The only real use case would be for Jaguar GR.3. It would mean the Paveway 3 (2000lb) carriage being restricted to the centreline on the upgraded Jag, didn’t mean it had to have a separate aircraft carrying TIALD to designate.
2 Likes
Was Aim-9m ever seen on it?
I’ll take this over here.
First things first.
CAMM should be a lot better. Period. Maybe if/when ASRAAM is added, they might fix it.
But also CAMM and ASRAAM are not identical like say IRIS-T and IRIS-T SLS are.
There are docs/sources for ASRAAM that cant be used for CAMM unfortunately due to the differences, like CAMM is capped at Mach 3, but flame has sources for ASRAAM to be more like Mach 5.
So ASRAAM and CAMM should be fundementally different and ASRAAM will likely be better due to better availablility of some sources. Though hopefully CAMM will also improve in the future, its dreadful current
My understanding isn’t that CAMM is capped and ASRAAM is uncapped, but rather CAMM and ASRAAM BOTH have a topspeed of Mach 3 at sea-level/near sea level, so I wouldn’t take the CAMM’s topspeed in-game of Mach 3 to mean anything.
If anything, it just confirms that the ASRAAM will have Mach 5 topspeed at high altitude likely.
As I said earlier, the in-game topspeed is due to surface launched, nothing to do with CAMM’s fundamental design which in the end has the same body and fins as the ASRAAM as I understand it.
There are some documents in the National Archives about ASRAAM, so hopefully they can be used to report it. As you know though whether Gaijin will do anything with those reports is another matter. Hell, they still haven’t fixed the vast majority of the problems reported with CAMM on the first dev server (and I know Aster etc. are also doing bad in that regard).
CAMM in game has is programmed with a hard speed cap of Mach 3, meaning that if you just take CAMM and make it air launched the missile will not be able to exceed Mach 3 even when it should be able to easily. I don’t know if the guy in your video removed that limit or just ported CAMM over 1 to 1. If he just ported it over 1 to 1 then CAMM also has some time to gain stuff going on, which is potentially neutering it’s short range performance compared to what ASRAAM should be.
The max speed of CAMM is hard locked to Mach 3 (well strictly speaking 1028 m/s - the equivalent of Mach 3 at sea level) in game. If CAMM can accelerate to Mach 3 from stationary at sea level ASRAAM can likely accelerate to speeds of at least around Mach 4 when fired from around Mach 1 at Sea Level.
3 Likes
You made a good point about the time-to-gain stuff, I’ll have to see if it can be retested with it removed but as for the topspeed, if it was uncapped for the CAMM in the video then it would compress and maneuver worse due to a higher topspeed.
The reason Morvran pointed out that CAMM has a topspeed of Mach 3 in-game, is because he believes that CAMM having a topspeed of Mach 3 while ASRAAM has a topspeed of greater than Mach 5+ is evidence of CAMM having a fundamentally different design than ASRAAM and why he believes ASRAAM would maneuver differently than CAMM when it is likely that developers believe both CAMM and ASRAAM are limited to Mach 3 at sea level (when launched at zero speeds ofc).
CAMM’s turning performance is tied to ASRAAM. I can’t see why if ASRAAM’s turn performance is bug-reported, that it also wouldn’t be ported over to CAMM as well. Similarly, if CAMM isn’t bug-reported or has its bug reports ignored, then I also can’t see why ASRAAM’s turn performance wouldn’t adopt CAMM’s.
No the point I was making is that flame/gunjob have docs for ASRAAM that can’t be used for CAMM (I’ve asked previously)
That’s news to me, was it regarding specifically the topspeed/motor/manueverability performances?
Yeah that ain’t right, ASRAAM materials have been and are used for CAMM. The issue of maneuverability of CAMM was down to repeatable testing needing to be done, not one of source materials.
1 Like
Also, it seems unlikely that the developers will accept reports based on CAMM being modified to work on a custom aircraft and used as an air-to-air missile. So that prevents ASRAAM information from being used really.
i forgot to remove the limiter but the only difference was the camm without limiter flying in a wider line at the end of the burn, quite far away from the target already
kinda funny how the british ended up making a missile that was less maneuverable than r-73 even though the entire point of the original aim-132 program was to make a missile that exceeds r-73 in all sitations.
You sure it’s not better but just classified lol
in everything other than maneuverability it’s probably better.
I don’t don’t see how it would be better than r-73 in that specific aspect
It doesn’t even have a higher g load, highest g load ive seen for asraam is 50 gs, while r-73 is 60gs
1 Like
It wasnt though.
The RAF/MOD realised that modern IIR missiles would be extremely difficult to defeat so, if 2 opposing aircraft with similar range IIR missiles both fired at each other, both would probably die.
ASRAAM was designed around the idea of being able to fire and kill the opposing target before they can enter range to fire, and thus ensuring victory whilst also surviving the “dogfight” So ASRAAM was built around speed and subsequently range rather than dogfight ability. Its actually quite an agile missiles, but its raw speed means it has a huge off the rails turning radius
Its why Germany withdrew from the ASRAAM project and developed IRIS-T because that is exactly what they wanted, a close range dogfighting missile to beat other short range dogfighting missiles
2 Likes
for war thunder specifically i think it will be a bit disappointing sometimes when you’re close to the enemy, but i like the overall idea of the missile
r-27et
but nato
1 Like
Honestly, I’m not sure to what extent that is true. Documents at the National Archives pretty much universally state that Germany pulled out due to budgetary constraints. They also didn’t start development of IRIS-T until about 6-7 years after pulling out of ASRAAM, which I guess kind of supports the whole budgetary problems thing.
Hmm… interesting