Your tests proved the effective range is 17km.
As your tests moved the goalposts to below 8000 meters [well, below 10,000 cause that’s where USAF tested there’s…] altitude, and they still hit the target at 4900 meters.
On top of that, this is where AGM-65Ds sit:
Kh-38MTs on a supersonic platform sit at 13.0.
Confusing real life tests to how it deployed in game is… something I guess
Regardless, I’m glad that you agree that how it’s deployed in game is significantly less than what it’s tested IRL due to many factors.
This is where Mavericks also sit:
Well seems like @Morvran is right about mavericks being at best 11.7 weaponry after all
Glad you acknowledge our statements are correct that they aren’t 13.0 weapons.
They’re currently 12.0 capable when fired from supersonic platforms.
And lower for stuff like Harrier GR7.
Yup, these aren’t 12.7/13.0 capable CAS platforms and it’s usually at that BR because of it’s AA capabilities. If these were to stay at their respective BR, better agms, bombs, defensive systems needs to be added for them to be competitive.
Nobody cares about your outlier AGM-65 frag.
So, it is good to hear that you excluded those.
Back in those days when you shared your F-14A frag with your Mirage IIIC,
You used it to justify the undertiered F-14A, and its AIM-54
“I had no problem fragging them while flying my Mirage IIIC, which has no flares nor RW,R thanks to my DCS tactics”
Yes, you stated that F-14A was superior to the Mirage IIIC, but AFAIK, you brought only half-truth.
Strange, I think I told you that we all cannot all exclude our personal experiences since we are human beings before.
personal views, personal experiences… and so on.
Ohhh… really…?
I never knew that this wasn’t your ‘personal’ experience.
I don’t think this is the first post in which you shared personal experience on this topic
unless you geniuely believes that you are an objective AI.
Soo… you are now claiming that I ‘invented’ this argument…
Honestly, feels quite frustrating.
Anyway, this topic was originally about 'why Gaijin doesn’t give us Brimstone FnF while Soviet still can retain Kh38s, So I hope you get back on track. Shall we?
We should also talk about APKWS it’s very, underwhelming.
Citation needed.
Any form of agreement from him with even a little bit of logic, and aligned factual evidence is a win
For me at least
He’s not wrong.
The marketing brochure shows the proposed seeker can track buildings - and maybe ships - at range. Most certainly not a tank at 15km. It simply doesn’t have the contrast and resolution to do anything else.
Hes also not necessarily right. Everything on how that thing works is pure speculation. Comparing it to the Hammer is ridiculous in this context.
All we can go on is the marketing brochure- there’s literally nothing else.
That means it should be able to track a tank from around 4-5km (with absolutely perfect conditions) at best.
I’m fairly convinced that what was proposed is just a terminal guidance camera like on storm shadow (but without storm shadows ejecting nose cap) but gaijin saw it and just ran with it anyway.
Which, if i remember correctly, is also complete guesswork based on the seeker resolution stated in the brochure, right?
It’s based on the contrast figures, likely sensor sizes and some maths if I recall correctly. I’ll see if I can dig it up.
Thanks but you dont need to bother looking it up for me. I remember as well that it was based on some calculations like this. My point was that its not based on some actual statement, test or anything like that which is why i find Alvis’ comparison with the Hammers dishonest.
Wait the American one gets fucking ds? and also the goal post wasnt really moved as do you really expect anyone to go above 1km in ground rb? thats death lol.
Just remember, the Tornado GR4 is at 12.3
Yeah… I wonder what the effective range of the pgms are? 2km lol, you have to drop them from up high as the booster aint doing much.
They are suppose to reach 20-22 ish km dropped at about 500 ft. I usually fire them at about 7-8km at 1000-2000 ft in ARB/ASB. But they are a total waste of SP anyway because they will just be shot out the sky by pretty much everything
I exclusively ran CAS high in matches of 12.0 and below.
And at 11.7, there’s never a reason not to, because not even CSSA5 is there.
4km lock range, and slow to accelerate… so like 4.5km against moving targets.
TV guided PGMs are only useful against spawn bombing.
As for this topic.
Comparing ARHs to IR guided seekers is akin to comparing IR guided to TV guided.
Radar guided will come in-time, but they aren’t a needed CAS option at this time.
I don’t want the possibility of being teamkilled by something I can’t defeat on anything other than Sweden.
pgms 500 can do okayish
pgms 2000s are just painful to watch. Slow, can’t turn, booster makes it plenty visible but doesn’t do much : it just falls like a dumb bomb
