The only thing only ever test fired but never approved was Brimstone, as it was test fired on a classified version of the AH-64 that we don’t know if was fully production components used [for example could have prototype equipment only used on that version], and England pulled out of the request.
So instead Boeing kept testing SPIKE and JAGM, and both were approved for AH-64E use.
its a 11.7 longbow apache with hellfire K’s 30 flares/15 chaff+ 15flare, no IRCCM no starstreaks or any other gimmicks the other ones have
1 Like
Ehh it just sounds like a slightly worse apache A which sits at 11.7 to. All the A has is 9Ls but still all apaches need to be buffed
2 Likes
i mean we got Israeli AH-60 with 16 spikes so why not lol
it can add agm-114L for ah-64D
AGM-114L Hellfire LongBow
- Produced: 1995–2005, 2016
- Target: All armored targets
- Range: 8,700 yd (8,000 m)
- Guidance:
- Fire and forget millimeter-wave (MMW) radar seeker coupled with inertial guidance
- Homing capability in adverse weather and the presence of battlefield obscurants
- Programmable fuzing and guidance
- Warhead: 20 lb (9 kg) tandem shaped charge high-explosive anti-tank (HEAT) insensitive munitions (IM) warhead
- Length: 71 in (180 cm)
- Weight: 108 lb (49 kg)
The problem is the MMW seeker. They’ve been hard denied for now and they won’t consider a placeholder alternative such as IR guidance for them at this time
Maybe suggesting a vehicle first will open the 114L for testing and seeing how it performs.
2 Likes
Apache wouldn’t suck as bad if the freaking IOG actually worked properly
1 Like
for some reason they are very hesistant on improving the 114’s
1 Like
Perhaps, though doesn’t the soviet ATGM thing with a radar basically already have MMW at least in a round about manner?
As far as I am aware it is modeled correctly. At least the IOG
While the khrizantemas radar is mmw the missile itself is radar beam riding instead of mmw active radar seeker like in 114L’s if i remember correctly
Teamkilling and undefeatable means not possible.
thats true, but given the the biggest reason given for not adding 114L was being able to track through smoke while the khrizantema can already do that its a bit annoying.
I know the missiles are approaching from a different angle so you do have more cover against khrizantema than you should against 114L but it still feels a bit off.
given how KH38s act currently with IOG and sometimes reacquiring people who smoke I dont see an issue adding 114L as long as they make it require a lock before launch like they have with ARH air to air missiles.
1 Like
Yeah, but the principle would be largely the same, except it’s not FnF and it seems like their issue with air launched versions is the fact that normal smoke doesn’t work
The longbow radar is capable of target classification which makes me question it’s capability of IFF.
1 Like
The “MMW would result in mass TKs” too me is the weakest possible argument. Because even with the Brimstones “head towrads this area and find your own target” mode. It was capable of identifying target types iirc and would be pre-programmed to go for specific targets. Meaning a Leopard and a T-72 could be near each other and if it was programmed to go for theT-72, it wouldnt target the Leopard.
But just like SARH or ARH missiles we have in air. Just manually pick which target they should be fired at first and it is no issue unless you;ve been stupid. At which point, they are no more dangerous than even SAL guided weapons
2 Likes
brimstone has a higher resolution than the longbow FCR the longbow cant identify a tank or spaa model, it can only tell difference between different types of vehicles eg spaa, tank etc but not go into specifics of whether it is an abrams or a t72
Yes, but it where Brimstone might be fired off from well beyond line of sight maybe as much as 60+km away with Brimstone 2 and 3. The hellfires wouldnt be.
I think they have a LOAL mode, but it likely wouldnt be used if there was any concerns about friendlies being anyhwere close by. Instead it would rely upon the radar on the Apache or even use a direct line of sight mode. Both of which would have inherrent IFF properties.
So again, not necessarily any more dangerous than an IR guided missiles used in the same way
yes but our problem is that dumb players will be dumb and while the nctr if it was that good could prevent it, i have a feeling a lot of those dumb players wouldnt bother to visually check especially if theyre keeping the radar above terrain but rest under the terrain
well the way you iff in the apache is by visual. the radar itself cant iff, youll have to zoom through the camera
im sure good players would always do this but the dumb people ruin it for us
i still hope for apache with spikes, atleast.