said, I have already submitted video evidence that you’re wrong.
1 Like
Reading your response had me like:
2 Likes
65E/WDU-24/B is pretty badass, we’ll see if Gaijin models the new warhead right
1 Like
Yes the agm65 rly need the buff. But the mig29smt too
SMT will get a buff with the R77/AIM-120 update
Considering Gaijin’s handling of HEAT and lofting profiles its unlikely we’ll see any fixes any time soon (iirc HEAT is limited to a maximum of like 20mm of overpressure pen regardless of the warhead mass)
Smt need a better flight performance or normal irccm in the r73 so this need and not a r77. Gaijn cant programing the arh missles normally like aim54. Fly low and the missle go to trash.
R-77 should be mostly trash in WT anyways seeing as the speeds and alts its designed to be launched at are atypical for WT.
Gaijin wont model it as such though, so dont worry.
As for the multipath issue, its widely reported, its just down to if the devs actually want to fix it, since its entirely a design issue of their own making.
1 Like
which speeds and altitudes are you referring to?, because the r77 would keep out-ranging the aim 120A/B in pretty much every situation.
R-77 grid fins have an advantage in drag at high mach numbers over regular planar fins, but act as literal airbrakes in the transonic regime (effect is most pronounced between M0.8-1.3) any subsonic or transonic launch will significantly impact the missiles kinematic performance, to the point where a surface launched AIM-7M attains ranges of around 26km while a surface launched R-77 attains ranges of 12km.
WT is not a game where much of the combat occurs above M1.3, or even above M1.0, and as such, the R-77 if modelled correctly(which it wont be cuz gaijin), should suffer horrendously in-game if used in similar ways as things like the AIM-7M/R-27ER are currently used (sub 10km shots at transonic/subsonic launch speeds). At high alt and high launch speeds it would likely perform somewhere between the AIM-7M and R-27ER, but missiles are not typically launched in those conditions because it is incredibly easy to defeat them in WT.
(Using the AIM-7M as compairison since the RIM-7M is widely used to this day and well documented, along with the fact the R-77 and AIM-7M have very similar dimensions.)
Is the smoking from the vehicle intentional?
Fun new thing I found recently regarding the AGM-65 post pen effect.
RPG-7 damage:
AGM-65 damage:
as can be seen, the AGM-65 not only make a fist sized hole in the back of the tanks turret, but there is a SIGNIFICANT amount of shrapnel damage seen from the explosion.
We all knew this already, but its good further proof that gaijins modelling of the AGM-65’s damage is incredibly wrong and needs to be corrected. This thing should be dealing significantly more damage than it does, particularly to lighter plates like the tops of tanks, or Pantsirs, which love to not die to hits from this thing…
It should be impossible for a ground vehicle in-game to survive a penetrating hit. Even a non-penetrating hit should be causing significant damage to all externals near the impact point.
6 Likes
The pattern on the turret Makes me wonder if the FISC warhead wasn’t revived at a later date. since the HEAT warhead apparently doesn’t fragment.
excerpt from ADA220095
Distribution:
APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
2 Likes
I think its probably just something to do with the fact that 50kg of TNT blowing up is bound to send stuff flying.
Gaijin likes to act like all the energy of HEAT warheads is purely directional, but its not, amd the massive explosions we can see from any AIM-54 impact videos proves it.
Further the fact that we know the liner is Aluminum, and that Aluminum is pyrophoric, there is another reason for strengthened post penetration effects, which could be simulated by allowing it to interact with the overpressure mechanic without restriction.
2 Likes
At the end of the day, its gaijin you’ve gotta convince that 50kg of TNT and a pyrophoric aluminium liner punching a fist sized hole into the top of a tank, or going off against the thin skin of an SPAA vehicle, would result in more damage than a thin line, not me.
Its gaijin that patently refuses to treat HEAT as HE with a directional component, and that pretends like pure HE munitions (oddly enough, the majority of russian air launched munitions) is VASTLY superior in on hit effect to a HEAT warhead (oddly enough, common for NATO air to ground munitions) of equivalent size…
Clearly, the S-25O (58kg TNT high explosive warhead) is VASTLY superior an anti-armor weapon when compared to the paltry AGM-65D (51.19kg TNT high explosive ANTI TANK warhead) used by those silly western nations
2 Likes
Cant forget that they arbitrarily won’t add the HE / APAM warhead variants (e.g. M151, M229 AGM-65E & F-/-G, Mk.63 , AGR-20A APAM, etc.) for various rockets & missile families ( 2"(Gimlet), 2.75"(Hydra), 5"Zuni / HVAR, 6.5" (ATAR) etc.) balance reasons.
At least it seems like the AGM-65G will be added with its warhead intact, though at least at this point I doubt it’s going to be retroactively added to most of the airframes that could carry it which defeats the point.
1 Like
Funny how the 65G is only being added now that Russia is getting the Kh-38 with 40km range and an option for laser or thermal guidance…
3 Likes