USA tech tree NEEDS their current air defense systems in game

Machinery of War Discussion Ground Vehicle
,
21
  • Take Pantsir
  • Paint it in white / blue UN camouflage.
  • Put it in everyone’s lineup when in top tier MM (like strike drones)

Balance solved.

6 Likes
22

Probably because they have such a focus on the air tree to worry about ground. Maybe if they stopped focussing on air we might get something else ground wise

1 Like
23

Unfortunately we don’t have any spaa system that is similar to the pantsir or even comes close to the flexibility that the pantsir offers. We did capture an export variant of the pantsir however I would rather not get into that can of worms.

However there are better prototypes that America has used. For example we have the Hummer SPAAM (4x aam120 and 2x aim9x).

If I remember correctly we did test VT1s. I think it was 4x2 launcher mounted on a m113 chassis.

Or we can reduce sp cost for aircraft that carrying purely AA weaponry. It should cost as much as heli’s carrying rockets or AA missiles.

4 Likes
24

You do understand the premise of using ARMs? It means SAM systems either have to shut down their radars or have to run the gauntlet or being acquired by an Anti Rad.

In any case you can fly anywhere near the battlefield and stand a chance of not getting shot down because said Radars are off or intermittently providing coverage, as opposed to now where you have to fly ultra low all the way around to avoid or delay detection. It gives you an effective means of destroying enemy Close Air, namely, bring a fighter of your own.

4 Likes
25

Wrong. The USA has alot of systems for air defence SLAMRAAMS THAAD Patriot systems etc etc etc. The only issue is minus the Slams they all use radar systems from separate systems. And not to mention the M-Shorad that just hit the scene or the Linebacker, or the upgraded Linbacker from 2016-2017 that “COULD” fire AIM9s (BAE made 1 model it never entered production)

26

THAAD’s just anti-ballistic missile, and Patriot is more of an S-300 equivalent. The real equivalents are (generally, off of bare-minimum googling):

Pantsir-S1(~20km): Anything with AIM-9X Block IIs or normal SLAMRAAMs.
Pantsir-SM (40km): Anything with SLAMRAAM-ERs
S-300/350 with 9M96E2 (120km ARH): MIM-104F PAC-3 MSE
S-400 (~400km, claimed): RIM-174 Standard ERAM (possibly up to 460km?)
S-500 (~500km, claimed): RIM-174 Standard ERAM (possibly up to 460km?) or RIM-161 Standard Missile 3 Block IA/B (900-1200km lol)

1 Like
27

The Sgt. Stout (M-SHORAD Increment I), or the C-UAS-DE (recent somewhat related prototype obviously angling for M-SHORAD Increment II) is probably the way to go;

200RPM 30mm HE-VT ammo (same ammo as the M230 as found on the AH-64), Full hemispheric AESA radar (AN/RPS-42, 35km range for Fighter sized targets) coverage theoretically makes it near untouchable by ordnance, The AGM-114L-C8 (adds proximity fuse) would also extend the engagement range past that of the FIM-92( from about 4km to 8km or so), so should at least draw equal and blunt the Kh-38’s effectiveness.

In this meta I’d personally prioritize defensive / utility capabilities over shear offensive ones, since the Stryker MSL/ SL- AMRAM lacks a gun, even if access to the Sidewinder & AMRAAM would be a very useful range extension.

2 Likes
28

No. That’s a stupid choice for all of the SPAA’s.

If air gets F&F munitions, so should ground.

2 Likes
29

It’s incredibly easy to play cap already, so that would only be a buff to cas.

30

You can’t use (most) Anti-Radiation Missiles against non radiating targets (those that can accept GPS coordinates or have terminal seekers could, but those are a fair way off), so that’s at least one station that isn’t carrying otherwise useful ordnance that could be used against MBTs and others. if SP costs were reworked a little to rebalance things to encourage their use you would see a marked drop in how often full loadouts of guided ordnance could be carried.

So it’s an active trade off that needs to be made since any in excess of what was needed that are taken are effectively wasted until another Radar equipt SPAA turns up. It would also give a mandate to Gaijin to freely implement more advanced SAM systems, since the response is obviously to take more ARMs, and be more careful.

31

To be fair, that’s because the USSR fell apart trying to compete with us, and so our need for a massed SPAA fires largely evaporated because our only two real threats are at best regional powers. So we put emphasis on emplaced weapons and sensors At the time of the fall we had several systems in various stages of design/testing/operation that aren’t in game.

Linebacker Brads, Slamraams, Avenger (+ multirole with Javelin F&F and AI3 (with properly modeled IR/UV seekers), M727 HAWK for both America and Israel etc.

If air power over IADS is the way the game wants to progress, it would relatively easy to reduce the cost of NATO air power to supplement AD. After the ADATs is unlocked you could even make the 12+ BR AD vehicle be a nation specific CAP fighter….

1 Like
32

Giving ARH to SEAD /CAS fighters would very likely directly mean a transition to ARH SAMs instead of the absolutely awful MCLOS BS we’re stuck with now. Which would vastly level the playing field.

33

I’m not sure I agree. If you get determined fighter opposition maps are simply too small to properly react.

34

Not sure why Russia would want an Abrams in Warthunder XD

1 Like
36

so you are saying that the democracy giver is weak?

1 Like
37

Yeah honestly, I haven’t really thought from this perspective. And the more I think about it, the more I agree with your suggestion.

I would rather knock out KH38s, Mavericks, GBUs, etc from the sky than knocking out planes from greater distances. What use is a plane if they can’t support the troops on the ground? Sure they can go for strafing runs but that will put them within ranges of manpads and proximity fused shells.

Having said that, I’m not too familiar with the M-Shorad’s main cannon. There are 2 variants which I’m aware of, the M230 and the M230LF (XM914, which the M-Shorad uses). What the difference between the two in terms of capabilities?

38

I like your name honda

1 Like
39

THAAD is ballistic missile defense my friend. Patriot and other systems is what you’re after.

1 Like
40

Because why not

41

Patriot is without a doubt at this moment proving through Ukraine it is better than the s400 system. This is not a remark on anything political to do with that, just that demonstrably by no means is patriot an s300 equivalent, it is a more capable s400 by missile effectiveness.

S500 is just a THAAD equivalent.

3 Likes