saw it, gaijin needs to make it clear what they are doing
The ASM-2 is a joke, it is impossible to hit the ground target🥲
8 Likes
I guess if ASM-2 is a bust for ground striking targets, the silver lining is you can use the LJDAMs to just loiter at 20-25km or something outside of SPAA range (depends on how long range the new AAs are) and play Iraq War drone strike simulator
3 Likes
2.5 km lock range?
1 Like
So the ASMs now have sea scimming
good thing is: it works well over water
bad thing is: it makes firing at ground targets impossible because they will scimm into trees/buildings etc.
you also cant shoot them at ships from closer range
1 Like
Pylons are still modeled wrong
Underside flare dispensers aren’t modeled
SNIPER doesn’t have thermals, which only affects Japan apparently (shocker!)
Air-to-air missiles are bugged, detonating on people and doing no damage (Seems to be affecting SAMs as well)
1 Like
For some reason it uses a slightly worse version of the Penguin seeker, because the 1972 AGM-119s basic IR seeker is somehow superior to the 1995 AMS-2 IIR (imaging) seeker. In practice the only differences are IRCCM and track rate, that are worse on the ASM-2, but it’s still stupid that they couldn’t even use an equal placeholder, but had to make it worse for no reason.
Another thing they made worse is the warheads too, changing both ASM-1 and ASM-2 to an explosive mass of 47kg, rather than the 56kg they had from the earlier AS.34 copied placeholder.
For the ASM-1 this doesn’t seem so bad, it is a 15kg lighter (150kg vs 165kg) warhead on a missile only 3 years newer. That puts the ASM-1 warhead at a solid 31.3% of explosives, compared to the AS.34’s 33.9% explosives.
This does seem reasonable for a slightly smaller missile of similar age, though since no real value is known I’d have preferred if they kept the rate at the same 33.9% for the in-game placeholder, which would give it 50.8kg of explosives in game
AS.34 Warhead
- Weight: 165kg
- Explosive Mass: 56kg
- → ~33.9% Explosives
ASM-1 Warhead
- Weight: 150kg
- Explosive Mass: 47kg
- → ~31.3% Explosives
But where it really gets horribly wrong is with the ASM-2s 225kg warhead, that in game is just the same as the ASM-2. This puts it at a laughable 20.9% explosive mass.
Now, once again this is a placeholder for lack of proper values, but it is unreasonably low compared to any other comparable missiles in the game, and far too low compared to the closest real world equivalent of the AGM-84.
ASM-2 Warhead
- Weight: 225kg
- Explosive Mass: 47kg
- → ~20.9% Explosives
The 1986 AGM-65G uses a similar SAP-HE warhead, though it is a far smaller one and the missile is 9 years older. Still, despite the limited size, this missile’s warhead manages to achieve an explosive mass of 26.5%, higher than the current ASM-2.
The closest real world equivalent to the ASM-2 is the AGM-84 Harpoon, which also uses a similar SAP-HE warhead in a much closer weight class to the ASM-2. The Harpoons 221kg warhead has 97.5kg of explosives, which is about 44%.
ASM-2 adjusted for equivalent performance to the AGM-65F would result in an explosives mass of 59.5kg, 12.5kg more than the current warhead.
AGM-65F Warhead
- Weight: 136kg
- Explosive Mass: 36kg
- → ~26.5% Explosives
Using the same AS.34 reference as the ASM-1, this would already bring the number up to 76.3kg of explosives, which is 29.3kg more than the current game,
Adjusting it to the AGM-84 Harpoon it results in an explosive mass of 99.1kg, more than twice the mass currently seen in game. (52.1kg more than in game)
AGM-84 Warhead
- Weight: 221kg
- Explosive Mass: 97.5kg
- → ~44% Explosives
As much as I understand these are just estimates and not at all real values, there is nothing to justify the ASM-2 having the worst SAP-HE warhead in the game. At the very least the placeholder values for the ASMs should be equal to contemporary missiles, but making them worse based on nothing shouldn’t be done.
9 Likes
Yeah its a turbojet engine not a rocket motor, so comically long burn times for anything in warthunder.
2 Likes
Fun fact: Gaijin removed gatewidth IRCCM from AGMs it seems. Probably because it literally did nothing on them, with or without it they all had the same FoV of 0.1
Honestly I wonder why gaijin even included it in the first place on some, as it literally did nothing.
1 Like
So it wasn’t just my imagination when I saw my AAM-4 hit and explode right on the enemy plane, doing no damage.
1 Like
I was literally about to come complain about that.
I guess Gaijin really wants us to forget the missiles and use that flight model.-
the ASM-2s also just like to go in circles for some reason lmao (at least from my test drive testing)
2 Likes
Wasn’t even on the F-2, it was on my F-15J(M). Direct hit with AAM-4, nothing.
Dang.
Well, I can attest to it being busted on the F-2A ADTW as well, so .
hey guys, am I tweakin or did they actually improve the pull on the AAM-3?
it feels a lot more nimble than before the update
1 Like
If anything it feels worse to me, but that might be due to the bugs.
Anyway, here’s the bug report, make sure to express how grateful you are to Gaijin for not breaking the game with every update.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/M2zgvNw6PUEl
It’s a general bug, nothing to do with F-2.
Anyways, something for the direction finding F-2, which was overlooked in the original suggestion. It also includes datalink functionality for aiming the AAM-4 between other aircrafts and the prototype. It was briefly mentioned in a diagram, but is more cleanly stated in TRDI60, which we didn’t have at the time of the suggestion:
3次元方向標定技術
目標のアジマス及びエレベーション方探情
報を組み合わせた統合方探処理による3次元
空間に存在する目標の方向標定を行う統合方
探処理機能の実現、データリンクを活用した
僚機との連携及び他機器(火器管制レーダま
たはIRST(Infra-Red Search and Track
System))との連接による目標位置標定を用
いて自ら電波を発することなくミサイルを発
射するシステムの実現性検討
The SAS system - in damping mode - seems to be out of control, as if it were still in manual control mode.
His AOA is terrible, he stalls at 600km of speed, it feels like he has the “maneuver button” on all the time. Terrible…terrible.
1 Like