definitely armour degradation would’ve been a more interesting addition than Volumetric.
Possibly but that is why I inquired about the explosive mass in the first place because we can ascertain more information about the capabilities if we know the total warhead mass vs explosive mass etc.
Sadly explosive mass and its type (and maybe warhead total mass? Western nations like to make their values worse than they are, but i dunno) is classified and we have no legal way to know it.
I’m sure there’s some snippet of information on the internet somewhere, just gotta look hard enough. We found quite a lot of information for other systems after a period of digging forums and archived sites.
I tried to do so in the past, offical sources i found just state it is a tandem and 6kg is on Wikipedia, i have no idea where they got it, mot likely on of the projects that lead to Brimstone.
For anyone that’s interested this is what a Brimstone 2 Warhead looks like:
In terms of the explosive mass we probably have to just extrapolate using the total warhead mass and the mass to filling ratio on other similar missiles.
3 Likes
I think that was because the Iris-T is cited with 25km effective range and ASRAAM with its Max range
Just some freelance journalist on Popular mechanics.
(wikipedia lists CSIS as their source[1] who then references a Popular mechanics article on Brimstone[2], the article is a bit of a nothing burger to be completely honest, the only intresting thing is the author claims the warhead weighs “14 pounds”. But also doesn’t give a source, nor does he appear to have worked on brimstone or other related projects.)
I see.
Well, it is as credible as it gets, but it will be the only figure we can go as of now, i guess.
Realistically, as stated before, its unlikely the warhead weight will matter much in WT considering the willful mismodeling by gaijin and subsequent underperformance of HEAT warheads. There isn’t much of a difference between the 51kg warhead of the AGM-65D and the 9kg warhead of the AGM-114, and the difference there is much greater than between the 6kg and 9kg warheads of the brimstone and hellfire.
Until gaijin fixes on-hit/post pen damage for HEAT warheads, they will continue to significantly underperform, and play second fiddle to pure HE warheads in the AT role for WT.
ASRAAM is advertised as >25 km maximum range, and the evidence points to it being significantly I’m excess of 25 km.
CAMM is basically ASRAAM with an ARH seeker and turn over pack and it manages > 25 km from a ground launch; so air launched ASRAAM is going to have a lot better range than that.
For comparison ground launched IRIS-T has 12 km range.
3 Likes
MBDA doesnt mention datalink in any official releases pertaining to ASRAAM (and they do for CAMM, Meteor and basically all other missiles), so it probably doesnt have one.
Still has LOAL though, so you can launch it at targets further away, but not update their position if they are manouvering
Block 6 has DL for sure. When it comes to earlier block it is hard to tell. They state nothing on their offical site, but 50km hit would be hard without it.
Thats not my problem thats yours
Everyone is free to discuss topics… as along as rules are not being broken, there is no issue… if you dont like someone, then you can ignore / block them in your user preferences on your profile, in stead of derailing threads complying about someone…
You should also PM someone if you have a personal dispute with them, in stead of derailing topics as well
3 Likes
I think it would be a lot better to measure altitude coverage since range is basically messy and dependent on a lot of other factors such as battery time, flight path, and how range is measured (complete range traveled or range when target was fired upon?). Altitude would just be shot straight up, and stop when it runs out of energy.
IRIS-T is something like 5km altitude while CAMM should be much more than that.
CAMM is advertised to be effective up to 10 km IIRC.
It is certain though that ASRAAM is longer ranged and faster than IRIS-T.
3 Likes
Ah, I misremembered, the claim compared the IRIS-T SLM vs the CAMM-ER, not the SLS vs CAMM
Itd be interesting to know exactly whats going on in this situation though, as if the CAMM-ER is overstating effective range, who’s to say the CAMM/ASRAAM isnt?
I mean, as far as I can tell, if you dumb it down enough, ASRAAM focusses on killing the enemy at the longest range possible, and IRIS-T focusses on highest lethality at close range. Both are highly flare resistant and have some sort of HMD slaving.
1 Like
Maybe overstating “effective range” but certainly by design alone the ASRAAM is superior to the IRIS-T. A much larger portion of the body is motor and the aerodynamics are immensely improved. Doesn’t take but a random internet warrior such as myself to identify what is obvious.
Thats pretty much the general assumption I had as well tbf. There just seema to be some oddities to it imo.
Structurally id assume the ASRAAM would outperform the IRIS-T in range/speed, but id also assume the CAMM-ER to outperform the SLM in that regard, which is allegedly not the case.
The CAMM-ER also adopts the strakes seen on the IRIS-T and its variants, and in general adopts more of an IRIS-T shape, also shared to some degree with the MICA.
Then you have the fact that the IRIS-T is (allegedly) more expensive, AND more widely used than the ASRAAM, with effectively the only ASRAAM operator being the Brits (from what I can tell, india is one of those weird outlier nations that uses a bunch of different missiles in smaller numbers), while the IRIS-T is operated by multiple european and some asian countries.
Across the Eurofighter program, the IRIS-T is the selected missile by all nations but britain, and most recently the IRIS-T was selected for integration by the south koreans for the KFX (though idk if the ASRAAM competed?)
All in all, its a bit odd. There seems to be many claims about the ASRAAM’s superiority in both design and capabilties, particularly over the IRIS-T, but it doesnt seem to translate to real world use, with the CAMM-ER adopting the shape of the IRIS-T, and the IRIS-T being significantly more comercially successful.
This could be purely coincidence though, as missiles are chosen for more than just performance, so maybe the ASRAAM is the wonder weapon the brits claim it to be. I think it could also be argued that the ASRAAM is a bad MICA as well though, with the alleged goal of the missile being pre-merge interception, it kinda steps on the toes of BVRAAM’s, but also falls short in the range respect, while seemingly not having any clear notable advantages over the MICA IR in maneuvrability (both are over the shoulder capable).
The MICA is a larger missile though, which could limit how many are carried, but its also noteworthy in being a larger commercial success…
A little odd for such a fantastic missile to be the worst comercially performing 5th gen IR missile of Europe, which is why I think theres more to this than whats being claimed.
1 Like