Im curious howd theyd handle a massive FoV AASM. Target ID would allow it to only hit ground vehicles corresponding to the same type as initially targetted and avoid destroyed tanks, but prevent a player from being able to actually target a target specifically.
This would be rather odd but broken. On thr flip side, I still think they should set the seeker track rate to 0 deg/s, making it incapable of tracking a moving target, as there still seems to be no proof the missile can hit moving targets.
There is another problem.
AASM takes only 2 pictures in 2 points, it does not have a continous track. 1 used to figure out where it is, and 2 to make sure it impacts the target. It will have troubles with moving things.
We don’t know anything about that, what is certain is that it receives a first picture before the shot and that the seaker is activated in the terminal phase, whether it only takes one image or not is never specified
We only know that the bomb can more or less become inactive if it doesn’t find its target.
The real question is, once the seaker is ignited and the AASM lands on its target, does the seaker remain focused on the target or does it just take one picture to find the target?
In the first case, this would probably mean the ability to track a moving target, but in the second case, it would only update the initially given position.
It’s about acquisition, not image capture, an acquisition can be done over a time period while a picture is instantaneous
The question is how the acquisition is done, if it’s just via a single picture, fine, the bomb updates its coordinates and captures the new position, but if it’s a longer acquisition, target tracking might be possible.
This is the problem, if the sensor follows a series of images focused on a target, if the target moves, the system should be able to correct its impact position in real time, but if it is just an image the position will only be corrected once.
I’m not saying that this or that idea is the right one, but we must avoid jumping to hasty conclusions.
This game doesn’t really operate on “nerfs” and balance other than withholding report implementations for balance consideration. If you think a plane needs a nerf, then you have to provide historical justification for it. European vehicles beating your favorite F-14s and F-15s isn’t a justification.
Almost garanteed its a single image taken twice in the terminal phase:
Following aquisition, an error vector is produced and new guidance coordinates are produced from said error vector. Its then redone 1 more time to meet the 1m accuracy requirements, which imo suggests that the process is not continuous and the imager does not have the resolution during 1st aquisition to hit its 1m accuracy req.
If the guidance was continuous, it would not need multiple aquisitions, and it would not produce itself a new set of target coordinates based on the estimated error vector.
2 images would satisfy the requirement for the plural to be used, this point of yours is just misrepresentation of the info to match your beliefs.
As I said earlier, I’m not trying to jump to conclusions, but to remain neutral. I’m just trying to understand how it works
If the processing is done with only two images, then so be it.
However, having studied image processing systems, I find it surprising that only two images are processed during the descent time. because if only 2 images are processed during the 4 to 5 seconds it take the bomb to impact this can mean several things, either the processed images are exceptionally complex and therefore require a significant processing time (due to their size or composition), or that sacrifices have been necessary in terms of energy consumption
