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
Ahhh, NOW we’re talking! I think a variety of bases with different properties, or better even modular bases would really be one exceptionally good thing for WT in general and Sim in particular!
I fully agree: A factory complex where I have several large, possibly fortified buildings should require a completely different approach and weapons than a tent camp…
3 Likes
Now that would be fun.
Also certain base types could be vulnerable to precision GBU drops as well
The paragraph clearly states that the RB04 is restricted to targeting landing ships, transport vessels, and escort groups—collections of ships of varying sizes.
Since it flies just 10–15 meters above the surface, it would likely struggle to hit ground targets smaller or more mobile than a small mansion.
Ha, I have an extensive suggestion essay in the works. Just not ready yet…
5 Likes
I’m looking forward to it
Sounds cool, i cannot wait when it can be read!
I made some more digging, RB-04 E had better guidance system and improved monopulse radar. Also the RB-04 C variant ( the initial product) could be manually guided using joystick and radar by second pilot / radar operator in A32A. still missile would flew wery close to ground, so in theory, it would act like bullpup?
2 Likes
Sounds more like Man-in-the-loop that they refuse to model on the AJ168
1 Like
what do you mean morvran_?
I think the AJ.168 had two modes: TV fire & forget (as modelled in WT), plus the “man-in-the-loop” mode where also after firing the TV image would be sent to the aircraft, and the crew having the possibility to fine-aim the missile still.
That’s actually what that pod is for under the Buccaneer’s wing.
Atm, WT has no weapons with such a mechanism, but it would be interesting to use. Not 100% sure, but I think at least some Walleye variants had similar capabilities: I’m pretty sure I’ve seen videos from Vietnam where the imagery from the bomb could be seen until impact into a bridge pylon, so I assume the crew would also have been able to use that image to guide the weapon…
Edit: Ok, found this on the Walleye:
1 Like
Keep in mind, Gaijin has done very little to improve gameplay in any mode for over 10 years. It’s clear the devs have very limited video game design knowledge and a very stubborn ‘if it does the bare minimum, don’t bother changing it’ mindset.
1 Like