Strictly speaking, PGM could also have an option for man-in-the-loop control via a datalink pod in a similar manner to what we’ll hopefully have on Martel
Unfortunately though, the pictures we had of Tornado fitted with PGM didn’t have the datalink pod equipped, so it’d be a decision for Gaijin to make on whether that was extended to Tornado’s PGMs or something only for the Mirage’s that are equipping them in the French tree.
Examples of the datalink pod on UAE’s Mirage 2000 and F-16 Block 60
If they really wanted to push it, (Post WWII ) remote control ordnance could apear as low as 8.7 with the A-4E, with the Walleye I & II ERDL.
It’s be fun, sure but maybe not the most balanced of additions.
What about a pair of skyhawks, one Australian and one from New Zealand.
To what degree of accuracy, hitting a 10,000 tonne ship at 10 knots is different to hitting a 10 tonne SPAA at 30 knots.
I would arrive so hard if they did that.
But remember the tec vid, Gaijin HATES Australia
It is as accurate as the man guiding it can be with the crosshair.
Martel has a listed CEP of 10 ft (meaning 50% of missiles will hit within 10ft of the desired impact point). For comparison the listed CEP of AS.30 is 30 ft, and people have no problem killing tanks with that in game.
fair enough
In game performance will heavily depend on how exactly they make the seeker work; i don’t know the specifics for the Martel’s schema IRL, but the Walleye & GBU-15, use a two loop seeker, where the pilot places an electronic gate over the desired point of impact and the seeker performs Prop nav. the same way a sidewinder does to set the missile’s intercept triangle properly, there is no functional difference between the target moving and correcting error in the flight path of the missile(e.g. due to drag or other effects).
Yeah, about what I though, seems to be very similar.
I wonder if its just going to be the Electro Optical MARTEL this patch, or if datalink pods for existing ordnance will turn up along side it(since by abstraction, there is practically no difference between them), or other items are going to be added (AGM-84E, AGM-130, AGM-154, AGM-158, etc.).
The (US)F-4E & A-7E could certainly use better options. (F-16C, has a few stores in particular as well)
Half makes me wonder if the F-111F / F-15E or A-10C / AV-8B+ / A-4M, F/A-18A are going to turn up next and if they are going to get advanced ordnance options considering this breaks the gates wide open for a multitude of options.
Also how SAMs are going to counter them as most don’t have great search radars, or guns to perform last ditch lead walls like some Russian systems (the secret to killing them is knowing that if they are targeting your position the missile will stay in the same apparent location) so are probably going to really need to be on their toes, or the SP cost is going to be prohibitively expensive to take the datalink.
Might just be martel for now to try and judge how it performs in game.
Martel cruises at about Mach 0.75, and has a sustainer motor that burns for around 90 seconds. That does make it a fairly large and obvious target, compared to something like a walleye.
The closest direct counterpart would probably have been the AGM-53, had it seen service. but I don’t know if Gaijin would go to those lengths for the A-6 / F-14 since it was not procured though did complete flight testing.
just another pgm……
Time to riot
The Maverick G, denied to the Harrier Gr.7, has now been given to the Gripen.
Edit: @Gunjob do you know if the Martel will remain a bad maverick, or will it get man-in-the-loop?
no CR2 mantlet remake, and fox is in 7.0. Also the best JAS 39 give to italy
True dude
Hopefully they add it to everything else that carried it, but we’ll need to wait for the dev server to see
