Hello. I will report it internally.
3 Likes
This would seem logical to me, however it must be remembered that the Mirage 2000 is far superior to the Tornado in terms of flight performance. I think the RMV should be at the same Br as the GR4
From my understanding, the Antilope 50 is an export variant of the V, and I don’t know for the others
There are no pictures at all about this for AUF2. Only thing you will get remotely close to that is this Double-Rack for LGB.
Spoiler
Antilope II and IV nether came to fruition, only the V got used in the M2KN/D. The IV variant for exemple was developed in the 70s but was never equipped AFAIK, while the V is a direct descendent of the Antilope program
eh idk, tornado has build in gun, and also has like waaaay more countermeasures and access to aim9m’s and in terms of speed they should be similar.
now to think about this, i guess in sim the RMV could stay at 12.3/12.7 since it has semi IFF with the scorpion HMD, but R1 should go down to 12.0 imo
1 Like
TGP’s were slaved to the radar at one point (shortly after the F-14B came out) but this feature was removed cuz it was causing problems, since it would pull a lock away from a ground target when trying to simultaneously engage air targets, wasting ground attack munitions. I almost made a suggestion to introduce a control that would allow you to turn on/off the TGP slaving function, but decided against it cuz its a hassle.
This is still the case, the Su39 for example has its TGP slave to its radar, the only thing is that not all planes can do it because the technology does not allow them to be coordinated. From memory the only planes that can do it in the game currently are the Su39 and the F-14B,
Could be wrong but pretty sure TGP’s are meant to be used as an integrated portion of the WCS in most/all planes that use them. I’d be extremely surprised if they couldnt be slaved by the radar, particularly since thatd massively reduce their effectiveness as a sensor in the air to air role, which though less common, is still possible. For the F-14B specifically, I know that the TCS can be used to slave the radar, be slaved to the radar, or be used as a standalone sensor for firing the AIM-54’s in active off the rail. I’d assume most bolt-on TGP’s can do similar things, but maybe not due to how the TCS is built into the plane, but itd be hard to argue that a TGP, which is in itself a sensor and director for ground attack weapons would not be able to directly interface with other sensors integrated into the aircrafts WCS…
To my knowledge it is not that common, modern aircraft equipped with air-to-ground radar are generally equipped with it because it allows them to designate their targets more easily. But aircraft with more AIr-Air roles generally do not have access to this technology, the only aircraft that had access to it being the f-14B as you said, but it was part of its basic concept.
On the other hand, aircraft can slave their TGPs with many other ways, whether via DataLink (coordinates provided by another aircraft or point designated by the TGP of another aircraft) or by laser (buddy lasering or designation from the ground)
f14b, su39, all of them can still slave targeting camera to radar lock
this screenshot is from this video, which is 3 months old, you can see that targeting camera of f14b follows the tws lock from the first minutes of the video
unless something major was changed in the last 3 months, which i dont know of
I mean, I dont have any source for it, but like i said, the idea an aircraft would have to manually save the TGP at all times is incredibly silly, and the idea it could slave a TGP with datalink or buddy lasing, but NOT with its own integrated radar is even more farfetched.
Im not saying aircrafts with air to air only radars would be able to slave the TGP to a ground target mind you, just that it should be able to slave to the radars locked target, seeing as the radar would be able to provide it with all the required information for the location of said target… It would be extremely silly for them not to be able to do such a thing, that be about the most basic of basic functions regarding subsystem integration, but I guess I have seen sillier things irl.
Dont think it has, i just havent really played the F-14B in a while, I do seem to remember most/all aircrafts with TGP’s could do it at one point.
Sidenote to that, its still tragic how poorly implemented the TCS is. Primary documentation bug reports were made during the F-14B dev server and go into every single capability of the TCS including its scan pattern, and gaijin implemented literally none of it whatsoever…
also, i wonder if super etendards anemone could do that 🤔 (besides that its missing all of its air2air modes and ship tws KEK)
1 Like
The Etendard couldn’t do that, anyway the targets being locked several dozen kilometers apart, the ATLIS wouldn’t have allowed anything to be seen
From memory, the pilots complained that the Radar displayed the enemy’s position on the HUD but that the pod did not follow because it was too old, this may have been corrected with the arrival of the CLDP but I believe that the ATLIS could not do it
1 Like
Forgot to address this so here I go.
Doesnt really matter at what alt it needs to be at to achieve these ranges, the fact it can is the issue in the first place. Not like the M2K struggles to gain alt either…
Right, so at low altitude, the AASM already outranges all but the pantsir, that sounds like a SIGNIFICANT limitation… /s
I’d love to see your source for this seeing as I’ve only ever seen the terminal motor in action, never one post launch, and I’m genuinely curious. Also not sure why you include this in me being “wrong”, i was asking if anyone knew how the motor on it worked, not stating it was terminal only.
Thats not unique to the AASM, any weapon with GPS guidance can do this easily enough, and technically any weapon with a lofted trajectory and terminal guidance (such as basic LGB’s) can as well. The incoming GBU-48/49/50 will all be able to do this just fine.
LOAL already exists in-game, not sure why gaijin decided to pretend that was a sticking point regarding the brimstone. Optical seekers were made to be able to lock the ground to extend their range in-game, which allows for them to switch to locking a target near the ground they have locked if the target is within its FoV once in-range. All SALH weapons in-game are also LOAL.
All seekers are limited in the vehicle lock range by render distance, and afaik all are LOAL if fired beyond render distance. The mav and Kh-38 are both also limited by render distance. Also, it seems render distance may be longer than 20km on the dev server, atleast for some vehicles.
As stated, LOAL is already in-game, and even beyond that fact, AASM is still superior to every guided weapon currently in-game. Pretending otherwise just because you want to see it added is disingenuous. I’ve also specifically stated the Kh-38 also should not be allowed in GFRB, as it is broken, and the mavs are pushing it and could be argued not to be balanced in GFRB either. Its bad gameplay design to have a class of vehicle that is literally 100% impervious to all things on the ground in a primarily ground game mode.
Gameplay should take primacy over weapon implementation.
Here’s proof LOAL literally currently exists in-game btw, with explanations on POINT locks and TRACK locks as well in-case you had doubts.
Ah i understand it better now. You’re just a yapper that hates being slammed with long range weaponry in GRB. Makes more sense why you are against evolution of weaponry in WT. And considering gaijin already went “fuck it” with the GRB gameplay might as well get good weapons for western nations too. Also a LOAL where you have to keep an eye on your weapon for it to finish it’s course is not a proper LOAL so cope.