Semi-active too.
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.
Boeing make one with AIM-9X and Hellfire-L. The AIM-9X is not far away now.
Neither of those systems have the range unless you can provide something else. Not only that neither of said systems are in the game, and seriously a hellfire against jets? Those are strictly meant for low-flying/ low speed aircraft. Meanwhile the AIM-120 is coming in the next update and has multiple land based systems you can throw it on for a much quicker spaa delivered to ground for gameplay. But yes lets go the route that doesnt add a top tier spaa like you want.
The hellfires would be used the same the hydras are on the LAV-AD. Eg you cant have to use them for anti air more for anti tank. Did you think the hydras were for jets? I don’t think Gaijin is concerned about how fast they can throw it together as that would be worse as it would come with many bugs from the air launched version.
Same with the AMRAAM. You would need a radar to launch and if not at least find targets that are over 10km away.
this is a discussion for Anti-Air not ground… Nice deflection when you know your wrong
Multi-pathing requires “look down” geometry to be established, and A2G radars in WT aren’t impacted (recent balance change implemented wit Alpha Strike update) outside Sim anymore, so its likelythat Surface to Air missiles may well inherit that capability, whenever Active radar missiles / TVM capabilities are implemented.
- Tracking radar and IR tracking of SPAA — a limiter to the angular velocity of a tracked target has been added to eliminate abrupt turret rotations on close fly-bys of a tracked target. In such cases tracking will stop immediately.
- Tracking radar of SPAA — multi-path effect has been disabled in Arcade and Realistic Battles. The received reflection of the target is shown with its own marker. The ability to lock your own missile in Realistic Battles has been disabled.
AMRAAM also almost certainly have sufficient signal processing power to use algorithms (and a Digital autopilot) that make low altitudes a non-issue, much more so for the later variants with their various improved / revised systems.
Depending on target RCS and aspect angle the onboard seeker is good for between 16~28km. Also if we do get the IM-SHORAD Increment I at some point, the RPS-42 is good out to 15~35km.
2 Likes
ADATS being half ass AA and TD is actually working against it. It used to be good, but with missile update and now the missile having smoke trail (like Pantsir), it has:
- Bad guidance (no stabilization with wobbly and lackluster energy missile).
- Not among the fastest anymore (Pantsir and VT1 are much better).
- Not one of the longest ranging anymore.
- Cannot track target if the weather is ever so slightly cloudy.
- Close range cannot pull enough G, too far and can’t really guide and hit target if it manuevers slightly, medium range sweet spot without enemy doing hard manuever at 4 to 6 km where it can reliably kill.
- Can’t even use the missile to kill MBTs reliably. It’ll overshoot or hit the dirt under it or hit a tree cause it wobbles. If it does hit, you can’t really aim the missile thanks to the missile update, so you’ll hit enemy turret or ufp and does nothing.
1 Like
So the russian line up is excused for having the best spaa for like the top 3 brs cause competent pilots might exist?
I think that adding one indestructible shared radar per team behind their spawns might a good idea.
It would make spotting and locking targets easier in the SLAMMRAM and would make other systems that need a seperate radar, like the MICA VL, this would give other nations more options when it comes to top tier AA.
I don’t know if you can mix radars and launchers from diffrent systems but I think sacrificing a bit of realism for gameplay would be ok here.
2 Likes