I would like to talk about SPIKE-LR and other Non beam riding ATGMs missiles we have in WT like Hellfires, Mavericks, PARS etc which all share the same problem!
In video above we can see Spike launched in MANUAL mode without seeing the target, and later on operator selects and locks to the target. SPIKE missile was made intentionally slow to allow operator to have enough time to do that.
While it is reasonable, because otherwise there would be salvos of spikes flying over our tiny maps towards the enemy spawns, the reason why I posted this video is that clearly spike strikes the target from the ABOVE:
Bypassing the strong frontal armor and striking weak roof armor, sometimes virtually flying into open hatches, which is why the SPIKE is probably most deadly ATGM out there despite being rather slow and with Low penetration warhead:
But not in WT, where it strikes from the LOS of the launch vehicle:
There are numerous disadvantages to current flight profile, which would not be there if the missiles would have correct trajectory:
Easier to loose track due to obstacles
Hitting ground obstacles before reaching the target
Going trough thick frontal armor/APS instead of roof armor.
So any ideas how to convince Gaijin to fix all those indirect flight profiles ? Because there are numerous bug reports for this so they must be aware…
Is it to much to ask to give those weapons correct parameters/behavior ?
I support this idea. Addition of more realism and new play style would be great to see in the game. Some of the players were accomplishing likewise scenario by locking their own Scout Drone, then dive into enemy after shooting the missile.
If this mechanic that you mentioned come up in the game, it would be really cool. Although, this had to be done when the “Drone Age” major update released.
The Mav and Hellfire both get their “top attack” shown in the images simply from being fired from above. The Maverick is of course primarily designed to be dropped from aircraft, which IRL typically fly high and fast unlike in-game where players skim the treetops to avoid getting slapped by SPAA. Hellfires are laser-guided, flying straight at the reflection of a designator without the context of range, target size, etc needed for top attack. The exception is the Longbow, not yet in-game. The SPIKEs are just incorrect though, discussed here.
It’s so painful to see so much care, only for a specific part of War Thunder, while for the rest it isn’t even calculated.
How I wish that instead of whoever is in charge now, there were the protagonists of another game, maybe they would solve the bugs or problems like these first, instead of milking the poor players.
Coff Coff DEMOCRACY
There were two other who crashed into a terrain, which they should avoid even by flying from AC to target on direct path and even so if the Maverick would loft/hold alt a bit.
Not at all, approximate location of target is programmed into the Hellfire prior launch and missile uses IOG to navigate to that area. It is all there in the Hellfire topic.
Those missiles should be corrected as fast as possible since they are underperforming since the day they were added. But off course it ain’t gonna happen cuz russian will suffer from this and off course GJ doesn’t want this.
Very well made post btw.
Not like the latter needed it, the PARS are still the best F&F ATGM from rotary wing by a large margin, meanwhile the AGM-65’s HEAT damage has been worse by a significant margin since it’s introduction while having a warhead that is almost 17 times the size of the PARS, yet, the PARS reliably overpressured and damaged targets, the AGM-65 cant do the same for some reason.
The SPIKE-ER on the other hand has been stuck with a case of “not actually impacting the vehicle right and having nerfed total penetration” it should be reliably hitting the center of vehicles roofs, yet, the thing suffers from hellfire guidance syndrome and chooses to randomly smash into the front armor arrays of tanks at random. It shares a very similar damage profile to the PARS 3 which almost sits right around 3.3 ish kg of explosive mass which is fine as both missile’s post penetration damage when they hit properly is acceptable for how small the warhead is.
Well I think that they should do more spall, but every atgm in game with Heat warhaed does a very small amount of spall (like the tows, in ukraine we are seeing them popping T90M, here You normally need 2/3 against an early T72/64). Also if a granade launched in an open spot with a smaller TNT equivalent can overpressure a tank, a 3.8 kg warhaed that pen the roof should be able to do the same.
Have you ever used the AGM-65s with HEAT warheads, if so, you should know that they are not dealing damage equal to their warhead having almost 17 times more explosive mass when compared to the PARS or the SPIKE-ER, reminder the SPIKE-LR, which has 700mm of penetration is only present on ground vehicles.
if so, you should know that they are not dealing damage equal to their warhead having almost 17 times more explosive mass when compared to the PARS or the SPIKE-ER, reminder the SPIKE-LR, which has 700mm of penetration is only present on ground vehicles.
Nice so you know their performance is inferior to vastly smaller HEAT warheads when they should not be.
The anser is yes, I just recently tried them out on DEV along with the SPIKE-LR and SPIKE-ER to compare them to the supposedly buffed AGM-65, the PARS is still superior against armor when compared to the AGM-65 which it should not be, the SPIKE-LR is still pitiful and the SPIKE-ER is meh but mainly shafted by it’s flight path still.
Always funny to me that German mains will cry and whine about the PARS not obliterating everything when its been the best F&F ATGM on rotary wing vehicles since it’s introduction and is still unmatched even to this day and have to always try to make other ATGM threads about how they suffer while having the best F&F rotary wing ATGM in game.
I know that PARS aren’t better than Mavs. I’ve both and i also played my KHT a lot more (something like ~100 games w/PARS 3s?). I can one-shot IFVs yes, but at the same time I can put 3xPARS into a T-80U and watch it live to tell the tale. I’ve had my 65Bs fail to kill as well, but they’re far more consistent.
Always funny to me that German mains will cry and whine about the PARS not obliterating everything when its been the best F&F ATGM on rotary wing vehicles since it’s introduction and is still unmatched even to this day and have to always try to make other ATGM threads about how they suffer while having the best F&F rotary wing ATGM in game.
Then you’ve never read anything “German mains” had written about it really, since their biggest gripe was never about how potent the warhead is, but how easily the missile losses lock (or that it can’t distinguish between a corpse and a live target despite being capable of that in real life) and that it can’t re-lock despite the actual missile having the capability.
The anser is yes
How many matches? I’m gonna take a shot in the dark and say sub-10.
