SU-17M4 is at 11.0 cuz it has R60M
and when was the last time you see an R-60M hit something?
I dont play 11.0 so i wouldnt know
this should give you a proper insight on what people have to deal with
summary of the jet:
• it turn like a brick
• for its turn rate it is also very slow
• only 6 R-60M
• R-60M is very easy to dodge and very susceptible to flare even the sun can threw it out of lock
• 12 Flare/Chaf
• no fnf agm/bomb
1 Like
looks inside
4 Likes
i wish i had other example that pointed out the flaw of this aircraft
R-60M wasnt the best furthermore at 11.0, Su-17M3 should be at 10.0 instead while Su-17M4 should be 10.7
1 Like
not really, someone clearly hasnt seen how short range a mav is when launched from a slow speed at a fairly low altitude
2 Likes
Someone clearly havent played A10 and SU25 more likely.
Strange that I can shoot em on 6-8Km on A10 Late… And on basic Su25 trying that same on KH25L is a no go
Strange that I play both , USA and USSR cas, and i have some kinda idea how those work in game
3 Likes
Note that you least have a zoom to help you scan, and aim.
Note that if you see it bare eyes you can ping marker in there and just swap on optics. lock, fire and evade if needed. Some luxurious thing what you cant do in SU. Or even better , use tech tree A10 and enjoy thermal imaging.
It changes game a lot, how you can enter and dance in battlefield, also gives you more range if needed
2 Likes
Not on the AGM-65A (or -65B), as it is a fixed optic.
Time spent “Head Down”, and refining the point of aim, will make you lose situational awareness and often completely miss missile launches, it’s not like it has an all seeing RWR in the baseline ALR-46, and the benefits that should be conferred by the -45F aren’t and are awaiting implementation
“CP-1293 computer (ALR-67) and IP-1276 azimuth display have been designed such that they are interchangeable with the electrical pulse analyzer and azimuth display of the AN/ALR-45 receiving set. This provides a software reprogrammable analyzer, an alpha-numeric display of threat bearing and identification (I.D.), and interface capability with AN/ALQ-126B and AN/ALE-39”
Going from .9 Mach to the ever so dizzying heights of Mach 1.1 practically increases the range by less than 200 meters due to the absurdly high drag profile and the Boost-only Motor.
1 Like
Can we have AGM-158 GNSS or IIR guidance to balance KH-38MT
The GBU-53/B, or AGM-154C1 are probably a closer fit to the Kh-38MT, or the AGM-84K, but that comes in fewer numbers and can only be carried by select aircraft.
Just wait until you someday get in there. It is actually 1.4 and yes it makes difference.
It also makes difference are you flying A10 or F16/F15/FA18 etc.
Still you can see it on picture , that even on fixed Zoom it is still Zoom compared to SU25 etc.
And when getting 65D it’s not fixed zoom anymore
And still, if you see it on bare eyes, you can just zoom, check and fire if it is still alive.
Use your bare eyes and just fix a pointer where you want if that feels too hard.
2 Likes
GBU 53 should have been added this update along with the new spice bombs
Id prefer they add 154B but that would be too much fun
Which airframes is supposedly doing Mach 1.4 remotely near sea level, let alone with ordnance?
The issue with the -53/B is that it’s completely unpowered so relies on a high speed / High altitude release (since airspeed based trajectory shaping isn’t a thing in game, should pop-up until at critical airspeed for Wings before opening to convert as much excess KE to height to extend range) and so is far more constrained than even the Brimstones would be.
Definitely, only issue is that it would have practically no penetration as the BLU-108’s are only 5" diameter (similar to the TOW -2B) and would likely share the same falloff as the TOW -2B and so be gutted by proximity, due to using a unique Damage model and the fairly high Height of Burst, doing less than nothing to most tanks even with out the ERA.
If anything I feel like it might force them to actually fix the TOW 2B if they add any similar systems
even with low damage there could be enough of them flying around to reliably deal will lighter vehicles
Sure but it’s probably a never ever considering how it was at it’s introduction.
It very much depends on how Cluster ordnance is modeled, due to issues with massed explosions, it may not model all submunitions functioning, but effectively pull a Monte-Carlo Approximation then just select some number of modules at random to avoid expensive computation for “wasted” bomblets.
thats boring I want to be able to crash low end PCs and last gen consoles on command
Think a little higher, you’d be crashing a Server instance with a single dispenser(considering that an F-4 with FFARs could do it), take the CBU-3/A for example contains 371 Anti-Tank submunitions, or the Mk .20 Rockeye (CBU-99) with 247.
sounds like it would be fun to bring a full load of them with f15e and drop all in series with no delay