if i am right PS-42 TA radar can lock an area on map because it is primaly an mapping and navigation radar, so if this missile gets added to game. it should stay in br 9 because it is 1950s plane and 1950s missile, and also it would be nice if CAS meta would get fresh winds. Let the RB-04 be wind of change
this is going out of the topic, but should dews ad Swedish navy? to be honest swedes have some pretty cool gunboats and ships.
1 Like
AJ.168 with TV seeker.
Oh right, that one too! Plus the Hs 293. But I^d more consider dthem guided bombs rather than anti ship missiles…
And if we include ships, there’s the SACLOS guided Nettuno too…
I found more info about the radar system from this aircraft’s manual PDF i found from Wikipedia articles sources. So this plane has PS 42-TA (search radar), PS42-TT ( air tracking radar),
PN-50 / A ( navigation and RB-04 missile control radar) and PN-50 ( altitude radar).
If I understand the concept, the missile itself is supposed to be assigned to a specific point on the surface (GNSS-like targeting) while radar keeps highlighting the spot (laser-like lock fixation)? Maybe it will be doable, however these planes (A32/AJ(S)37) will definitely be moved up as this way we get a laser-like pod in form of a radar with possibility to switch target thanks to the pre-designation of targets via map (especially if targets are scouted).
Also, the 300 kg warhead is, from what I’ve read, SAP with pre-fragemnted components, so its explosive filler mass will be lower than 300 kg. Maybe it is comparable to M117 750lb bomb, but, depedning on the accuracy of designated point via radar, it won’t be enough to be effective.
Actually I’m wrong, it will be pretty much just GNSS kind of munition as missile would lead it to the point itself via ARH seeker, so radar is there just for pre-lock and spot identification.
Either way, this thing would be pretty much Grom-1 but with (much) shorter range, so even if it is added, the planes would probably not benefit too much in A2G aspect.
1 Like
missiles has range of 30km, it is good if we look look GRB map sizes.
Yeah, but I still wonder how it can target ground targets. I don’t really get it as whether it is a laser-like guidance style with necessity of having radar on or it can be fired wherever the radar placed the point and missile guides itself like any other munition with GNSS guidance.
I still don’t quite understand.
Why is everybody so hell bent on using specialized anti ship weapons against tanks?
With every ASM introduced in WT so far (or proposed), the land attack capability seems to be one of the major points that is always discussed…
I mean… depends. This post has a statement that Soviets get OP CAS option, therefore, Swedes can get one via ASMs that have capabilities of being used against ground targets.
The nature of talks about ASMs’ capabilities being regarded primarily from ground attack aspect is understandable as most of the people (and I’d say I am part of these people) don’t care about ASM usage in naval specificaly.
It is even more evident when countries cannot offer dedicated counterparts of weapon systems present in others (e.g. Japan mains want ASM-2s to be added alongside F-2 for A2G capability as Japanese themselves have no dedicated guided A2G ordnance like Soviets/Americans/British/French have: AGM-65s / Kh-29Ts / AS-30 / Brimstone etc.).
It is pretty much the case with Swedes as well: its either AGM-65As or AGM-65Gs which are not competetive in current economy due to their relatively low quantity (2-4 per airframe) and quality (Kh-29Ts kind of outperform AGM-65s while being in same number on certain airframes).
Unfortunately only ASB has naval targets so for a majority of the community A2N weapons would serve no purpose. If they can double as A2G weapons in GRB they would hold value. Which is probably why so many ASMs haven’t been added yet and why the ones we have are kinda useless Vs naval targets
Plus Ki-148 I-Go Model 1B found on Ki-48-II as it is also anti-ship missile but with hollow charge warhead.
1 Like
This is where I tend to disagree or at least get uncomfortable: Yes, CAS was brought up, but in my view is a completely different topic. That some countries may have a superiority in one field/role should not be the basis to forcefully bend characteristics and capabilities of (specialized) weapons so they could answer such a discrepancy.
In all those discussions, be that Kormoran, Martel or Penguin , I’ve so far never seen really conclusive data that would proof that those anti ship missiles would be used and reliably work against small point targets as tanks or other CAS relevant targets.
Sure, you could fire a Martel against a building, and Kormoran against larger structures could work as well, little argument there. But hitting a CAS relevant target? That’s something completely different.
At best I’d expect the Penguin to be the closest to being capable of doing so, but then the situations where that would work could also be very well covered by a Maverick…
There’s a reason a radar guided Brimstone was fielded 2005, and not already 40 years earlier like the Rb-04: Using radar to engage a large block of metal on a quite flat, smoot surface is quite a lot easier than picking up a small object among many other small objects on a surface that reflects and scatters radar energy easily, no?
Again, for large land targets, be that a large factory or so, ok.
But a tank?
Unfortunately true indeed…
… but forcefully bend realism so such weapons fit into a different role?!?
I guess what you stated about map and game design limited usefulness of those weapons is the main reason why they’re still a novelty in WT than a real, regularly seen thing.
Iirc, they could, or might have been used for that because they are not EO guided like they are in game but remote controlled by the co-pilot and so the limitation on what can be hit is largely the skill of the co-pilot. I’d guess targeting static SPAA was entirely doable. You also had the ARM version used by France on the Jaguar and maybe the Super Eterndard?
To some extent, maybe the MARTEL yes, and of course the anti radar variant ARMAT, for use against air defence assets…
Yeah, it’s not necessary to make an ASM into an ATGM for the sake of making an additional loadout option for GRB, but I do understand the desire. Like the Typhoon at the moment having no FnF weapons, 6x Marte-ER ASMs would be quite useful if theyd double as ATGMs
Yeah me too! Give all those weapons!
Just please in a realistic way…
I’m already quite miffed that incediary bombs are a multitude more powerful at destroying bases than regular bombs, but then are of limited use against massed ground troops…
1 Like
Yeah… And looking at some of the aircraft OP mentioned, CBUs would be the vastly more valuable weapon
Welllllll- Napalm would do aloooot of damage to a troop baseee
1 Like