glorious 500kg of russian IM rated propellant clearly
5 Likes
Soviets were so advanced they had propellants/fuels like DM63’s one in the 80s
3 Likes
kinda applied the same rule with dual pylons for amraams in the EFT but why did they reitre ARMs ? what did they replace it with ?
brimstone and SPEAR 3. They’re just as if not more capable and you can saturate air defense with more of them from different angles, plus turning off your radar doesn’t save you.
but brimstones have much less range compared to modern ARMs and spear 3 is not in service.
Storm-shadow and Paveway IV
Which are planned to be replaced in the role by SPEAR-3
1 Like
ALARM was retired in 2014 iirc, which was getting quite old that point
20x IR-Guided Mini-Cruise-Missile (SPICE 250 ER) with full A2A loadout? Count me in!
1 Like
Brimstones and small HE projectiles have been ruined :(
? not on my end…
Seems to be a client side issue. All good on my end.
Got another MAW failure, at the end of this;
6 Likes
There is a bug report about RWR which also mentions MAW being inconsistent. If there was a way to push it forward somehow, that would be great.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/0FCWYsUo1gof
Already been forwarded, there isn’t anything I can do for that report now. I have however raised this internally. I’ve got two examples from my own gameplay.
5 Likes
Could it also be that the MAW is sometimes just “dumb”? I mean, AFAIK it works with angle comparison, so if you maneuver the angles change and it can happen that the compared angles differ so much that the previously detected missile isn’t detected as a threat anymore. Shouldn’t the MAW keep its “memory” (keep the track internally, much like TWS keeps tracks in memory) that this missile is obviously aimed at you even if you maneuver and only “forget” it, if it’s completely sure that the missile lost its target (diverted from the interception course far and long enough)?
Also had it that some missiles blink in and out of the MAW detection every few seconds, even though they were continuously in the FoV of the MAW and I didn’t really maneuver.
Contrarily it means you can tailor the antennaes profile for the minimum RCS return. The F-35’s is permanently angled upwards due to this, but you could do the same with a gimbal I imagine.
The contract is deliberately structured in a way that makes leaving nearly as expensive as staying, when you factor in the R&D benefits its cheaper to see it through.
AFAIK the ECRS antenna is always 40° gimbaled but rotateable. So incoming frontal radar waves hit the radar dish always at a 40° angle.
With a gimbal it’d have some points where the AESA would be flat to some angles, but the swashplate on the ERCS is a decent enough answer to the problem of expanding radar scan zone while maintaining reduced RCS. Obviously cheaper to run a single fixed array though.
1 Like