Flame has a report up for Brimstone 1
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/x1rwDAcNP6Li
Flame has a report up for Brimstone 1
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/x1rwDAcNP6Li
I made that one because someone asked me to. It is possible that the datasheet is referring to a future version of Brimstone. Giving it another read it does seem to be referring to at least Brimstone 2 due to the mention of IM compliant motor.
Can’t see which brochure has been attached as evidence to see if it is indeed Brimstone 1/DMB.
MBDA just publish the data on the website and brochures as “Brimstone” regardless of whether it’s 1, 2 or 3 since the product they are selling is what ever the latest version is - only the RAF really make the distinction (likewise with MBDA’s SPEAR vs the MoD/RAF’s SPEAR 3 - the Cap. 3 part of the name only relates to the UK requirement).
You can only really work out what stage of the missile’s development it reflects, from the publication dates.
And what is our no escape zone for the Typhoon when shooting at it from by AIM-120В?
I have a feeling that it is 10 kilometers maximum if near the ground and 20 kilometers at 10 km.
Funny.
Your topic is here https://forum.warthunder.com/t/eurofighter-typhoon-germanys-best-fighter-jet
One piece of advice - bases.
To be fair wrong thread. Would be more for the german thread.
Personaly i had mod research for kws and mig29g prepared amd for the rest kust iswd a lot of the mog 21 lazur
Well. I even messed THAT up. Im going to bed. thanks
Sorry, what is this option called so I can find it.
Thank you.
Thank you, appreciate it!
Thats the other thing they really could do with working on. Making it much easier to tell the difference between a missile and a jet. I would be surprsied if that was something modern radars couldnt tell apart. Was never really issue before ARH-Spamming was a thing. WAY too often i’ve found myself unable to lock onto the jet because instead the radar is locking onto the missiles infront of the jet instead.
On Tornado I can tell the missiles from the planes. The missiles are translucent.
I suspect it has to do with the angle of half-sensitivity parameter. On the Tornado it’s almost half that. So (as I understand it) it can tell big and small targets apart. 4 degrees on Captor (if it is a direct copy of Sea Harrier and/or Gripen) is just a ridiculously huge angle.
Just remembered, what we need for this. Is this:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/E7gwXrwKbMec
Biggest issue ive noticed with the eurofighter is the Radar switching itself to IRST when it loses track instead of using TRACK MEM which fucks you over massively if you dont notice it immediately
I don’t know if I said it here or in another thread earlier but radar is “too good” for it’s own sake. Every time you pick up something that you cannot track it’s usually a missile from another player. Since tws isn’t fast enough to update it’s position either it just clutters your tws for 8 seconds until it fades away unless you shut your radar and turn it back on. Radars shouldn’t really pick these up, especially at longer ranges.
One other question is when will we see the ECM pod of the typhoon and the decoys from DASS
It is more than about time that ECM/ECCM in general is implemented in the game as a mechanic.
The game is not ready? Then make it ready as it’s your game to build, devs.
It would be rather difficult to strike a balance between something which vaguely resemble reality, while being understandable to the average player.
My question is more about the fact that in game missiles with laser + IOG guidance should not have a launch zone, and they just kept that restriction from missiles with laser-only guidance.