The Kh-38MT may not actually exist

[ron_23]

no it is the Brochure itself
the origanl argument was that the 38mt was canceld because it wasnt seen in brochures for atleast 5 years

@MythicPi

I dont think it has even gotten beyond the drawing board and made it to the testing stage, since if it had, they would presumably present a modernized mockup of the missile or the manufacturer would at the very least have an actual picture of the thing instead of needing to use artist renditions of the supposed missile for brochures.

… well and also the fact that they didnt use a render

[sudo_su1]

@MythicPi

Not sure what JSC “TMC” is, afaik the manufacturer is supposed to be KTRV

TMC is the English acronym and KTRV is the Russian acronym

JSC TMC = Joint Stock Company Tactical Missiles Corporation
KTRV = КТРВ (In Cyrillic) = Корпорация Тактическое Ракетное Вооружение

[MythicPi]

@Zannafrancy12

i dont see how you can say that

Why?

[Zannafrancy12]

there have been many arguments so far, mostly pointless, but what we do know is that as far as the evidence we’ve seen there is no proof of the missile being used or produced, like again we have 2 pictures and THATS IT, 1 mockup and 1 brochure we only have pictures of

[MythicPi]

Ty for the explanation

[Zannafrancy12]

there is 1 picture of a the missile on a rail(of which we dont have in hour hands) and 1 picture of a mockup, that it as far as evidence goes, like at best the missile is in its prototype stage, but i wager its far more likely that its simply shelved, ill keep using kh69 as an example of a pretty advanced weapon that was showed first in 2022 and has entered active service and has seen combat already.

now whatever the IRL discussion may be i feel we’re forgetting we’re debating war thunder here, i dont think we have enough evidence to allow such a strong weapon to remain in the game.

[ron_23]

there might be an argument, for the seeker to be nerfed to 2. or 1. gen thermals

cant confirm or deny the following statement tho, as iam not knoledgable about IR seekeres

@tripod2008

It’s nice to see some hard data, but it makes things almost certain that the Seeker is improperly implemented, based on these numbers.

The “Self Homing Head Sensitivity” assmed to be noise equivalent temperature difference (NE∆T) of 270 Milli-Kelvin (mK) is ridiculously high for a “third generation” system, let alone requiring a 4 kelvin difference to provide sufficient contrast for a track to be maintained, needing “16 units” of contrast Is not great, especially for a brochure means that they’re not using a Histogram or other contrast stretching techniques to improve performance the same way the IIR/ CCD Maverick or many other Electro-Optical systems do.

claims that NE∆T values of 25~35 mK can be expected of an Cooled InSb Focal plane Array (AMBER Radiance I)

“Our cameras, having a noise equivalent temperature difference (NE∆T) of only 25 mK, can detect extremely small variations in source irradiance. NE∆T indicates the required temperature difference of a particular pixel with respect to the background to obtain a signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of unity”

In short surfaces that are within a a quarter of a degree of one another have the same return(and depending on what is actually displayed it may be far worse), which is a magnitude worse than commercial gear from the late 90’s.

Sure with limits as above you will assuredly get passable contrast within a scene, but in no way shape or form will you retain details, and everything will be blown out and blobby.

[MythicPi]

Though I think gaijin pulled those numbers out of their rear, I dont have anything to disprove them beyond logic, and thats never gonna fly with gaijin.

[ron_23]

@MythicPi

look at the message i replied to

@MythicPi

Though I think gaijin pulled those numbers out of their rear, I dont have anything to disprove them beyond logic, and thats never gonna fly with gaijin.

[PercussionCap]

@MythicPi

The evidence against its existence up until the Zhuhai brochure was posted was pretty strong imo, but if the Zhuhai brochure is real, think the missile is atleast to the point of being a prototype weapon.

We don’t even know if the missile mounted to the aircraft in the brochure is actually a 38MT. It has deliberately been taken from quite far away and is of poor quality.

[ron_23]

@PercussionCap

if the missile mounted to the aircraft in the brochure is actually a 38MT

then please enlighten me what else it might be?

[PercussionCap]

Could be an ML or a mockup. We have no evidence of it being functional.

[ron_23]

ML has a straight looking seeker

MT seeker is angled downwards:

[Zannafrancy12]

even if its an mt, it would be the only ever picture of an mt we have seen other than a mockup, which should lead to the very real possibility of it being non functional.
if it was in context of a very new missile i wouldnt be saying that, kh38 family isnt new though

[MythicPi]

This might explain a few things actually.

1. Why we’ve only seen the laser variant in combat use (or really, in general until the brochure was posted)
2. Why the claimed hit percentage under ideal conditions is so bad (80% probability of hit in ideal conditions is horrid)
3. The unofficial russian blog claims of the poor SEP (and it being accounted for by the large warhead.)

Its possible that the IR seeker is not really capable enough to offer any advantage over a laser seeker when drone laser designation is so prevalent anyways. May also suggest the the original point of inquiry I had on the missile (its potential inability to hit moving tank sized targets) might actually be accurate.

Unfortunately, I dont know enough about IR seekers to really comment on that point.

[ron_23]

@Zannafrancy12

if it was in context of a very new missile i wouldnt be saying that, kh38 family isnt new though

all of the pictures we have of the ML are from a certain recent conflict and as far as i know there are no pictures of the ML that arent from Ukraine or a mock up

[Zannafrancy12]

@ron_2303

all of the pictures we have of the ML are from a certain reccent conflict and as far as i know there ar no pictures of the ML that arent from Ukraine or a mock up

its the first major conflict it has been involved in. i think this supports my point that the missile shouldnt be in the game fairly well.

[ron_23]

@Zannafrancy12

supports my point that the missile shouldnt be in the game fairly well.

that isnt point of this thread

[MythicPi]

@PercussionCap

We don’t even know if the missile mounted to the aircraft in the brochure is actually a 38MT. It has deliberately been taken from quite far away and is of poor quality.

Like I said, I have my doubts and am now on the fence on the subject. Theres stuff about the brochure that bug me, to the point of suspecting it may be a fabrication, but I really don’t have any definitive counterpoint to it atm.

I’ve always tried to keep this thread as objective and fair to both sides as possible. I’m not about to stoop to the level of the pro-russian players that have been claiming the missile existed without any solid evidence of their own since the thread was made and handwave the new info thats been provided just because I dont think the Kh-38MT is healthy for the game.

[Zannafrancy12]

“kh-38mt may not actually exist.”
sure thats the thread name, and if we’re gonna limit ourselves to wether it exist irl that is also pretty dubious, its a fair guess prototypes exist, some sort of seeker exists, but a prototype isnt the same as a production weapon, there is no proof it ever done any flying at all. all the proof is a single picture.