Brimstone Missiles

Machinery of War Discussion Aircraft
1

I’d like to talk about the new Brimstone Missiles that have been announced for the Tornado GR4 strike jet coming to the game.

Now Gaijin has chosen to not give them the mmW seeker for the sake of balance. Now I do agree with this change, however the reasoning and the way it was adjusted are the topic of discussion today.

First Gaijins reasoning.
image
There is absolutely nothing wrong with this particular reason, in fact I agree with it completely. LOAL is a mechanic far too strong for the current game and I feel some degree of LOS should be needed in the current game state.

HOWEVER Reason 2 is the problem
image
This reason, falls apart at the first hurdle because as it stands at top tier the 2 most prominent A2G weapons both create this very problem they claim to want to avoid.

The AGM-65D and G mavericks can easily engage outside of the 12km effective range of most SPAA (barring the pantsir), however in their defense they’re slow and easy to shoot down for the best SPAA at top tier. however, the KH38 does not suffer this issue.

The KH38 between the missiles own parameters and the targeting camera available to the Su-25SM3, can easily engage from well beyond 18 kilometers (thats beyond the effective range of even the best SPAA in the game the pantsir which it rarely fights) not to mention there’s 2 versions of the KH38. The 38L will give tanks with an LWS a notification so that they may laser to avoid it, problem is the KH38s blast radius is so massive even if you smoke against it unless you’re long gone it will still kill most vehicles. The KH38T meanwhile gives you NO warning and no room to combat it either as SPAA or as a Tank.

Now once again I do agree the mmW seeker is too strong to add into the game as it is more accurate than a TV or IR guided seeker, and can see through smoke.

My solution?
Give the Brimstones an IR seeker head. Ahistorical accuracy is not a counter argument here as the weapon has already been modeled ahistorically, as the FnF mmW seeker is the main reason behind this weapons design. So for the sake of the integrity of this weapons identity, an IR seeker that can be switched to SAL would allow the identity to be retained while allowing this weapon to actually be competitive in the game state. or alternatively model them like SPIKES…

Alternatively, if this change is deemed unacceptable due to ahistoric reasons… then just remove the plane entirely from the game. There is no reason to add these weapons to the game if you wont model the weapons sole defining trait for “reasons”

That’s like going to buy a car and it’s missing the engine. But these are simply my thoughts you’re free to share yours and I do hope gaijin considers some kind of rework because this problem will affect not just the GR4 but also all future Brimstone users.

32 Likes
2

It’s a British system and only Britain use it.

I agree with the justification it needed to come with a compromise of being a fnf missile “mini maverick” Instead they removed what made it unique put it on one of the poorest performing airframes in game and said there you go Britain.

At the same time they added a Su-34 and F-15E with more egregious weapon systems

4 Likes
3

Everyone agrees that Lock After Launch would be broken. But why do people say the mmW Radar seeker will be broken? The only advantage is that the Radar can see through smoke, but since 95% of the time you only know youve even been targeted when you are hit. You dont have smoke deployed. So it will be the exact same in a regular match as spikes with their IR seekers.

10 Likes
4

it could solve problems by just giving it the same search and lock moder as the KH-38. But gaijin didnt do that… by the way Su34 could use her radar search ground targets now but AH64D cant search ground targets by its Longbow radar XD

1 Like
5

Keep mmW seeker, don’t implement LOAL. Having the higher accuracy and being able to go through smoke shouldn’t be an issue as there’s so many Russian vehicles already do this with little counter. Also, surely Brimstones should be easier to counter as SPAA because they should give off a bigger RADAR signature because of the mmW? They fly slowly too so they could just be shot down by SPAA like we already do with Mavericks.

I think the only issue is the LOAL where they can change target after launch, just don’t implement this part of the missile. I’m not sure if the Brimstones are designed to reacquire the same target if it gets obscured and comes back into view, but this shouldn’t be a problem as people can just hide behind buildings like they do with Mavericks or Spikes. Whenever I see someone die to a Maverick or Spike my first move is to get behind cover like buildings or trees.

5 Likes
6

The one has only W on his keyboard: no plz delete all FnF missiles XD

7

Find it funny tbf, Its absolute Bull**** with the excuses made, “We wont add the track mode because it can see through smoke” 2 games in a row now I pop smoke, The KH-35 doesht give a shit still tracked me through the smoke IMO hit me top down direct centre as I was trying reverse away with smoke between me and it… I don’t care if people say “Ohh it wasn’t tracking you though” The missile continued on its path through the smoke and hit me… Thats still tracking the target through smoke doesn’t matter how you word it.

1 Like
8

Gaejin logic prolly

9

Whenever you think there’s no bias, they come up with ridiculous stuff to justify ridiculous decisions. “Brimstone fire and forget would be too op”. Meanwhile Pantsir is A-OK. Su34 with fire and forget is A-OK. Not to mention artificially nerfed radar on the EF2000

3 Likes
10

It would of been Lock on After Launch.

I also would rather them model things correctly rather than give weapons a fake guidance system.

They should not “just give brimstone IR lock”. They should of waited until the game was ready for the brimstone, and other lock on after launch weapons, to be added.

1 Like
11

Can’t wait for USN F-18 with brimstones

12

F-18 has brimstones?

13

image
here

14

Marines would maybe use JAGMs

15

It’s a super hornet, navy jet

But yes, the marines probably would use JAGM

1 Like
16

BTW, why do I see Brimstone PNL in the game, when most of the CAS films about the plane uses SAL version?

17

the best solution can be a short operetional zone for the launch, similar to the drone (8000) or maybe more short (5000) and leave the radar system, it’s hard to enter in the operetional area for the spaa, so you can obtain a great reward if you manage that

18

Additionally, MMW band blocking smoke formulations do exist. The issue is that not all countries have an equivalent as far as I can find, though it wouldn’t be the first or last time systems are simplified for balance reasons.

The advanced development program for the M81 grenade was conducted from 1987 to 1992. In the transition to full scale development, the Operational Requirements Document (ORD) required the grenade to provide IR and MM instead of just MM protection The Grenade, Launcher, Smoke: Millimeter/Infrared (MM/IR) Screening, M81 was type classified in 1995 and is scheduled to begin production in 1998.

and so in effect they be modeled the same as existing IIR seekers “under the hood”.

1 Like
19

Hey all,

I’m a big sim player and one of the main issues I have with the brimstone in it’s current state is just how insignificant it is when compared to other CAS systems in enduring confrontation.

The 6 maverick + 2 GBU loadout, the GBU39 loadout, and the KH38 or Grom 2 loadouts that other comparable aircraft get allow them to burst 6 or more ground targets at once, while also not having to commit to guiding the weaponry in, and be heading home for more ordinance as soon as the weapons have been fired/dropped. The brimstone carrier on the other hand has to loiter on target and guide each brimstone in which takes longer and puts the carrier aircraft at much higher risk, for much slower returns.

It is also worth noting that chaining brimstones is not as easy as chaining hellfires on a heli, or chaining KH38MLs and KH25MLs: The hellfires are easy to chain since the platform carrying them doesn’t get closer to the target in between launches, leaving a useable gap in between each missile determined by the user. The KH38MLs/KH25MLs also maintain very good pace until hitting the target, meaning a chained missile fired closer to the target still won’t catch up to the first missile unless fired at extreme range. The brimstone on the other hand runs out of booster fuel quickly, and then slows down like a brick in mud to the point where I often find chained brimstones often get very close to each other despite being fired with seperation, which means you cannot hit multiple targets consistently.

The praise I will offer the brimstone though, is in ground battles against SAMs. Here both the lofting characteristics and extremely slow speed actually enable you to launch a brimstone with IOG over a ridgeline or just very low to the ground, turn away, wait until the brimstone approaches the target, and then turn back towards the target and pop up to lase the brimstone in the last 7-10 seconds of flight before a SAM can respond. This can also be done effectively with the paveway IV though, and is not an exclusive feature to the brimstone.

Anyway, just offering some food for thought and my two cents on the subject.
Do with it what you will.
Cheers all,
Sebdspy

20

Theoretically The Brimstone has a significant “magazine depth” advantage against the mobile target set; like Convoys in comparison to the GBU-39/B, since the Laser-SDB I & SDB II are not implemented (yet, GBU-53/B is in the files). Though currently needs to take the time to pick them, off one at a time which balances them, not that a LOBL profile (even if not actually present IRL) would be too good in my option even with the way things are, considering the reduced range that MMW seekers have (approx. 6km limit).
Assuming of course as previously mentioned above, IR / MMW obscuring formulations of smoke were provided globally to provide some counter in GRB / GSB.

The GBU-39/B is sufficient against massed static targets. And the Grom 2 is good against armored / area profiles with the large warhead.