If AGM-65Ds are the best we can get on the Gr7, despite being Ahistorical, then more advanced AGM-65s or Brimstone have no chance currently. Aim-9M maybe, but I doubt we’ll see those until maybe Q4 this year or Q1 next year and even then, may not be added onto Gr7
I can maybe see the Gr9 being a premium, but I think its too early for it
Could’ve just have been a lack of information on the Blast Penetrator Fragmentation Mavericks. My internal report covers them properly now. But yes the British Harrier II’s only operated the non-HEAT Mavericks.
Yeah, we can hope. Though I can see it also being deliberate to curve it being too strong. Many complain about their range and strength currently.
I mean if you’ve two SPAA within 10-15m you might get a double kill, but for the most part they should be as lethal as the HEAT Mav’s.
Ah, though I’d imagine the more modern variants though would have longer ranges and be more accurate? Or is the difference between all the variants warhead type?
Though what little I know about Brimstone, I definetly dont see those for a while.
The JX & K series use a CCD seeker which should improve accuracy and range but I think that might be in comparison to TV seekers rather than IR. I’ll quote Tripod2008 on that one;
GR7 is cleared for nearly all the BPF warhead Maverick;
Ah thank you, so most differences are seeker type and warhead type. That makes more sense. Definetly would be good to see more added then.
Yeah the AGM-65-G2 should have near identical performance to the AGM-65D in terms of range and target acquisition, just more likely to catch collateral kills. Of course this hinges on a proper implementation, because the warhead is only 80lbs so if its not modelled properly it could terrible at cracking tanks, something it should have no issues doing.
Yeah, fingers crossed then
Pretty sure that there was a relevant excerpt in the Maverick section somewhere in the GR.7 manual you have, that mentioned it explicitly IIRC.
But otherwise it’s from this document it claims that the CCD seeker is three times better than the existing TV (Electo Optical), which using known limitations of the -65A / B against tactical targets (e.g. a T-62) which is only 3~4km slant range (under absolutely optimal strike conditions). The limiting factor on the use of the EO variants was that the seeker wasn’t great, this was fixed with the change to IIR & SALH seekers, though they have their own issues.
If the CCD seekers were properly implemented it would simply bring the AGM-65 to the same ballpark to which the-65A/B they are in game currently the -65A/B have a point track range of 6 /12 km respectively achieve, somehow. while being only able to be accessed by modern airframes.
Which of course isn’t a bug, but a deliberate decision , which I’d personally hope that they revise at some point so the correct ordnance can actually be provided and help limit the impact of its proliferation outside the BR range of SAMs, and serve as a check on the very early systems adopters and lead in airframes that some nations get that otherwise don’t have sufficient performance to back them up so are often lower then they probably should be in an A2G context.
You guess gaijin might consider change targeting pod from Thermal Imaging and Airborne Laser Designator (TIALD pod) to Sniper Advanced Targeting Pod (ATP) on Harrier GR.7 this year ?
I wouldn’t think it was considered a priority for gaijin to have it on GR.7.
The pod was in essence a counterpart to GPS/INS munitions capability, and primarily to be used with Paveway IV (which was only on GR.9 and BAE Warton’s GR.7A development airframe)
The GR.7 model we have as is, lacks the GPS antenna on the spine that was added to some aircraft as part of upgrades to use Enhanced Paveway II (prior to GR.9 and Paveway IV) so reflects an aircraft from way before Sniper was around. It has the “frog eye” inlets on the LERX though, which is typically a GR.9 feature and only on some GR.7s (IIRC it depends on the size of the LERX)
Sniper and AIM-9M are unlikely to be seen on the GR7 at this point. Given the reports have been in for sometime, they would only be added as a balance decision. All speculation of course but I’d expect GR9 to have Sniper and AIM-9M so its different enough from the GR7 to be interesting. Second we start bolting on everything to the GR7 then the GR9 becomes pointless to add.
AGM-65G2 is the exception as the AGM-65D was supposed to be a placeholder until the BPF Mavericks come.
So I hope any day gajin consider Harrier GR.9A with AIM-9M, Sniper ATP, AGM-65G-2 and brimstone I
I don’t know Harrier GR.7 could get 2nd AGM-65 Maverick Q3 ?
I don’t know when it will be fixed, but its unlikely to be an addition moreover a replacement for the existing AGM-65D, at least that is what was in my report. the 65D wasn’t carried by British Harrier II’s.
You guess dev might consider another AGM-65 replace AGM-65D on Harrier GR.7 this quarter ?
No idea on timescales.
So Harrier GR.9A with AIM-9M, Sniper ATP, AGM-65G-2 and brimstone I for sure ?
Officially I don’t know, but personally I’d guess so. Also again AGM-65G2 should also come to the GR.7 as it didn’t carry the D Maverick.
How will the G-2’s or F’s perform vs tanks? It is it going to be reserved for LAV’s and SPAA?