what about the B
It really depends on if you could prove a specific configuration exists, after all they denied the GPU-5/A (30mm gunpod)for non-15E’s due to a lack of sufficient evidence.
CBU’s have been mentioned on a few leak lists now (alongside Anti-Radiation Missiles)as being in the works so is definitely something that could apear at any time in the future.
1 Like
The USAF only tested the A, as they stopped being involved during development of the B and C variants.
https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/agm-154b.htm
according to this (not the best source, i know) the air force canceled their order in 2002 but JSOW-B in LRIP 2001. which means it had to have been tested sucessfully.
and cant anything that can use JSOW-A use the B or C? isnt the only difference the warhead?
maybe JSOW will be different though, after all the whole thing about it is the different variants only change the warhead and some electronics (but not compatibility iirc) right?
the A and B are GPS only, the C is GPS/IR guided. A USAF aircraft shouldn’t get a weapon the USAF never procured. That would be like giving the F-15A AIM-7P’s, a USN only sparrow variant.
1 Like
fair enough about C. but for A and B, they were joint developed and in production (LRIP for B)
Only if Gaijin really couldn’t find a counterpart for the USAF, to which they don’t really have a direct counterpart in the 1000lb class, but they do have the GBU-62 (500lb JDAM-ER), GBU-15 / AGM-130, AGM-84 H & -K, AGM-142(HAVE NAP), AGM-158(JASSM), AGM-184A (JSM) and others.
4 Likes
werent those only used by B-52?
In that specific configuration, yes. but as the last image shows a light weight variant was trialed as HAVE LIGHT.
4 Likes
nice. i do think the JSOW will come sooner than JASSM, simply because range and JASSM is faster/better guidance. which is why F-16 and F-15 could use it. its also just a pretty cool glide bomb
@ashton replied to the wrong person.
I said Kh-38s are OP, and have primarily used AGM-65s in ground battles as my primary CAS option after GBUs.
With all ten tech trees completed for air.
I own every US aircraft and 95% of Russian aircraft, I would rather use the Su-34 any day over the F-15E in GRB but hey guess I’m the idiot who knows nothing.
1 Like
Yes, and the Kh-38’s speed is so obviously, blatantly, clearly, etc. the same speed as the AGM-65 with the same glide ability, so they are literally the same! How could I be so mistaken! I yield!
Let me add /s in this post for you, since you clearly have the mental processing power of a sack of potatoes.
4 Likes
@ashton
Why do you care if your frag gets “stolen”?
If your target is destroyed before your missile gets there, they’re still gone. It doesn’t matter.
“Missile speed”, AKA kill “stolen” or not, does not matter in random battles right now [even though I want it to matter] when all the IR missiles are OP.
Oh, and nice ad-hominem there that admits everyones’ posts here are correct that Kh-38 is OP and AGM-84Es would be a neat addition.
Well said.
Guess what NATO players have to deal with?
Using outdated air defense vehicles like ADATS to slowly shoot down six ultra-fast KH-38 missiles.
And Russia?
Using the Pantsir-S1, which has multi-target engagement capability, to take down four ultra-slow AGM-65 missiles.
🤡
6 Likes
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