I’m inclined to say render because the outermost pylon looks more like an Aspide than a HARM and the PIRATE is missing it’s black dome.
The Aspide-like missile also looks a bit odd, missiles aren’t usually one solid colour.
3 Likes
Yeah, its also the extreme chromyness of everything, just looks a little overly forced
1 Like
Here’s the same “aircraft” from the Airbus website:
https://mediacentre.airbus.com/share/bkL9ikaU6/element/677584
That version definitely looks like a render.
1 Like
Same guy on the Copyright too
Juanjo Sanz - Mango Producciones
Though on page 18 of this
is the same people and the photo does look real, same “aircraft” but no chrome.
Looks like a HARM?
Yeah i figured something looked off about it
1 Like
I still do this regularly on the SU27SM… no fancy radar or ultra strong missile required.
I don’t think I have lost once to a eurofighter in the SU27SM since the update, and I see so few of them in any games now.
I have also noticed this aswell.
Typhoons only see 1 or 2 per team and thats from 3 different nations.
But that could be because they are using them in ground battles?
Nah, it’s performance there is also not so great as if you put any ground ordnance on it turns into a brick and is no better than a tornado at killing ground targets.
Most air RB players stick to Air RB unless they are grinding aircraft for GRB.
It was FOTM for a month, then when it was nerfed people realised it had no redeeming qualities over other aircraft.
I think we also absolutely deserve brimstone 2 in SAL mode, and brimstone 1 in fire and forget mode, but with no autonomous ability/lock on after launch.
1 Like
I would agree with that assessment, they can still do work in ground battles but they are outclassed.
If they planned to nerf it that hard they should not have added it yet.
You are wrong. Plain and simple there is a multitude of sources that state otherwise for relevant ordnance.
This really comes down to if Classification of a Target is a Subset of Identification, or if it’s the other way around, and as to how much you think it matters that it could distinguish a T-72 from an M1, M3A3 or BMP and a Ural or Gaz, it can tell the difference tween Tracked and Wheeled vehicles and approximate size but that’s all it needs to do the job, a positive VID and ROE restrictions fall on the pilot anyway so more detail really isn’t needed, since alternate guidance modes do exist to provide it as needed.
For example the AGM-114L, GBU-53/B and others like the Brimstone all used similarly derived baseline MMW seeker from the AGM-124 WASP (Wide Area Anti-Armor) project and are able to classify returns and desegregate targets using Sorting functions to ensure that repeated selection of the same target does not occur, even without the use of a two way datalink for track correlation and disambiguation as sufficient info can be provided prior to launch.
How this could be accomplished using a MMW seeker is postulated in the following paper
https://www.tesble.com/10.1109/igarss.2019.8898353
And sorting is covered in this report (Directly relevant to IIR sensor, but remains partially relevant, as it discusses sorting techniques which remain relevant to mapping seekers)
6 Likes
Brimstone Launch Angle Fix is on Dev-Stable coming to prod soooon. Love that new 40° limit.
Big thanks to @Mulatu_Astatke for the source.
48 Likes
9 Likes
Is this when we point at someone and laugh our arses off?
1 Like
For whatever reason, the IRST acquire doesn’t seem to understand… looking down? If the target is below the nose it just doesn’t scan over it at all.
I wish other eurofighter fixes would get implemented as fast as that brimstone one.
3 Likes
it physically cant because it is ontop of the nose,
for it to be looking further down it would have to look through the nose