mattebubben

the RB 75 is the Swedish Designation for the AGM-65A. With the RB 75T being a AGM-65A with a heavy blast-fragmentation warhead like some of the Later AGM-65 Variants. Sweden never acquired the AGM-65B but Leatherneck have said they are gonna add it as well since it would be useable by the AJS 37 (as it was compatible with any aircraft capable of using the AGM-65A) and it has a Zoom function that will make it easier to use compared to the RB 75s with their Zoomed out Seekers. (that make the RB 75 / 75T harder to use for target acquisition etc then they would have been IRL due to ingame limitations concerning resolution etc).

My guess would be that they are just AGM-65Ds use to represent a Inert RB 75. Since Green was the Swedish Color Code for Inert Weapons so i dont see why they would change this with having the RB 75T in Green =P. To my knowledge the RB 75T would be Visually identical to the normal RB 75 (So AGM-65A) it uses the same body / Sensor the only difference is in the warhead.

the Su-27 probably sunk a Tanker/Cargo ship. They give the same score as other ship types and can easily be killed with Rockets or bombs.

So that is where i got it mixed up then. Mixed up the Training Arak Pod and the Örak. But yea if the Training Arak Pod was capable of launching Live Single Rockets then i would be Okay with them adding it. Since it could be used first for Training as it was supposed to (When Training with the Rockets) but could also be used on combat missions since where as it would likely not have been done according to the Swedish Doctrine but during wartime if those pods where the only ones available they could likely have been used in combat missions. And its possible that an export nation might have used those pods for combat since where as the all Rocket Salvo is perfect for the 1 pass attacks that would be standard in a full out conflict against the Soviets (which was the only real concern for the Swedish airforce) there are other Scenarios where having the Single launch ability could be benefitial (Anti-Insurgent/Guerilla missions etc where the threat against the aircraft is minimal so multiple attacks are possible without risk) What they could do it just add the Different the Pod options with the Normal ARAK pod being the standard all at once mode and the Training Pod having the Single option (just like there are multiple rocket pods avaliable for the Hydra 70 rockets in the A-10etc). Then if one wants to be Realistic one can limit the Training pod for just training missions and use the Standard Pod for combat missions (Atleast When Flying a Swedish airforce Viggen). That way Servers could also limit it if they really wanted to (by simply not adding the Training pods to the Armaments list)

The module will include Fictional Skins for the AJS 37 having it serve in other nations then just Sweden (Un Historical / Fictional what if skins) this will most likely include both Existing and Fictional nations. And they have Also stated that they will include the AGM 65B (because they believed that it would possibly have been useable on the AJS 37 without any modification and that it would be more effective in game with its ZOOM capability due to the Limited Ingame Resolution that might make it harder to Find and Identify targets using the RB 75/EP-13 then it would IRL) They will not make a Fictional Variant but they will add atleast 1 armament option that is non historical. (that are added both for Gameplay value and as what if options either if the Swedish Airforce also decided to get them or in a Export Scenario). So if it was Plausible for the Rocket pods to launch singles (but it was not done for Doctrine reasons) then they could likely have included a single option. But as it seems that is not the case (if it was not something that could have been easily done) they maby its less likely they will add it. (it was a long time they mentioned the chance of adding that ability so they might or might not have changed their minds since then)

Ok thanks and in that case its a whole other matter. (All Loadout / Weapons diagrams etc i have seen Showed the ARAK/ÖRAK with the same Symbol etc so i had always assumed they both used a Pod) On a side note (but still relating to the Rockets) In this Picture it shows 2 pairs of Rocket pods one showing White Rocket heads and the Other Showing Green. And i have also seen pictures Showing Black rocket heads. As you know allot more then me on this subject what does the Different Color Codes mean? I assume the Green are Inert Rockets and the Black are Live rockets but if that is the case what does the white color designate?

And that was the exact reason why Sweden never acquired any Traditional cluster weapons. Since the Swedish armed forces where a purely defensive force. So if the Swedish Airforce were to drop live cluster bombs it would have been over Swedish Territory and as such they saw the risk (which had been proven to be a certainty from conflicts all over the world) of the resulting unexploded munitions to be unacceptable and not worth any of the advantages it would bring. (And while i agree with this thinking i dont see how it would have made much of a difference considering any enemy would have had no problem littering all of Sweden with Cluster bombs and in the case of a Soviet invasion the number of Swedish Bombs Dropped would be as nothing compared to those dropped by the enemy) So it was not untill Technology advanced to the point where it allowed a Weapon that had all the advantages of a cluster weapon while at the same time removing the risk of the deadly unexploded submunitions that plagued the traditional systems (or if not remove it then atleast minimize it to a faliure rate where it was not a significant problem) that the Swedish Airforce acquired a Submunition based weapon system. Sadly if i dont remember incorrectly the Government decided to Scrap the BK 90 a few years ago after Sweden joined the CCM Treaty... Despite the fact that the BK 90 does not have the problems that caused the CCM treaty to be needed to start with... (as it does not leave That kind of Lethal Submunition)

Did the live rockets and the Practice rockets use the same pod? If they did then would it not only be a matter of the wiring / launch sequence in the pod? And if that is the case there would be no reason why the Live rockets could not be fired in singles either it would simply be a matter of The Swedish Airforce never did that due to the Doctrine used preferred the Large spread out salvos they got when all rockets were fired at once (as well as the fact that the AJ Viggen was primarily used in a one pass haul ass kind of way ^^) But since the AJS module we are getting includes a fictional export option there would be no reason the single option could not be included (If the same pods were used both Live and Practice Rockets). If they needed different pods then it would be a different matter. But if it was possible to do with the standard rocket pod it just Wasn't done then i say they can add it as an option (make it a selectable option pre-flight like the Rocket pod settings for the F-5E etc) just leave the Default option as the historical all at once Salvo mode.

Damn i will have to get me one of those =P. Going through the manual with my current mouse takes to long ^^.

One of the first mission types i will try out with the AJS 37 will be DEAD and it will be interesting to see how viable it will be. Using its speed together with AGM-65s and maby BK 90s and Rocket Pods etc (BK 90 could be usefull if you know the location of the Sam site beforehand but would be less effective for snapshot attacks). The Optimum loadout for such a mission type probably depends on how the Jammer and RWR are implemented but it will probably be a interesting mission type to test out and it should be better at it then the A-10 for sure ^^ (Since Approaching at high speed popping up just long enough to get off a AGM-65 before getting on the deck again should give you a decent chance of Success without eating a Sam). And sure you might only be able to get 2-4 Sam/AA vehicles per sortie (unless they are so close together for the Splash to get multiple) but getting to and from target at mach 0.9 (or Supersonic if you can spare the Fuel) should allow for pretty quick follow up attacks.

Well its no less capable then any other Attack aircraft developed in the same timeperiod (late 60s/early 70s) Comparable aircraft like the A-7D/E,Sepecat Jaguar,Su-17 and Mig-27 are not really any more advanced / capable then the AJ/AJS 37 is. (the Viggen is just as good in most areas and better in some) And while all of those aircraft does have Internal guns they are not really Significantly better in the other compartments (For example i dont think and of those aircraft listed had Internal Countermeasure dispensers when they entered service) If you try to compare it with the F/A-18,F-16C or other 4th Gen Multirole aircraft then its less advanced yes but those are more modern aircraft that entered service atleast a decade later letting them take advantage of all the advances in technology that occurred during the 1970s where as the Attack Viggen is built using 1960s tech. The AJ 37 was amongst the most capable strike / Antiship aircraft in the world when it entered service in the 1970s its was still a very capable strike / Anti-ship aircraft in the 1980s. By the 1990s it started to very much show its age but due to delays on the aircraft that was due to replace it (Jas 39 Gripen) it had to soldier on untill the late 90s (That was the reason for the limited AJS 37 modifications). The AJS 37 will be very capable in the types of missions it was designed to undertake. That is Anti-ship missions and attacking ground targets using low altitude high speed approaches before launching all weapons in a single pass before getting out of the Area. And in those missions there are Few 1970s or 1980s aircraft that would do it better then the AJS 37. Sure when it comes to killing as many tanks as possible while loitering in a low threat environment (Lighter Sam Coverage and no Enemy fighters about) the A-10C and Su-25T might still be better but if you need to get in and out fast before enemy fighters (or Sams) can intercept you then the AJS 37 will be the best thing for it available in the game (Untill the F/A-18C is released). And i foresee that the AJS 37 will prove itself usefull on MP servers like Blue Flag and Open Conflict (where Enemy fighters are a real risk).

You have to be very careful with you statements ^^ since as a Swede im pretty sure its high treason to talk ill about or not be excited about the Viggen ^^. And one of the first things im looking forward to trying with the Viggen will be Carrier ops ^^ since with Thrust reverser its just possible you might be able to land on the Admiral Kuznetsov and takeoffs should not be an issue (alteast not if you back up to give yourself enough "runway") ^^.

Thanks for the Response. And here is a follow up =P How Precise do you need to be with the QFE when using the radar? (In order to get a precise enough targeting solution) Spot on or just close enough for the radar to get an idea where to look? or is there no info in the Manual to give an idea when it comes to that sort of thing.

Do you have to set the correct QFE even if using the Radar to Range the target? Or is that only needed if you do a "radarless" attack?

Gott Nytt År! (even though its 1 hour left here in Sweden ^^)

Well i dont think the Draken was "That" short legged =P. Sure with Afterburner on it started to run out of fuel very quickly (but that is nothing different then other Fighter/Interceptors of the time like the F104 etc) but with the External tank and mil power it should have "some" range (again not considerably worse then comparable aircraft) But most of the Smaller Fighter Interceptors of the time period did not have great range (unless they had Air-Refuling capabilities). And also Saab has always been very accommodating to customer nations when it comes to modifying the aircraft to suit their needs (a great example of that being the Danish Draken variants) so if the Australians where really interested in the Draken Saab could probably have done work to try to increase its range (even if that took modifying the airframe to make space for more internal tanks etc or simply allowing for more or larger external tanks). But when it comes down to it if they did not find the Draken to have any significant advantages over the mirage and the mirage better met their range needs that might have been preferable to getting Saab to develop a new variant of the Draken for their needs (as that could likely have been more expensive then ordering the Mirage IIIOs based on the already existing Mirage IIIE variant).

The Mig-21 was delivered with all its Weapons fully functioning (even its Cluster bombs some of whom were new) So i dont see why the Viggens weapons would not be fully functional on release. Different Dev teams have different skillsets and different development priorities etc so the state of Razbams Mirage 2000 and what it can and can not do has very little effect on the Viggenand its weapons (For Example Leatherneck have developed their Own Air-Ground Radar for the Viggen where as Razbam are waiting for ED to finish theirs) So unless/until they tell us otherwise i think we can expect that the BK 90 (and the other Weapons for the Viggen) to be functional on release.

This is indeed the Perfect time for the AJS 37 as well. Since first it will get all the users that have any interest in the Viggen what so ever. But since its also the first Fast attack aircaft (Supersonic with a dedicated strike role and guided air-ground munitions) it will likely get plenty of sales from there. Then it also has Anti-ship functionality and the air-ground radar which might also interest some people. So all in all the Viggen is bringing so many features to the game that no other aircraft available has that it will likely cause alot of people to try it for those features alone. Atleast untill some other aircraft with those features come along and by that point they might be hooked already ^^. If any number of other Fast Attack/Strike aircraft had been in the game (Sepecat jaguar/Tornado/Su-17/22/Mig-27 or multirole aircraft like the F-4/F-16/F/A-18 etc) then i think less people (those who are not interested in the Viggen itself but rather the features it brings) would get the Viggen but since the Viggen is first then anybody who wants those features and abilities are likely to buy it.

Well a better question would be what makes any aircraft Iconic ^^.

:megalol: Soon™ Now if we could only get some Video showing off the employment of the RB 75 :music_whistling:

Well the Few Obstacles thing is not really true =P. As MANY of the road bases had Trees just on either way of the Road/Runway. If i remember correctly the narrowest Road runways where as narrow as 8m (12-24 was standard) and there would be atleast another 4m on each side of the runway that was cleared (and usually a bit more but not always) but beyond that there could be and usually was trees. (The Roadstrips where also between 800m-2000m long) So even on the strips that were 12-24m wide it would still be pretty narrow if there were trees on either side especially if we are talking a landing are night on in bad weather (and could be even more scary during the winter). It was not just the Highways and Main roads as plenty of "smaller" roads in the area surrounding an airbase would be made into roadbases as well. (in the 5-10Km range around an airbase there were usually a few road bases both long and short)

Well the AVG Turnaround time for a Viggen (Fully Refuling and re-arming and making it ready for take off again) Was less then 10 minutes (And that is with a team of 7 Ground crew made up of 6 Conscripts and 1 Officer) and to my knowledge that is less then what it takes for most other aircraft even if their standard number of groundcrew is larger. (and that is just the AVG ive heard of some groundcrew that regularly did complete turnarounds in 8 minutes with full weapons loads) And this time would be the same at a road base or at "proper" airbase.

In before somebody starts to get air-air kills against F-15s and Su-27s by doing Off-Bore shots with the Rb 05 ^^.

Dont know how well their Mavericks work ingame atm when it comes to locking up ships. (Irl might be different but if i remember correctly with how the mavericks currently work its often very hard to lock up ships ingame if not outright impossible in some cases) And its also likely they wanted the Additional Air-Air missiles as they might have intended to enter an air-air role after they had used their RB 04s. (What is what they did during the match) And if they intended to go air-air after the RB 04 launch then i understand them not wanting to give up 2 Rb 74s.

They were carried during the Grudge match they were shown carried by Viggens in atleast 1 flight though they were never launched on video and i think the aircraft that carried them might not even have made it to the target.