According to EADS it takes 8 seconds to complete a four bar +/-70° priority track scan. That is how long it currently takes to do a four bar +/-70° scan in game without priority track.
So the overall scan speed won’t get any worse in game. If anything you could argue that the non priority track scan should be slightly faster.
Moving this convo to a more appropriate thread:
Its fair to say the brimstone is very good at ID’ing targets, and if pre-designated by a TGP, its likely using the pre-launch info on the target to avoid targeting objects that dont return the expected image to the seeker.
Or pre designated with the planes radar
But they are designed to be lauched without knowledge of a target and find its own
They can be fired either or. The website I linked discusses it.
In indirect mode, a killbox is designated and the brimstones are fired at it, locking identified threats when it comes into view automatically (the primary reason gaijin said they didnt wanna give Brimstone MMW seekers). This is used for striking multiple targets that might be well defended, such as an incoming convoy of ground vehicles (this has been seen done by ground launched brimstone in Ukraine vs a russian tank convoy atleast once on video, but cant post that here).
In direct fire mode, it can be launched at a vehicle the launch aircraft/sensors has direct LOS to.
The seeker is also stated to be high enough resolution with good enough target recognition to be capable of picking the ideal point of impact based on what the target is recognized to be, and when fired in salvos against groups of targets, the missile impacts are staggered to prevent missiles from striking the same one.
Well then, i hope gaijin just gives us p-track already.
@Gunjob see any potential issues with this suggested P-track code based on the ESA P-track adjusted for the current in-game CAPTOR-M?
I’ve already discussed this with a Dev. Can’t go into detail obviously.
Just figured i could try to provide example code to help :p
And this is why we can’t have FnF, because you can delete up to 12 vehicles in a single pass without any line of sight to the target, MMW Brimstone is busted.
Tornado completing this kind of attack;
Got any extra explanations on what we’re looking at in the 2 pics? Not sure what the cam view is of exactly, and the green image looks like a radar return but not exactly sure either there.
Not sure, for pic 1, pic 2 is a radar return for sure. I guess I could try and track down the guy who gave the presentation to ask haha. Give me a hot minute.
@Mulatu_Astatke applying here to save detailing the Rafale thread.
That is literally Brimstone’d primary operating mode…
As already shown Brimstone has Automatic Target Recognition.
The Eurofighter can use its RWR to designated targets for Brimstone.
Ah yes a research paper investigating the use Convolutional Neural Network for target recognition in infrared surveillance systems. That does not prove that no other system could identify individual targets, it just shows that for that one research project they chose six target categories as a starting point to prove the technology.
Brimstone also uses radar (not IIR) and to my knowledge does not use CNNs. If you are going to discuss brimstone’s target recognition capability, I suggest you find something more relevant.
Such as? Can it do anything more than distinguish a tank from a tree if they are standing within 50 metres of the other?
Maybe provide relevant sources? I’ve yet to see anything worthwhile. I mean, really you should know more than me…
Like talking to wall
It was designed to be deployed in target rich environments like tank convoys it can tell the difference but there is no point even mention this as anything that doesn’t fit your world view is just wrong according to you
Its pretty simple, SAR imagery can be done at 94Ghz, same as the Brimstone seeker.
No way! I would love to see that, could you send me the link please?
I do remember seeing them trying to mount Brimstone to vehicles but didn’t know it had been a success!
You’ve already been given plenty of sources showing it is capable of target recognition, which you have arbitrarily dismissed because “Britain is bad at target recognition” without proving any suitable evidence to support that assertion. So Frankly motivation is pretty low to spend a bunch of time digging through a massive pile of sources, just for you to dismiss them all out of hand again.
However I’ll give you one more chance to engage in a good natured discussion. These come from an Alenia Marconi Presentation on the Brimstone.
Unfortunately sources on Brimstone are quite hard to come by because it is for the most part still classified. Maybe in a few more years the archives will start opening up on it more.
Again this says nothing. I’ve actually provided useful information that AASMs can target specific and unique targets even amongst cluttered environments.
At best, the Brimstone likely uses a combination of radar and IR to discriminate a vehicle from a tree. Which is - as I said - nothing special. Classification could simply refer to differentiating between two separate classes of ‘land vehicle’ and ‘false alarm’.
There is no evidence that Brimstones use 3D target models in their ATR algorithms like the AASM does. Rather, sources actually indicate that radar ATR is little better than ‘useless’ for an actual battlefield:
Why do you keep talking about IR in relation to Brimstone? I’d figure since you’ve clearly spent time looking at this, the most basic level of research would’ve told you there has never been any Brimstone variant with an IR seeker.
