(another similar topic exists, though it doesn’t expand on it more)
IN MY OPINION, GIVING IT THIS VERY SLIGHT RANGE ENGAGMENT BUFF IS FAIR AS IT ONLY OPERATES AS 1 VEHICLE.
The FB-10(A), by all known sources of information, uses Radio Command in addition to Imaging Infrared. In the case of the FB-10(A) on the Type-625E, it uses the Infrared when the Radio Command lock is broken (either at will or mistakenly) or during terminal phase. An example of this in action would be;
You lock said target →
While target is locked, you then fire said missile → (In this scenario we’ll simulate a hard lock, keeping the target within the tracking radar’s scope scale. If you were to not originally lock with radar, it will instead use its infrared seeker the entire time)
Missile then burns until within appropriate distance for IIR to track sufficiently.
In short, the missile would operate more similarly to the IRIST-SLM platform, and since this is a single vehicle I don’t think letting it use it’s very maximum range is such a big deal, especially since other SAMs are getting very good buffs (IRIST-SLM).
TLDR: THE FB-10A USES RADIO COMMAND/ UPDATE COMMAND TO HELP GUIDE THE MISSILE UNTIL IT REACHES TERMINAL PHASE, IN WHERE TI THEN SWITCHES TO IIR.
For my sources, I will be using a Chinese equipment supplier, which SHOULD be fine because Gaijin uses similar sources for the IRIST and especially the Pantsir.
Also, in addition to the original message, the FB-10A and HQ-10 are known to be VERY similar. The HQ-10 had very obvious antenna that protrude from the missile, which very well signifies this class of missile is very much capable of radio command updates.
I’m also curious because on the HQ-10 the transceiver looks like this:
I’m not much of an expert in missile engineering, but would this be the antenna on the FB-10A or just something to measure speed/ smth else? Correct me if I’m wrong, it just looks very much like a radio reciever.
The current implementation of the CSSA5 is strongly disappointing. Every time I access the dev server to inspect progress on new top-tier SAM systems across nations, the CSSA5 stands out with shockingly low completion:
Its FB-10A missiles remain unusable—even after unlocking and equipping the modification, they revert to FB-10 in-game.
Critical capabilities are missing for both missile types:
• Image-recognition targeting (IIR) ✘
• Data-link functionality ✘
Lock-on range against top-tier helicopters with IRCM drops below 3km (vs. realistic 8-10km).
Bug report regarding the Command Guidance got denied, and they are still refusing to accept any information on it at this time. Seems highly unlikely the FB-10A will get fixed. I don’t know why they added missiles they cant even properly introduce.
One of the reasons it got denied was “3rd party sites” when the site I used was an exporter/ defense sales who gets their equipment from a CASC subsidiary, so doesn’t make sense. And regarding the fact it was a “guess”, it was a HIGHLY educated guess because I used a missile which uses the same technology as the FB-10A as a source, technology manufactured by the same company which makes the FB-10A.
If anyone could assist me in pressing Gaijin about this matter as they continue to randomly buff missiles and change stats when they want, but a educated guess based on a classified missile using similar technology from the same country is denied is beyond me.
Any help in proving my claims will be greatly appreciated, especially from my friends in China. If interested in assisting in getting this missile fixed, check out the bug report linked as it lists and explains lots of information.
In addition to my statement, the hypocrisy is unreal. A lot, if not most, of the information regarding the C series of AIM-120s is still classified yet it receives it’s seeker buff. And any, if not most, information regarding it were similar style to sources I’ve used in previous bug reports of mine which were denied; such as the United States Airforce University, fiscal reports by the government, etc.
Similar at best cause this thing has 20G. Even Su34 can out manoeuvre it. Otherwise it should have been much better than EldE with a gun with AHEAD potentially and much higher range. AHEAD has been passed but we are yet to see it.
