They don’t think, they know that the missiles are different. But if they implement SLM properly it would end easy KH-38 fragging. Which they don’t want, so they woul use any excuse to keep the missile gimped.
I’m quite curious is the S-300 would be gimped in similar fashion.
the original argument was that systems capable of melting IIR seekers can’t be ‘equipped’ on ‘helis’ - you bargained by saying that transport helis can carry such systems if they are fully dedicated to that task. that’s not anywhere in the realm of DIRCM equipment
essentially you’re saying ABM DE weapons can be equipped on fighter jets because the boeing YAL-1 exists… maybe part of you realized that, resulting in you pulling the off topic card
To be fair, the sources provided in the report were pretty bad, ranging from Brazilian “essay” style research making bogus claims like SLM having a maximum speed of 450 m/s and 60km range to literal sabotage manual for Novorussians, translated to Chinese…
Is there actually a source for the IRIS-T being affected by in service laser based DIRCMs? Like, real world data or anything like that? Because all the data that I know of point towards the IRIS-T being very unlikely to be affected by it unless its a high energy laser beyond what any modern day DIRCM can provide.
That was one of the big reasons why they did not use a traditional FPA seeker, after all.
Even if it would be affected: The DIRCM can only blind one missile at a time as there is only one laser. It wouldn’t blind multiple missiles at the same time. I don’t know how it’s modelled in game.
It seems to work against all missiles simultaneously.
Also the LDIRCM is mounted underneath the fuselage, so theoretically it should not work against missiles coming from above (since it’s out of the LOS of the L370V28).
That’s contradicts the designation “Directed Infrared Contermeasure”…
Seems like they just implemented the normal IRCM (which only works against all non-IIR missiles in range) but made it also work against IIR seekers.