“It incorporates active radar with an inertial reference unit and micro-computer system, which makes the missile less dependent upon the fire-control system of the aircraft.”
Huh contradicts this but whatever carry on
All that means is that it has an onboard radar. Does not mean it can find new targets.
This part is true it is less dependent then SARH missiles which don’t have onboard radars.
- Any DCS/FalconBMS manual, forum, video, or discussion.
To explain in simple terms: “mad dog” is when you fire an AMRAAM without a lock. The missile onboard radar will instantly start looking for targets, locking onto the first thing it sees. At no point is the launch platform’s radar involved. You simply fire the missile, and it does the rest.
Also, regarding the MML - Multi-Mission launcher, it doesn’t seem like it has a radar. Like the other AMRAAM SPAAs, it too would need a radar trailer, and if trailers are on the table then the AMRAAM option would be preferable due to it’s greater range. Besides, I don’t think the game is ready for AIM-9X - it would be way too lethal.
Another option could be the Stryker MSL, which is an M-SHORAD , with an advanced variant of the Avenger (AN/TWQ-1) turret that can accept the AGM-114L or AIM-9X, of the various configurations possible with the system of offensive modules, and an advanced 3D AESA (AN/RPS-42 , Multi-Mission Hemispheric Radar) radar(claimed detection out to 20~35km for the relevant target set).
Alternately the AGM-114L / -179 (including the proximity fused version(s)) could serve in a similar role as an AMRAAM equipt SAM, but with comparatively reduced performance factors.
Or the IM-SHORAD, which uses the RIwP ( Reconfigurable Integrated-weapons Platform)
Isn’t this the M-SHORAD configuration that was recently named Sgt. Stout?
Hmmm… I don’t think it’s gonna be very good for the situations we have in game. AGM-114 has a top speed of Mach 1.3 compared to AIM-120’s Mach 4. You’re not gonna threaten jets with it.
That leaves helicopters, which are difficult to kill with radar missiles. Regular radar is easily fooled by chaff, and PD radar doesn’t even see the helicopter, as the signature of the spinning rotor blades is not modeled.
The AGM-114L would be cool, and possibly effective against ground targets, but it’s not the cutting edge AA system that I feel is needed right now.
Edit: don’t get me wrong, I want the M-SHORAD in game, as an upgrade to LAV-AD. It just can’t fill the long range AA gap that the Pantsir does.
How about actually researching these things before you go into a thread and make stuff up on the fly because you don’t want the vehicle added?
“The launcher is operated by the Launcher Control Terminal (LCT). While the launcher can be fired by the crew, utilising the LCT, this is an emergency option only. Under standard operational procedures an engagement would be conducted remotely by the Fire Distribution Centre (FDC), which could be situated up to 20 kilometres distant from the HML and to which the 3D AN/MPQ-64F1 Sentinel radar and the other HML vehicles of the unit would be linked.”
It can fire without a connection to the FDC, and without a connection to the FDC, it can’t get any targeting data from the radar.
2 Likes
Maybe the MML has some issues but all of these are secondary sources not primary. None are .gov or .mil or are from operators manuals. Meaning they are not sufficient for War Thunder.
Example? I admit I was wrong on some things but I did not make them up. I heard them from other places.
Look… I am normally very understanding, but now I’m starting to lose my patience.
You seem very determined to not understand/believe that “mad-dog”, “bore” or “dogfight” employment of AMRAAM is a real practice. This is a basic feature of virtually all active radar homing missiles, anyone with even a cursory understanding knows that it’s possible.
If what I’ve posted so far doesn’t convince you, then I won’t waste further time digging through documents. You will probably find a new reason to reject whatever that says too.
You are welcome to find these documents yourself.
Thanks tripod that is a real document with real statistics. If its possible with the AIM-7 i’m sure its possible with ARH. At least you provided evidence to support your claims.
I just happened to have the relevant excerpts already on hand.
2 Likes
Norwegian, not Swedish
There has to be some form of communications between a missile, a radar, and a fire controller (or control center) for it to fire. Because of that, there has to be some method of communicating to the missiles on the Humvee that they should fire. So far, there’s been no source suggesting that a control vehicle or radar lock is 100% required to be able to fire the missiles, or that the personnel within the Humvee are entirely unnecessary for the firing process to happen. Due to that and the fact that the missiles themselves have an active seeker, there isn’t a reason to believe that the Humvee operators could not have given the missiles the go ahead to fire (and since they have an active seeker head, it would lock onto CAS and go do its thing).
Well, there you go. A source proving my logic.
2 Likes
Did you even click on that link? How can that source be trusted? Further, thats the Norwegian one not the SLAMRAAM. They are similar but not the same.
To be honest I does not even matter if this gets added I will just stick below 50m in my heli and all you can do is stare at me. Would only be good against planes, it would be helpless to helis. Due to lack of manual control you cant override it.
The SLAMRAAM program originated from the Norwegian NASAMS system, and the vehicle in that article (the NASAMS HML) is the same vehicle that was tested in SLAMRAAM. People call it the SLAMRAAM because the vehicle was in that program, not because they are separate vehicles.
2 Likes
You did not address the sources authenticity.
so your basically admitting you just dont want good spaa added to the game then
The MML would be just as good. Newer avenger systems also could work.
none of them have the range, also AIM9-Xs’ arent in the game, but AMRAAMS will be in a few days.