To be fair, aim 9X has a range of around 10-25 miles, idk about you but I can’t see a plane that far lol
1 Like
Except if you look at the thing, missiles with longer ranges are just short range IR.
Frankly we need this and equivalents for new nuclear mode. Opens up more interesting targets.
Found what I believe is another angle here Saab readies new anti-ship missile for Swedish Air Force’s Gripen fighters
Over on the right side of the photo →
1 Like
Been having a blast with the JSOW on the F-18CMLU-2, having a friendly briefly mark S-300 units and you can drop on them from 80+ KM with no issue and no enemies shooting you back, I haven’t even had one be intercepted yet, genuinely having fun with the mode. (Don’t tell gaijin I said that)
4 Likes
Because they can’t be intercepted and it is incredibly irritating. They’ll change it as soon as anyone else gets their munitions with low observability optimisations. Really should not be how it is, and it won’t be as soon as anyone else gets their home grown options.
Shhhhh, keep it on the down low, lemmy have fun while I can
It’s made the mode even more of a joke than it already was. Coupled with completely substandard air defenses after several changes, it’s now TDM with different furniture. DEAD doesn’t work for anyone but those with yank munitions, SEAD with ARMs doesn’t work because they do not reacquire emitters. Just rubbish.
And yet the kill feed is full of KH-38MT and KH-31 killing AA, either way, the mode needs work, the munitions need work, still fun in my opinion.
Anyway, off topic
It takes a full salvo of all the munitions carried to get through short range air defenses, and you can no longer effectively target long range options. You will see it but where yank munitions require 1 bomb per target, pact does not have such luxury. Thus, it is effectively worthless when the AA is so substandard you can simply focus on airfield camping (for either side).
But you are right, it is off topic.
2 Likes
Boy, I sure do love having to research the entirety of rank 6 and rank 6+1 to get access to the next rank!
3 Likes
does anyone have an archive link, or even a link to the original of this brochure from saab? i’m trying to dig up more info about BOW-21 and PAWS-2 but most i’m coming across is vague.
IIRC, the Elbit PAWS-2 is derived from the AN/AAR-57, which Gunjob mentioned when there was a discussion about LWR so at least there’s something to work on for the MWS
The BOW-21 seems to be much more vague aside from the document you mentioned. Believe SAAB also is helping Germany upgrading their RWR to the “BOW TRWS”.
1 Like
Doubt, because AAR-57 is UV MAWS, when PAWS-2 have MWIR.
Most likely Gripen have some UV MAWS and not PAWS 2 but I’m not sure…
Try mailing them?
Could be the MAW-300 they were testing as part of SAAB’S IDAS sensor suite?
Though I’ve seen articles saying that SAAB had selected Elbit’s PAWS-2 to be introduced into Gripens.
Or it could just be modularity maybe? The recent Gripen F that Brazil posted featured an extra sensor where the MWS is usually located.
Link to OG PDF: https://www.saab.com/globalassets/event/defexpo/idas.pdf
You guys expecting too much when Gaijin cant even bothered to fix RWR band coverage to this day.
hey, success by volume
Yeah dont know about that chief.
I don’t know how many times we bumped that report yet nothing changed, even Gunjob did bumped it but developers doesnt seem to care.
Funny part is they only need to add K-Band coverage but as it seems its too hard for them.
The suggestion for the modernized JAS 39E got approved already. I have no clue what they’re gonna change, if they add a whole new vehicle, all my current grind’s gonna be for nothing:(
I really wish they’d just rework the existing model instead.
Watch it will still lack K-Band coverage like C and regular E model.