Unless they are adding the BLU-108 equipt variants the searched volume is too small, and the CBU-105 would probably be more effective.
JSOW-B has longer range than CBU-105 though right?
and JDAM-ER glide kits for 2000lb LJDAM would be nice
Storm Shadow and give it a damage multiplier vs bases :P
too bad they dont have JDAM kits for napalm bombs huh
Almost certainly, but it gets an additional 16 skeets (6 vs 10 BLU-108) for said reduced range, and a 16Nmi range is certainly still useful.
Also it can be carried in significant numbers.
1 Like
nice. that’s a whole Soviet armored division’s worth of skeets
CBU-113 is a CBU-87 with the WCMD-ER guided tail kit, which is filled by 202x BLU-97 (287 g (0.63 lb) Cyclotol + zinc body) which has an incendiary function and fills that roll.
Oh yeah 18x (10 x 4 ) is 360 110mm RHAe EFPs total
Only thing more with a higher Pk per fly out is the Rockeye, but there is no guided / long range equivalent.
2 Likes
I’d love to see they add GBU-28B/B and GBU-28C/B. 4,700 lb bomb would be the biggest bomb the US have yet and would be fun to use.
it’s possible to have a 10,000kg Tnt equivalent mk84 class weapon? inject that STRAIGHT into my veins
wow
when can has agm-130d?
That’s fine, ONLY IF the mig29 gets its R73s back that you all complained about until it was nerfed and taken from it.
And what does this have to do with DMLGB?
Sounds like USSR cope to me
1 Like
Because the post says to add it to the Aircraft because it was able to use them. The mig29 was able to Use the R73s and here we are years later and it’s still not added to it after being removed. U.S shouldn’t get handheld unless all other planes get their actual loadouts that are in game.
A lot of the counterparts to F-16C and F-15E have gps+laser bombs.
I’m fine if MiG 29 gets r-73 if it goes up in BR
And if we are talking about accurate loadouts, US is not handheld at all
5 Likes
F/A-18C Late since latest dev server update has GBU-54 LJDAMs now:
It’s a bit annoying that any other report of LJDAMs for the other US fighters are getting seemingly ignored however. I feel Gaijin found that the Hornet was perhaps a bit lacking in the CAS department compared to the others, which I suppose it sorta is, and also because it’s new. But, athough very nice, I don’t think these would be particularly overpowered, especially on the F-16C since it only has two pylons which can take it (same with the EGBUs).
Not to mention they also still need to fix the base GBU-24/B.
5 Likes
Made report for the rest
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/Wqg0JaNf6slJ
Smin and a tech mod still haven’t responded to me though. So not feeling great about it
Yes, your report is one of those I was referencing to. Plenty of older reports as well, also ignored/unseen.
I have been following all these LJDAM reports for a while, and decided to make one for the Hornet in the hope that it would be seen simply because the Hornet is new, and I guess it worked because it got accepted in a day and now it’s here.
I kinda hoped Gaijin would add them to the F-16C and 15E at least then as well while they were at it (like how GBU-39s were given out with the F-15E’s addition), especially because the sources I used included mentions of those planes as well. Buuut, it might just be a balance issue for some reason. For the F-15E I could sorta understand it, but for the F-16C not at all.
3 Likes
The hell.
Is there any documentation regarding that?
1 Like
Sounds funny
Is there any way to report it as missing?
It would probably be best rolled into “Suggestion” that covered all alternate warhead options / configuration for the Mk.80 series that we know of.
1 Like