the AGM-65L was developed around 2010
not true either btw
its just a laser guided maverick
if it is MITL then so is the GBU-12
this was clearly about the TV style MITL like it was added last update and talked about in this dev blog
4 Likes
I don’t think the actual AGM-65L we got is also called the Longhorn. The Longhorn was only a project and never was produced, it essentially is kind of a proto SLAM-ER. Kind of weird to bring up anyway. At best his statement that AGM-65 would have MITL is misleading.
I guess it’s similar to saying the Sidewinder is radar guided (and then mention the AIM-9C) or the Sparrow is infrared guided (and mentioning after the AIM-7R, probably more similar since that also didn’t see service).
1 Like
Just get the TT F-18E. It gets AGM-84H which has MITL
TT F/A-18C Late has it too
1 Like
Youre right in the sense that you werent only trying to, just not in the way you think
You attempted AND succeesed, turning your try into complete lie.
Yummy more bombs to shoot down with 96 missiles
1 Like
So you can repeat fire a single jet with the SM-SV? that’s fine. but why would you do that?
How do you even know what KH-38s are?
He played the aircrafts carrying them so theres a high chance he knows how they perform??
Just a hunch.
I love its HARM.
I’ve used them?
I have 5-6 top tier air nations and 3 in ground
Russia being one of them in each
I have used them before
1 Like
oh
Also, i don’t expect mavricks to behave like KHs, i would go to the launch range of them and come back to the airfield.
you know they can be easily flared right? why do i need them in my lineup?
Let me clear the misunderstanding here, better than leave it:
I was NOT talking about the ingame AGM‑65L that we actually have on the F/A‑18C. That one is the laser guided variant, and I completely agree, it does not have MITL, NEITHER AGM-65E nor the AGM 65G have MITL.
What I WAS referring to is the AGM‑65L “Longhorn” a separate, Proposed development study from Raytheon back in the late 1980s and 1990s. That specific project WAS designed with a two way data link for LOAL and manual MITL. It NEVER entered production, BUT it was a real study, and Raytheon’s own archives CONFIRM the proposed capability completely.
I used words “proposed” AND “studied” in my original post, so I WAS NOT trying to pass it off as a fielded weapon. I was just POINTING OUT that a Maverick variant with MITL was AT LEAST explored historically.
And Calvin’s comparison to the AIM‑9C or AIM‑7R actually makes my point for me those were rare or unproduced variants too, BUT mentioning them IS NOT “misinformation” as long as you specify what they were. I DID EXACTLY that.
So yeah, no hard feelings I wasn’t lying or spreading misinfo. I just think we were talking about two different things. Hope that clears it up.
Thank you mate
1 Like
You welcome brother.
so it never existed
and thus there are no MITL AGM-65
and it is not called AGM-65L longhorn
1 Like
It did existed as a real proposal, Hughes worked on it from 1991.
The proposal included MITL/LOAL via data link that’s a fact.
The “AGM-65L” name got reused later for the laser variant, but that doesn’t erase the Longhorn study that included the MITL.
they made a concept
that dosent mean that it worked or was ever fired
and from all i can find it was called AGM-65F Longhorn and not AGM-65L
or simply “Maverick Longhorn”