Don’t shoot AGMs at SPAA, shoot them at tanks. SPAA can’t win matches, tanks can.
WT needs better SPAA BTW.
Either way the suggestion that Ashton and I support for expanding armaments should be developed.
It’s not April fools yet. Also I don’t think the guy is “defending Russian equipment” he was stating how they’re literally not equal in many ways. I’m also not sure if you’re here to disrupt the post like I’ve seen in others somehow always in an argument? but I have noticed that you’re the only one in here arguing with someone my guy. no disrespect just saying.
4 Likes
🤣🤡
4 Likes
every thread i see that guy in, he’s trolling.
anyways, Hornet should get its full AGM-84 derived armaments. I don’t think there is any practical difference at all between a 100km AGM-84 and a 20km artificially limited AGM-84 ingame, they might as well be the same.
Removing GPS would be a terrible move with the weapon, limiting flight time is definitely the correct way to balance it if you absolutely have to limit its range.
I think that frankly KH-38MT, in War Thunder terms, is a JASSM equivalent except in warhead.
AASM Hammer is in WT terms also a JASSM equivalent.
The huge differences in performance in real life do not scale well with the size of GRB matches and won’t really make a difference. I doubt some of these munitions being stealthy will matter either.
AGM-84 SLAM/SLAM-ER, AGM-154 JSOW, AGM-158 JASSM, frankly, all of these weapons are nothing new. They only combine features on a couple of them that aren’t combined on any specific weapon yet.
The CAS weapon I fear and will have me shiverin me timbers n shakin in my boots is the GBU-53/B Stormbreaker SDB II, since you’ll be able to throw like 20 of them at a time, blanket an area by selecting different spots with the map while releasing, and like 5 minutes later their IR/MMW radar seekers will go find anything living in the areas you blanketed and hit them precisely.
I was honestly surprised to not see AGM-84 at minimum. Even JASSM in my opinion would not change anything about CAS’ current state.
The Mitsubishi F-2 has a similar weapon in the ASM-2/ASM-2B (IOG+IR for the 2, GPS+IOG+IR for the 2B).
The only thing that I could think of that made the F/A-18 and F-2’s incredibly late appearance after aircraft like the Eurofighter, Rafale, and Strike Eagle was that they had KH38MT equivalents/a little better, as nothing about their armaments in air to air was too crazy, especially the F/A-18A and F-2.
Now, I’m confused. We unironically should’ve had F/A-18A for almost 3 years now. It should’ve came out alongside or shortly after the F-16. And similar for the F-2! Its earlier versions had AIM-7s as the only radar missiles, still SARH. It should’ve been in the game after the F-15J, but before the F-15J(M).
6 Likes
Another thing: I thought the F-5A(G) was to LOAL long range IR air to ground weapons what the FJ-4B VMF-232 was to guided CAS weapons in general.
It lined up pretty well. It’s also a little odd that we’re missing Norway’s air tree, as opposed to Sweden’s.
I know it seems kinda off topic, but the F/A-18 is the peak of WT vehicles being added at odd times in odd states, and it’s got me thinking about everything strange.
1 Like
It can use GPS to bomb point also without INS drift.
agm-84e got accepted. now its the waiting game
1 Like
Link?
1 Like
Awesome.
I may report the JASSM, JSOW, SLAM-ER tomorrow if nobody else does first. Too tired tonight. The F/A-18C’s flavor is that it has crazy naval weapons. Love to see the accepted AGM-84E SLAM report.
1 Like
Hopefully its implemented soon, though i doubt. agm-130 took 2 months after the first report 4 months ago to be added to the f15e
1 Like
And they still don’t have the Short Chord variants which would permit the simultaneous carriage of missiles on the shoulder rails.
1 Like
Hey @TheScienceOfWar
AGM-84Es should come no matter what you falsely accuse people of.
And Kh-38s are still OP regardless.
You are trolling, and are in every thread I’ve ever seen. I’ve been advocating for all of these weapons (and specifically the AGM-84 in all its variants) to be added with every post I’ve ever made in this thread.
Literally every post you make on this forum is deliberately misunderstanding other users, and you are everywhere
That is all I have to say about you, for time immemorial
I was honestly shocked we got it at all. I actually take it instead of Mavs now, as despite the loss in magazine capacity, the increased distance at which it can track moving targets against an AGM-65D and the 2000lb Mk84 core weapon are a great combination. Often, staying on station to ripple fire Mavs takes long enough I’m putting myself at unnecessary risk anyways. Unless I compromise useful capability and take a bunch of GBU-39s, I can’t overwhelm the Pantsir by choice.
So I can take a useful weapon load, which may kill Pantsir if not paying attention and will allow me to exploit any gaps in SPAA coverage and massively attack the enemy team, or I can take a less useful weapon load and fight a Pantsir and lose the ability to do much else.
AGM-130A-12 is winning the utility debate for me, currently.
Speaking of the F-15E, some of these weapons should come to the F-15E in time as well.
2 Likes
Only the JSOW A variant was tested by the USAF, as it was co-developed by the USAF and USN. The B and C variants were developed after the USAF dropped out of the project.
Didn’t I post proof that showed otherwise? C was navy yeah, but B was joint development
Yeah, you’re correct, I forgot. Still the point stands with them only being tested and not fully adopted.
Just like T-80B thermals. So it’s fair game for addition on hornet, eagle, and viper