If u get what i mean u would understand how good they are
Sry edit: when it comes to anti-spaa they are definitely GOAT. AT is meh obviously
a blurry picture from a brochure taken on an iPhone (a brand renown for their picture quality btw) is somehow infallible evidence?
lol, lmao even.
might I add it’s absolutely amazing only he can find it when even Russians can’t no?
a little critical thinking goes a long way
4 Likes
That airshow was in China so it’s pretty normal for a Chinese dude to post the brochures.
1 Like
because it’s totally normal to show only show weapons at airshow and have no documentation or evidence anywhere else.
Yes, they are showing export weapons at an airshow.
2 Likes
so it’s a mockup at best, that isn’t proof as people have posted above
Imagine selling mockups at an airshow.
1 Like
Eee that’s what is done 99% of the time? You do not want to have a possible danger stick in a place with a big amount of civilians. And even when there are no civilians, you still do not want a unintended explosion.
4 Likes
Definitely.
I’m not arguing if they’re presenting something in it’s inert setting or not.
I’m talking about them offering something that doesn’t exist.
1 Like
That happens. Mockups of weapons not yet existing are produced and are brought to air shows. Their purpose there is to attract attention of potential customers, get the orders and fund to make real ones.
May weapons ended their life that way, as a mockup on some kind of a exhibit, not gaining traction needed to make them.
7 Likes
Then why do you put that in a brochure in the same way you put other, already built, weapons.
There’s nothing there that says that project needs funding and is not yet completed.
1 Like
For the exact same reason. To market it. Make potential customers, bring attention.
I have for example ADATS Mk.3 brochure. It never happend. Nothing in that brochure says it needs funding or is not yet complete.
Said talks happen behind closed doors. Brochure can be seen by ANYONE. A army person, a civilian, a enemy spy. Only the customers get the details.
11 Likes
To be fair the A4 has standoff munitions at like 8.7 or 9.3 grb
1 Like
Imagine being a customer, you spot that thing and want to buy it, but you’re met with the “it’s not yet completed and it might take who knows how many years and money.”
IIRC the mockup has been presented in 2017 and 7 years later they’re still waiting for investors ?
Doesn’t make much sense to me.
Was that brochure only for that vehicle or is it a part of a bigger one ?
Yes. It’s what is expected when buying weapon systems. You think you turn up to a show and leave with a truck packed with weapons or something?
Weapon lead times are often measured in years, and it’s made perfectly clear when something isn’t ready early in the negotiations.
IIRC the mockup has been presented in 2017 and 7 years later they’re still waiting for investors ?
Doesn’t make much sense to me.
That’ll be because noone is interested in it.
5 Likes
Yea, that’s what happens. However if a mockup is on a airshow, it is closer to the finished rather than not, that does not mean it is finnished. And ofc situations where systems that did not start any development in, just went out of the drawing board are presented. Companies do not just make a bunch of deadly weapons and hope someone buys them. They work on CONTRACTS. Contract causes something to exist.
I don’t think I understand your question, what do you mean a bigger one?
However yes, it is about Mk. 3 only.
3 Likes
No, but I expect to get it earlier than a decade without paying who knows how much money just to get it developed.
And they’re still trying years after, interesting.
Maybe because unlike the Kh38MT, the Hammer takes significantly longer to hit the target and it’s motor produces smoke giving spaa (some not all) to react.
Don’t get me wrong, the Hammers are the 2nd best but it’s no where near as good as the Kh38.
Yes.
In case of 38, most of them are shown as ME.
No specific versions.
So after years of the MT not gaining any traction, they tried again with a new mockup but once again it failed. Simple as that. ML is selling, so they will keep bringing general ME missile around, hoping someone goes for either ML, MT or MA.
5 Likes
Im going to give you a example.
CAMM missile started it existence in around 2005. It entered service in 2018.
4 Likes