They literally do not overpressure due to being modeled as a HEAT, not HE. even though their caliber and explosive mass are well clear of ordnance that should otherwise qualify.
from the wiki article on damage mechanics
For closed-up vehicles, this happens when explosion effect manages to penetrate the armour of the vehicle:
HEAT and HESH shells and ATGM can also create overpressure damage but are less effective at it compared to HE ammunition and seem to only affect vehicles when very thin parts of the hull or their critical weak spots are hit directly, with overall armour thickness of hit surface having to be below 15 mm RHA, since their explosive power is directed towards creating special effects (molten jet for HEAT and scabbing for HESH) instead of producing shockwaves. There are exceptions in HEAT ammunition, which can deal overpressure damage through 20 mm (select few powerful HEAT ATGM) or 30 mm RHA (most tandem missiles). Tanks with reasonable amount of armour will not take overpressure damage from HEAT, even if special effect penetrates them easily.
This mechanic affects vehicles with thin armour negatively, but, unlike with the hullbreak, any tank is potentially vulnerable to overpressure damage.
So even though it’s main charge is of similar mass to a Mk. 81 250lb bomb (which has a 5 meter destruction radius) it can only penetrate 30mm of RHA
I just stetted it. it has overpressure damage. But to trigger it, you have to break armor with HE damage, EFP jet won’t be able to cause overpressure damage.
and the report is closed with
EFP do not cause overpressure damage. Works as intended.
additionally the HEAT warhead magically has less penetration than the AGM-114 even though it is significantly larger and heavier.
The -54C definitely has been, as there are practically no differences between it and the -54A modeled, are three is certainly enough evidence to call into question a few of the changes that were made, let alone the fact that the seeker remains the same even though it should be significantly improved.
There are definitely options available (ATAS / AIM-9M , AGR-20 (M247), AGM-179) and the potentially unbalanced ordnance (AGM-114L/-N, etc.) they could be further restricted as needed (limited station availability, only able to be carried on dual rails, etc. ) to balance them since they don’t have to be provided in denominations at first.
Multispectral smoke configurations exist so it wouldn’t be entirely inaccurate, since with an INS, you should still need to combine deployment with movement to avoid being hit by a -114L, the same way one would against a PARS, or other F&F store.
The issue basically boils down to the fact that ERA remains effective against the -114B, since doesn’t have a tandem charge, so can occasionally cause issues, and considering the the AH-1Z remains in service its anachronistic for seemingly no reason when the AH-1W could have been chosen in its lace with practically no other loss of capability, for the most part.
