Good luck making that work.
1 Like
He probably confused effective range with the most optimal test case that being:
- no enemy spaa
- target in the open with no foliage
- platform speed is above mach and at a high altitude.
Prior to the new spaa, the effective range of the maverick is around 10km and for the kh38 it’s around 20+ish.
With the new spaa, the effective range of these agms are reduced but by how much depends on the map and enemy spaa’s present.
1 Like
Maverick does not lock a moving target past 14 km
1 Like
The lowest BR Brimstone carrier plane is the Tornado at 12.3, if I remember correctly. In a downtier you can use Brims more less ok’ish. They’re not F&F and you slowly have to aim at one target after another…but it works over time.
As you can see, its a slow weapon (timecodes). You need to keep the lock for quite a time. You always need to re-align your plane towards the target. Target box is rather small. In average you need 1min or more for a Brimstone kill. So, we all know how fast paced GRB is, match’s hot phase only last a few minutes, before everyone leaves.
At top BR its totally and completly not viable as CAS weapon. You can’t play like this vs BUKs. You’d need the fire & forget mode. Like KH-38 and other’s have. F.E. Ru players just volley off all their missiles in a few seconds, lock’n’spacebar and turn away. Often getting multikills in 1-2 minutes. EF2000 at this BR really needs F&F.
1 Like
Not really, since there “somehow” still remains a Report for the AGM-65’s Speed to be increased significantly.
Maverick incorrect flight performance
“I have found times varying around 9s (+23%). And thus an average speed of ~289 m/s. In the included document, it is also mentioned acceleration of the 65G model is approximately 17Gs (~167 m/s/s) and 65D models 22.5G (~220 m/s/s),”
The Pantisr has a very high ROF cannon, and a co-axial TWS modes (very high polling rate, so predicted trajectory is precise), though; so has a good chance of intercepting stores when performing terminal defense.
The Sgt. Stout (M-SHORAD Increment I) I feel would have been a much more effective option for the US vs the NASAMS / CLAWS at top tier solely due to the 200RPM, 30mm HE-VT and (near) hemispheric AESA coverage, even with the lacking range (and performance) of the FIM-92 (of which multiple reports that could assisting in rectifying the situation do exist; #1,,#2,#3).
If Gaijin implemented it faithfully it would be relatively fine, as with sufficient care in employment and the implementation of the assisted modes, targets can be handed off properly with a near zero chance of Friendly fire. As per the below source (for ants);
The (baseline) JAGM is equipt with the Following firing modes (The -ER would theoretically have additional modes to support the addition of the IIR seeker)
- Point Designation (PD), SALH all the way.
- Target Designation (TD), initiated with SALH, w/ handoff to MMW seeker for the Terminal phase.
- Active Fire and Forget - Laser Queued (AFF-LQ), MMW w/ SAL override.
- Active Fire and Forget - Millimeter Wave (AFF-MMW), MMW all the way.
It effectively does if the relevant systems were to be implemented faithfully due to sensor fusion.
Active interrogation of targets is practically redundant at this point, the APG-78 can Classify the Type of Target by it’s return into the following categories (tracked vehicles, wheeled vehicles, helicopters, fixed wing aircraft, ADU(Air-Defense Unit);with RFI data).
And when combined with Link -16 and various Blue-Force Tracker systems allow for unparalleled Situational Awareness to be built and maintained.
The Hellfire’s should be able to be launched in an N-LOS capacity by being sent dataframes from other aircraft, or Link-16 updates so they shouldn’t even need to pop-up, and the “Self-Defense” mode of the RFI should permit semi-automated one-button cued counterfire against detected SPAA / SAM. but realistically things need to be fair, I get that. So adding an RWR handoff is off the table (even though later US 5th gen aircraft will be dead in the water without it due to the lack of a radar gimbal, and +/- 60 degrees will be near impossible to have to work around to support a two way datalink track with the main radar)
Helicopter/Weapon System Integration
“When the RFI detects an emitter, the pilot or copilot/gunner initiates a cued search. With a single button push, the FCR performs an immediate narrow scan of the emitter azimuth, “merges” the most likely target or targets, and automatically computes a fire control solution. Almost simultaneously, target symbology is presented to the crew and RF missiles are armed for immediate launch. All the pilot needs to do is pull the trigger and mask the helicopter as the fire-and-forget RF Hellfire missiles fly to and destroy the designated targets.”
Simply Add MMW band obscuring properties to the generic smoke formulation and provide it to all smoke grenade equipt vehicles, as a “Gaming Convention”.
7 Likes
definetly not
3 Likes
And good luck making 21km work with Kh-38MT.
Both are doable though.
That’s against targets that move after launch.
Kh-38MT and AGM-65D have a track range of 14km after all:
You must have seen text that was not there since I have no claimed it is doable or not doable for the MT.
What is fact, and you should know very well, unless you have not deployed with AGM65ds, is that to achieve a 17km hit with AGM requires perfect conditions.
That includes requiring above Mach speed and high altitude. And again, good luck doing that.
My argument does not fail because your MT argument doesn’t fail.
5 Likes
I don’t believe there is any way of proving Alvis unless he plays with the weapon itself and deploys it as such.
But this again, requires him doing so, which of course will not happen
3 Likes
No but you see, as long as you have the vehicle and play it in custom battles, you’ll be able to claim that it works in GRB and anyone who disagrees with you is a Russian propagandist
\s
6 Likes
Careful, you’re agreeing with me again.
Can’t have that. XD
Weird that we’re all in agreement about these things.
@Hike_DK
I’ve used AGM-65Ds and Kh-38MTs against moving targets out to 25km starting from 14km to find effective ranges.
AGM-65Ds stopped being consistent after 17km.
And Kh-38MTs stopped being consistent after 21km.
Granted, I would use neither because I don’t main CAS to begin with.
However, if I did use them I’d just pick as close of range as possible, using low altitude surprise tactics.
Effective ranges stopped being useful for me when Buk, CLAWS, etc got added.
Carlos Hathcock made a sniper kill on 2300m-ish.
But it doesn’t mean that everyone can kill an enemy who stands 2200m away.
I think it is your bad habit to justify your theory with your personal experience.
Such as… Fragging F-14A with Mirage IIIC before.
@Stockholm_Blend
And I made about a dozen AGM-65D frags at 19km, that doesn’t mean I write 19km when the data shows 17km to be the consistent effective range.
I never once posted my personal 19km frags in my posts, let alone the 21km AGM-65D frag against a SPAA. There’s no reason for me to use those because those are outliers.
I’ve also exclusively stated F-14A was superior to Mirage 3.
I’ll continue never using personal experience for justification. As I’ve used personal experience exactly zero times.
Edit: This may also be the first post on this topic where I’m sharing any personal experience… cause for some reason you felt the need to invent that argument.
Which I think is half the point you are missing. AGM-65s should have something like 22% more range and should be notably faster. Couple with the lack of IOG, smaller warhead and substantially slower speed compared to KH-38MT there just isnt any way to actually compare the AGM-65 to KH-38MT.
Even if both are fired at 10-15km, one is going to perform considerably better than the other.
AGM-65D/G are an 11.0-11.7 weapon maybe. 13.0? Nope.
6 Likes
The IR seeker of AGM-65D is under-performing a bit for sure.
Of courses Hammer and Kh-38MT are over-performing because their real-life seekers are supposed to be active LOAL with a 1.5km range against programmed targets.
The slower speed is why AGM-65D 4km worse.
While AGM-65D can only get 3km beyond its tracking range, Kh-38MT can get 7km beyond its tracking range due to the notably faster acceleration, leading to higher speeds as well.
The difference is much more than that Alvis. Here’s the tests I’ve done which can be replicated if you doubt my claims.
@Morvran If you’re also interested as well and want to fact check further claims made by anyone (or a certain someone)
Test Drive: Dessert. 2nd farthest target, GB ADATS
Note: some of these measurements may be off by ±20-100m, ±10-50kph, or 1-3s due to human error
F-15E (Spaded) - min fuel - 2 AGM-65D, TGP, 1 Countermeasure Dispenser
| Speed | Alt | Target | Result | Time in Air | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mach 1.1 | 1000m | 17km | Did not reach target | ~70s | Was in the air for around 70ish seconds before falling out of the sky |
| Mach 1.26 | 1500m | 15km | Did not reach target | ~60s | Was in the air for around 60 seconds before falling out of the sky |
| Mach 1.29 | 3100m | 16.9km | Almost reached target | ~58s | maybe 15-30m away from target before crashing |
| Mach 1.30 | 4900m | 17km | Hit | ~55s | note this is the farthest target on the map. angle of impact is very shallow - allowing any radar to detect and intercept |
Su-30SM (Spaded) - min fuel - 1 Kh-38MT, TGP
| Speed | Alt | Target | Result | Time in Air | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mach 1 | 1200m | 20km | Hit | ~45s | N/A |
| Mach 1 | 1100m | 16.7km | Hit | ~33s | N/A |
Angle of impact is very steep - making it hard to detect once above the enemies radar that doesn’t have high elevation
used AI to reformat into md table format for ease of readability
As you can see, even in the most generous scenarios Mavericks cannot hit a stationary target, you have be to at a higher speed and altitude which is not reasonable to do in GRB.
This means your statement is false regarding how it performs in GRB.
4 Likes
Your post is quite literally evidence for my statement that Kh-38MT is superior.
Time to tracking is faster than time to target; that’s a substantial amount of burning time.
Once motor turns off, it’s gliding.
And because AGM-65D has such a high probable drag, it slows down far more than Kh-38MT and takes longer to get to its target.
Edit:
Also you tested at wrong altitudes, but that’s fine. It still proves my point.
wrong statement bud
Is most likely done in perfect conditions which is something that you will rarely see in GRB
Exactly my point!
It’s why I didn’t bring up 19km shots, and dismissed my own 19km experience as any type of rule, because they’re no where close to what can be considered a rule.
I also launched at 8000 meters prior to the new SPAA.
Though Pantsir’s October 2024 buffs made things a tad more difficult.
Glade we agree that the effective range of Mavericks significantly much shorter than 17km as you have initially stated.
The max effective range for mavericks is around 10ish-km but will still struggle due to terrible loft, launch angle and drag. However the closer the target is, the more consistent it is.
1 Like