Look I don’t pay attention do it after they denied Japan more than once from getting the CSG because the “IR can’t track a tank” and I haven’t heard it being any better until now to be fair-
That and the fact the 2S38 of all tanks got a buff with this update while still overperforming
The bug reports on both were rejected for the notion of mentioning clutter which I suggested to be reduced while even imaging seekers are still stated to have clutter. The difference isn’t the amount of clutter, but the way it functions.
On a contrast seeker an aircraft on the blue sky is a contrast to be locked, however if the ground is in the field of view, that is also a contrast. So if there is no way to specifically differentiate between different signatures the aim moves to the average position between them, since that’s the center of the perceived contrast.
On an imaging seeker the aircraft alone is differentiated after the lock, and can still be hit with the ground in the FOV. However if it is, for example, green and flies in front of a similar green background it can blend in, causing the seeker to lose lock. Similarly it might fly partially behind objects, which can obstruct and obscure it in ways that it can lose the lock.
However for this second point an initial lock would still be possible as long as the image of the partial aircraft contrasts its surroundings.
I’ve been told to make a full suggestoon to differentiate imaging seekers, but that might require a lot more sources to do and some very specific information I’m not quite sure where to find. While I don’t have time for it now, but I will get to it eventually.
I’ve seen a few users here use patent information for things like this, might be worth a shot.
Tons of ARH missile changes in 2.37.0.73 - AAM-4 also got a ton of changes, sustainer has also been added (finally)
I will do some tests and come back
Main booster also got stronger, lots of minor changes too. :D
from Zabi’s datamine
AAM-4:
NEW Test; 12km, Mach 1.16 head-on, 60km distance
NEW Test; 8km, Mach 1.1 head-on, 70km distance
NEW Test; 3.5km, Mach 1 head-on, 30km distance
Bonus Test; 8km, Mach 1.1 head-on, 35km distance
Overall, is still inferior in range and looses speed quickly yet again. The new sustainer / force increase is nice but still not enough. The Loft adjustments might also need further work as it seems to be too much. AAM-4 is now better for close distance (at least in time to target, against non-maneuvering ones, AIM-120 still has higher impact speed, which can be considered as an advantage against maneuvering targets).
At least it’s not a stick.
so… looks we finally can carry 4x AAM-4 & 2x AIM-120A & 2x AAM-3?
AAM-4 for <20km fight, 120A for BVR?
it looks like the AAM-4 in the close range test was fired substantially earlier than the 120 and thus arrived earlier. I think if the 120 was rippled off first among the set, it would show that it still has a better time to target.
on a side note, the AAM-4 had a really bad oscillation at the lower alt test as well which could be a factor thats causing the drag due to the control surfaces constantly making changes to AoA and thus causing more induced drag.
Japan was working on a lot of different designs. This included IR, Radio Guided missiles as well. Really the only one ever being tested was the Ki-147 and Ki-148(Harder to confirm this).
On one of the Japanese Coastal ships you have a thing that looks like a bomb hanging to the right or left side don’t recall and its a sonar of some sort. Shame Gaijin hasn’t implemented it as of yet.
The image below is an early one, not the latest
This is the new one.
I’d like to advertise a squadron. Our squadron heavily focuses on Japanese and other Asian military equipment. We have an affiliated and very active Discord as well (DM for invite)! We do a lot of research regarding Japanese aircraft as well, especially the F-2.
Some community members are a part of this squadron, such as @MAUSWAFFE and @WreckingAres283. @Fireraid233 is here too!
Does Japan use JDAM
Yes but there is no capable platform in game yet; F-15J(M) is unclear.
Unfortunately in regards to the AAM-4, it appears to still just be a worse AIM-120A/B in most every regard and really has no viable purpose over the latter in any engagement. The color coding should honestly be flipped around because there is no situation that the AAM-4 will do better in compared to the AIM-120A/B and it’s easier to have 6 of one missile type than splitting it 4/2 for your ARH’s
The bright side is the CGS-1 bombs were passed again for review and may be added onto existing weapon’s platforms
Hopefully its fully functional and give it the benefit of the doubt that It can destroy/target ground units and not just landships.
You can make custom skins for weapons now. Here is for FAB-5000.
