You’re the one defending it’s existence. show me it exist and function like it did in war thunder and i’ll drink my piss.
Thank you
I found the Export Variant of the KH-38MT also know as the KH-38MTE and if you press this link:
https://roe.ru/en/production/aviatsionnaya-tekhnika-i-vooruzhenie-vozdushno-kosmicheskikh-sil/aviatsionnye-sredstva-porazheniya/upravlyaemye-sredstva-porazheniya/aviatsionnye-upravlyaemye-rakety-obshchego-naznacheniya-klassa-vozdukh-poverkhnost/kh-38mle/
you can see all the KH-38 Type in the 2nd Photo you can see it written in russian, according to Russian people translating, it the KH-38MTE the export version
Im not, just asking for the same proof gaijin would if you were to raise your claims as a bug report, but you cant provide that hence the common argument of “I havent seen it so it doesnt exist” despite being a part of a government funded program for a modular missile system which means if it was cancelled there would be a paper trail. As for the seeker working the same in game as it does IRL we knew it likely doesn’t as both TV correlation (possibly contrast I cant remember the gaijin post from years back well enough) seekers and the IR seekers of Hammer dont due to engine restrictions and the brochure from Zhuhai 2024 seems to back that up even more.
From the reading I have done recently KTRV were supposed to finish up testing of the MT seeker in 2017 around the same time as the Grom-1. Source
EDIT: Removed last paragraph as I misread Air Surface Missile as Anti Ship Missile during my repeated skims making it redundant and wrong.
2 Likes
Thats an L in cyrillic not a T. And the seeker design would back that up.
that the top you have to scroll down to see the T
I did, second image in the gallery is an MLE, the image before it is the mockup from maks 2017 with what we assume is an IR seeker and the third image in that gallery is again an MLE.
2 Likes
So just to clarify, even if we accept that thing thing ever proceeded past the mockup stage (it didn’t), then by it’s own marketing brochure it could hit ships at best?
So we have a fake missile, with outrageously boosted capabilities which wrecks top tier balance. How the hell did this thing ever get added?
And people still defend it. Crazy.
15 Likes
Like Komoran, but the german ASM was ofc forbidden to lock ground targets.
1 Like
Yeah, lol
Might be worth bug reporting the seeker. If they’re not going to do us the courtesy of addressing it’s existence then it may be worth bringing it into line with what the marketing material says, regardless of its actual existence.
9 Likes
Read point 8 from OPs discription 😑
and ofc Japanese ASM that can lock Ground targets doesn’t get added, peak Gaijin
3 Likes
The GBU-15 / AGM-130 use a modular seeker and the option to use the same WGU-10/B as the AGM-65D so they should have similar performance which makes sense, where the -38MT appears to use a bespoke seeker.
Would it be optimal employment for a GBU-15, to be used against a tank, no. but it does retain that capability should it be needed or whatever reason.
It would significantly reduce the size of the useful target (which needs to be some apparent size for the targeting gate to reliably lock-on and retain track of) that the centroid is being generated from, at very least it would shift the point of impact significantly towards the engine compartment / exhaust, and so it’s useful range would be questionable considering we have data for the AGM-65 under test conditions. And that it is apparent that the -38MT is a magnitude worse off.
It would look very different for Ship of course, and these limits would be much less of an issue, and make far more sense as a specified performance goal.
4 Likes
yeah like the premium Yak38 with an internal gun isnt real or the Yak-141 with a radar oe IRST
Definitely, a true anti-fiction advocate would want all of that gone, right this second without any rules or personal opinions attached.
Trialed vehicles should share the same faith.
I’m an anti-CAS advocate and want it gone or better, TO mode to be added to avoid flying pests. I never added any special subjective rule to that, as I think doing ifs, buts and maybes isn’t a right stance when it comes to that.
I want them gone, right this second without exception.
I’m also a realist and realise the world doesn’t work that way. One of the things destroys top-tier balance and is modelled so outrageously far from its actual capabilities that it’s actually pretty funny and the others are not.
It’s clear where the priorities should be.
1 Like
4 Likes
well looks like new spaa is a dissapointment, west will still not be able to counter russian bias CAS
they give sweden spaa that has IRIS-T with 10-12km range instead of giving them the IRIS-T SL designed for SPAA
kh38mt will still outrange it…
1 Like
The “swedish” Iris T SLS won’t change anything. Gajin writes 12km range / 5km heigt. KH-38MT shooters still untouchable, except they’re doing it wrong^^
