Static tanks for sure. From the available material the scene would just be matched with the target point where the tank is. But it’s not tracking the tank persay, it’s seems it uses the edges of the scene to inform the guidance. That way you can still hit your target point even if the scene is slightly different.
But it doesn’t really track things in the traditional sense.
IIR Hammer is clearly a very accurate weapon system. As has now been documentated in video over recent years. Just doesn’t work at all in game like it should. And largely would only come into it’s own if GPS/GNSS accuracy gets modeled.
That is a thing Agm 65F is not in the game. And the agm 65g is apparantly baseg on the D. So those just might lack that.
And for the likes of KH38 the IOG seems to always work
This is for Taurus, and I think Taurus is different in that it actually operates an imaging head the whole flight for guidance using known terrain features being matched to what the KEPD can “see” and where its GPS/INS system say it should be, but this is a video of the actual terminal stage of the Taurus KEPD from the seeker POV, so it can maybe give a better idea of what these seekers are “seeing”.
I knew id seen this video before, I just had a really freaking hard time remembering where. Taurus also has a 2 way datalink tho, and can be retasked or strike moving targets afaik, though the only moving target that would warrant a KEPD would also be a ship.
SCALP definitely isnt meant for moving targets except maybe ships, likely similarly to the AASM
Matches the seen area to the pre programmed area, and once it confirms it is the correct place, it corrects itself ono the designated target in said area.
As far as I know Storm Shadow / SCALP has no moving target capability. To my knowledge It has never been advertised as having an anti-ship capability, and in Ukraine the only ships it has hit have been ones that are in dry dock or otherwise moored / stationary.
Semi stationnary is more likely “stationnary targets that have moved before the missile hit” in that it has a 2 way datalink, so it can send back info and receive new coordinates to target. I dont doubt it could hit a moving ship either considering the seeker, but it’d likely need to be guided to the appropriate coordinates to pick it up in the first place.
I’m not sure how to interpret that TBH. I guess it could mean it has a capability against some form of moving target. But personally I’m leaning towards it meaning stuff like S-400 / Patriot air defence systems; they are not stationary targets in that they can move (unlike buildings / bunkers), but would be stationary at the time they are attacked.
Edit: Or as Mythic said targets that are stationary when attacked but have moved position slightly compared to when the strike was planned.
Well, considering the AASM can access the rafale database before launch to get the information of how a vehicle looks like, as long as said vehicle is still in the seeker FoV and missile capabilities, the missile should still be able to connect with said target even if it moved from the original targeted area/is moving slowly.
That’s similar to the MMW brimstone which I believe has a rather short range and «goes « pitbull » only a few kilometers from target, according to this document (well more precisely it should detect the target a few kilometers before impact):
While the rather small time window the AASM has after seeker activation and its more limited maneuverability, especially at those range, doesn’t make it a very good system against moving targets (and mostly useless against fast moving ones), it’s not a capability that I believe is impossible.
But anyway, it depends on how the IR target is actually transferred to the missile by the rafale. And as only the rafale is said to be able to transfer informations, as @DirectSupport mentionned, I wonder how the RMV AASM would work. Is it preprogrammed before launch (like the SCALP) ?
If so, it would be completely incapable of targeting moving targets
SCALP Storm Shadow also use terrain feature guidance for the whole flight.
Actually, I would tend to believe that both missiles use the same base algorithm for their guidance, seeing that the guidance system of both systems are very close and the system used by the SCALP and AASM seems to also be used by the German, although on which system is not said (but the Taurus is the only German system that similar to the SCALP hence my assumption)
I might be misunderstanding, but I’m almost 100% certain the IR head cant hit a moving target specifically due to how it works.
The “seeker” isnt really a seeker from the sounds of it, its just an imager thats used to compare images and not continuous video feed to what its supposed to hit.
This section mentions the imager tries to match the scene to its pre-programmed target image:
This section mentions this is done twice, which sounds a lot to me like its taking 2 pictures. 1 at 1500m alt, and then another from closer in where it tries to get better resolution for that 1m CEP.
Which to me implies it is not continuously comparing what it see’s to what its meant to target.
If its really only taking 2 pictures then theres no way its hitting a moving target.
The key point to me is that it mentions that the onboard guidance will produce an error vector based on comparing what the IR head see’s vs what its supposed to see, and adjusting trajectory to compensate for the error. This in no way means its locked onto a target and guiding in real time, it means its checked where it was going to hit vs where its supposed to hit, and adjusted accordingly.
But from the information provided it appears the AASM IR seeker is used for scene matching rather than target tracking. So it will not be
To put it another way: the AASM doesn’t fly to the target area then turn on it’s seeker look for tanks. Instead it is given a map of the area surrounding the target before the mission (or perhaps the map can be uploaded during the mission or more advanced platforms). When it reaches the target area, it switches on the imaging seeker and compares what it sees in the front of it to the map it was given.
The map will tell it the location of target relative to major features, the seeker can then identify the major features and steer the weapon accordingly.
AFAIK, that is the basic guidance for older system (Mirage 2000 testings in the 200s) which requires preprogramming in the same way the SCALP, Taurus… are preprogrammed.
With the Rafale being able to provide accurate target data before launch, it should be able to correct its course towards said target even if it’s not on the same mark as it used to be before launch, as long as it’s in the general area.
When I say moving target, I’m mainly thinking of stuff like SPAA (in game) that might move only a few dozen meters from targets. Let’s say the AASM is 1.5km above the target in terminal guidance at Mach 1, the bomb will hit about 4-5 seconds after the sensor activates. With 2 correction, one 5 seconds before impact, and the last about 2 seconds before impact, that is largely sufficient to hit at least near the target, and since the AASM is a bomb at its core, it’s definitely sufficient to destroy the target even if it’s moving at lets say 20-30km/h
