I have used the mav and yes it struggles with low speed launches. But no way is it so weak that it plops down at anything less than 4km even with a super low speed launch.
Try with harrier?
I can later, but am not at home rn
1 Like
Tag me when u do!
Hovering harrier.
580m altitude
65D
5.40km range
1 Like
It’s a bit difficult to use Mavericks when you’re completely stationary as they tend to dip before they loft. launching them at an angle usually fixes this issue. Even then, I find that they struggle to even stay in the air.
Maybe I’m using it wrong, but this is how I did it
Looking at the first shot closely, the reason why it fell that short is because it lost LOS when it dipped
damn… average (sucessfull )engagement distance would appear to be… 1 km.
@Alpharius11348
u were right.
but not exactly.
the mavericks are messed up. the FM seems to be wrong. as well as the guidance logic. they tilt downwards too much and dont retain enough speed at all.
yeah they should go much further than they do in game
there is an accepted bug report on their time to target but its been sitting a while so dont expect a fix anytime soon
im gonna hop on now and test low alt range against a moving target
3 Likes
launched from 150m Ralt on a consistently slow moving target at 3.4km slant range barely hit
launched from 75m Ralt on a consistently slow moving target at 3.3km slant range, was around 300m short
both launched from hover with a slight manual loft
1 Like
If I’m reading that correctly, the range for a maverick missile launched at 0 knots airspeed and sea level altitude should be a max of ~11km?
That should be proof enough to change the missile’s performance pretty drastically. Wonder if it just has the drag profile of a fridge in game.
I think so. There was a bug report made on it a half a year ago.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/RUUZn9rqeGYA
Probably one of the main reasons why they aren’t fixing it is because the planes that have them will need to be looked at for balancing.
But hey if there was a document saying that the drag is much worse, I wouldn’t be surprised if gaijin implements it the next day.
2 Likes
Yeah in this case it is obvious mavs have been hard locked to subsonic speeds by gaijin (ahistorically and inaccurately).
2 Likes
I think part of the reason too why it hasn’t been actioned on is that it is only 1 datapoint I could find. The document I found for this report was the only publically available one that included a time to target figure, but sadly only for one test. So it’s not exactly easy to tune the missile to reality just based on that.
There’s entire graphs however for time to target in the AV-8B tacman, but although unclassified it is export restricted so I can’t use it. But it too shows in-game performance is a bit too low as well. I did some random launches to compare, and interestingly enough one lined up really almost perfectly with the graphs, but 3 others didn’t. Seems that the longer the range, or rather the more the maverick is forced fly at low altitude (higher drag environments) the more it deviates from its real performance. However TOF differences aren’t that drastic according to the graphs, however impact velocity is significantly underperforming.
I think it’s actually the lofting that is probably incorrectly modelled. It instead of staying at high altittude, it drops to lower altitudes too much, lowering it’s speed but also lowering the flight range to be more direct, which in turn decreases its TOF. Instead it should probably maintain altitude more, taking a longer path, but keeping speed, so that TOF is roughly maintained, but slightly faster still, whilst the missile has more energy left for more range/maneuvering targets. Drag I think is just overal a bit too high as well probably, judging from the real life test in the bug report.
Tests results compared to graphs:
Spoiler
Pretty rough graph reading, so the figures compared to real life (in orange) aren’t exact. Tacman has graphs for M0.7 and M0.9, so launch speeds above that should actually result into a more favorable outcome.
-
AGM-65G no.1
– v_launch = 849 kph (M0.72)
– altitidue = 2559 m
– range = 14.4 km
– tof = 60 s (+9%, +5s)
– v_impact = M0.48 (-23% at least) -
AGM-65G no.2
– v_launch = 1079 kph (M0.91)
– altitidue = 2475m
– range = 11 km
– tof = 36 s (pretty much spot on)
– v_impact = M0.7 (pretty much spot on) -
AGM-65G no.3
– v_launch = 865 kph (M0.76)
– altitidue = 5601 m
– range = 22.3 km
– tof = 94 s (+7%, +6s)
– v_impact = M0.49 (-21% at least) -
AGM-65G no.4
– v_launch = 1082 kph (M0.91)
– altitidue = 2673 m
– range = 16.8 km
– tof = 72.4 s (+11%, +7s)
– v_impact = M0.45 (-27% at least)
– note: I actually launched this one for 20km, but it didn’t reach the target, according to the graph it should have around 19km range here.
1 Like
that seems to be in line with how they messed up hellfire flight path, in that they input motor stats and decided on drag but either motor was too weak or there was too much drag. But instead of addressing that they just flattened flight profile until time to target was roughly correct.
2 Likes
So from the looks of, Apaches are one of the worst helis in top tier. It’s agm is probably the worst right now because of it’s terrible flight performance and god awful IOG.
The Hellfire Romeos could make it a bit better but I’m not sure by how much. as far as I’m aware the only improvements we could see from game, is flight trajectory, MEMS IMU (should be a lot better than what the K’s have), and maybe a programmable fuse?
having a programmable fuse with better IOG could allow for better targeting of spaa as well as helicopters but that’s way above what I know.
Ideally, I would prefer if the agm-169 gets added but knowing gaijin, they’ll say something dumb like the hellfires being vikhr’s equivalent or something like that.
Depends entirely on how the Warhead is modeled as it’s no longer a pure HEAT jet (+ Fragmentation sleeve), but an unholy combination of the two. So could either be a wet fart; or the second coming of Christ. Similar to the TOW-2B with the implementation of the novel EFP damage modeling.
Programable fuse (it’s actually a height of burst sensor, so considering how the 155mm M107(PF)'s sensor is modeled it becomes a straight up proximity fuse due to Gaijin abstractions) comes with the -114R-2.
The issue would be if fuses are ever revised to decouple the impact and proximity fuse so it can actually airburst over targets(due to the way it functions at the moment, fuse functions at point of closest approach, or contact), that it may significantly reduce the impact of the HEAT modeling against armor, lighter targets would die all the same.
2 Likes
The AH-64E can use the Spike NLOS
they could use it as an excuse to finally fix the hellfire flight trajectory
In terms of it’s IOG, how much of an improvement would that be over the K? I’m assuming honeywell is still the main supplier of these IMUs so maybe it uses the HG1930?
For it’s direct flight path mode, would it work like a beam riding missile?
I don’t actually have much on the -114R since it’s so modern but I would assume that it’s main advantage is weight reduction or miniaturization freeing up the mass budget and volume for other systems (could also be a technical refresh to renew aging components), not immediately performance related.
As they already had a functional dead reckoning system with earlier variants.
Almost certainly not, direct mode just skips over the Significant Loft, and climbs slightly until the look down angle requirements are met before assuming intercept geometry for a top attack, and has similar terminal phase & impact angle. This is done to avoid loosing the Laser due to cloud cover, while still retaining some of the benefits to maximum range that lofting provides, the mode that climbs the least is LOBL, and the direct mode only impacts flight performance for LOAL launches.
And to some degree is pointless since the Hellfire in WT has been adjusted to meet the known LOBL time to range metrics, so in effect already doesn’t climb as much as it should for the LOAL modes, even when fired without a track.
1 Like
I see. The main issue I have with the Hellfires is how inaccurate it is. I see around 2 factors that’s causing this. It’s flight characteristics and it’s guidance type. Lets just focus on the guidance type. I find that laser is absolutely terrible in cluttered environments like with trees, bushes, etc. If a tank is partially covered by these things, it’s difficult to get a point lock.
Even if the Romeo gets added, will that make Apaches usable?