Yeah that’s cracked! if Russia want un flarable missiles its time to give Typhoon Spectral flares
1 Like
And the manueverability should also be really good too? Similar to ASRAAM where there are only aft control fins?
There is not really anything known about the manueverability of the Meteor. It has no thrust-vectoring AFAIK and only its tail fins for control, but these are designed as stabilators so they can use their complete surface for the steering of the missile. Additionally the Meteor was more designed for range than manueverability.
How the missile behaves exactly, especially at speeds Mach >4, I don’t know.
1 Like
Who tf is this bug reporting manager?
The missile doesn’t use its fins to turn in the traditional sense.
The missile is statically unstable and the fins are there to induce angle of attack, the misisle then uses body lift and its motor to generate the turning force.
This is the exact same kind of ignorant nonsense used for the Stinger misisle G loads…
Bug report went out too soon tbh, now it will be even harder to get them to change their minds.
3 Likes
Need this document or that document to fix Brimstone and sht but straight up added fake missile like KH-38MT
Double standard clown
4 Likes
That is a developer answer that tech mod added in the comment.
If you have any documents that could halp with this one, that are free to use ofc, I would be grateful for sharing them.
1 Like
The only thing fictional about that missile is the seeker and the rest is identical to the kh38ml
So the missile itself isn’t fake but the seeker
They are correct though in that there is not a single source which says the Brimstone pulls 40° of AoA, only that it can attack targets up to 40° of boresight - which it can already do in game.
2 Likes
Seeker is real and photos were posted in that topic
Not disagreeing with that.
The bug report is poorly worded and grasping at straws, but the reply is just as ignorant.
1 Like
Please don’t spread that discussion in here.
All that was posted were pictures of a mock-up
What the ppl are demanding is a picture of the Kh38mt on a plane or a official document stating it’s usage.
Until then we cannot be sure if it is real or not.
1 Like
IT’S LITERALLY YOU who brought it up man.
You have photos of different seekers, i am not talking about mockups
Damn, your attempt on gaslighting is wild
So where was it confirmed that those seekers are actually real and functional
Since when can the Eurofighter carry Kh-38MT?
Unless I missed something, there you go
1 Like
If iam really gaslight Ing you should be easily able to prove me wrong, right?
Yes. You start talking about kh38mt, i answer to you and you go “Please don’t spread that discussion in here.”
Intelectual dishonesty at it’s peak
So follow your advice and stop talking about kh38 in eurofighter thread
It not him it was me that sarcastic about Gaijin double standard BS about Brimstone need lot document fix it but added fake KH-38MT without any proved it existence.
Great that you are telling me Iam gaslighting but are doing nothing but throwing allegations around.
To me it sounds more like you are gaslighting
Nice deflection. Peak gaslighting.
Again:
I might do some testing tomorow and make a new bug report for the brimstones if need be. I was pretty sure the claim for 40° AOA was gonna get your bug report killed cuz nothing states the missile needs to pull 40° AOA, nor would it need to do so logically, since that would be the AOA required to keep the target roughly centered immediately post launch, which would be rather extreme and would suggest the missile could engage targets with offsets more significant than 40° off-bore.
All that really needs to be proven is if the missile is kinematically capable of engaging targets at the 40° pre-launch gimbal limit in-game reliably, since thats literally the reason it has that gimbal limit. If it cant, its underperfoming, likely in overload and/or control authority.