Rb 05A vs Rb 75

It seems like the Rb 75 Maverick is superior to the Rb 05 in accuracy, range, targeting (because I suck at guiding the Rb 05) and mounting options. Does the Rb-05 have any advantages over the Rb 75?

In a situation like this, would each pilot choose his own loadout, or would it be acceptable for him to modify that given to him, or is that the decision of someone on a higher pay grade?

One advantage: BIGGER EXPLOSION!!!!!

it has a few Kg more explosive in it and looks nicer :D

One advantage: BIGGER EXPLOSION!!!!!

 

it has a few Kg more explosive in it and looks nicer :D

Well when you put it like that it makes sense! Ta :)

The Rb05 can also be used against all targets, while the Maverick can only used against targets it can lock on to, which means they need to have a high contrast. But that is more a problem in real life than in the game, where this is not really an issue.

The Rb05 can also be used against all targets, while the Maverick can only used against targets it can lock on to, which means they need to have a high contrast. But that is more a problem in real life than in the game, where this is not really an issue.

When I read the instructions in the manual I thought it might need a lock to fire. So in real life you can’t just boresight it at a point on the ground?

When I read the instructions in the manual I thought it might need a lock to fire. So in real life you can’t just boresight it at a point on the ground?

if you are talking about the RB 05: you can fire it without any lock and steer it into the target

it needs some practice though

if you are talking about the RB 05: you can fire it without any lock and steer it into the target

it needs some practice though

Thanks. I didn’t understand why Mavericks were a big deal before but now I’m starting to get it. Clearly they are a very versatile weapon.

Thanks. I didn’t understand why Mavericks were a big deal before but now I’m starting to get it. Clearly they are a very versatile weapon.

He was talking about the RB05, not the Mavericks (RB75). Just want to make sure there is no missunderstanding :)

He was talking about the RB05, not the Mavericks (RB75). Just want to make sure there is no missunderstanding :)

Thanks QuiGon, as you figured out I did mix those up. Clearly The Force is strong with you - apologies, I’ve wanted an excuse to say that since I first saw your username :lol:

As I understand it the maverick was pretty much a replacement for the RB05, so it's no wonder it will be better in most situations. They apparently considered developing an optically guided version of the RB05 but went for the maverick instead since it was already available and probably very similar to how an optical RB05 would have been.

As I understand it the maverick was pretty much a replacement for the RB05, so it's no wonder it will be better in most situations. They apparently considered developing an optically guided version of the RB05 but went for the maverick instead since it was already available and probably very similar to how an optical RB05 would have been.

Wow, that's interesting to know. I guess the Shkval system wasn't an option... :P

One thing to consider is the early poor TV-seeker of the RB75. As it depended on contrast, it needed to be very close to actually lock-on a target. In highly cluttered scenes it might as well lock on to a bush or tree. If the sun stood low, it might lock-on to shadows. In poor light, poor weather, dust, haze or battlefield smoke conditions, it might not be able to lock-on at all. Against large targets such as bridges or ships, the missile might target an undesirable area or miss altogether, as the seeker was drawn to the extreme ends of large targets.

Here is what a F-4/F-16 pilot had to say on it:

The A-model was useless and dangerous as you needed to get closer to get a lock on and shoot than you did dropping dumb bombs and often you had to reattack to get lock on. Sometimes you couldn't (go all that way, face all those threats, and come away empty handed?). The B-model was only slightly better.

When I shot my AGM-65B at Nellis in 1986, we were very familiar with the area, we had INS coordinates for the target tank column, the tanks were dark green against a bright yellow desert background, and the weather was CAVU, there was no smoke, and nobody was shooting at us. As I recall, I started trying to lock up my target (last tank in the column) at about 12,000' slant range, and drove in to almost minimum range before getting a solid lock at around 5,000' range. (The missile hit the tank.)

Note that the AGM-65B has the doubled seeker magnification, which the Swedish Air Force never actually acquired (RB75B). The Viggen only carried RB75/RB75T which is a AGM-65A with a shaped-charge or larger blast-fragmentation warhead.

So while on paper the RB75 was a superior weapon to the RB05 in most respects, if the ability of the TV seeker to successfully lock-on under the given circumstances was in question, the RB05 might have provided an alternative.

Of course all this does not apply to DCS, as the TV seeker will perfectly lock to any game-object. I wonder if it would be possible to replicate the actual real-life targeting algorithms of the Maverick TV-seeker in DCS. At least for player launched missiles. After all the scene viewed by the Maverick seeker is rendered anyway, at least pre-launch. The necessary contrast information is already there. The contrast-locking algorithms cannot be that complicated or performance intensive, considering they have been running on 1970 vintage hardware that fit into a Maverick.

Exactly, that's what I meant on the previous page:

The Rb05 can also be used against all targets, while the Maverick can only used against targets it can lock on to, which means they need to have a high contrast. But that is more a problem in real life than in the game, where this is not really an issue.

It would be great if that could be simulated in DCS, but I don't think that's possible. I don't know if it is even possible to detect lighting contrasts, especially to lock on to them, in the DCS engine, not to mention the performance costs of such a process. It would be great though if it would be possible. Same applies to heat sources, which are only emitted by game objects so far.

I'm working off memories of explanations people gave me and I'm no expert so I don't know how accurate this is, but when I was trying to apply the Shkval in the Su-25T, I remember people talking about that sensor being contrast dependent, and people mentioned their frustration at having locked onto trees or rocks as a result, and I think I remember locking on to a boulder or something myself too, so maybe DCS already contains an algorithm for a contrast dependent lock?

The SwAF modified their version of the Maverick.

From System 37 Viggen, page 93 (my translation):

The missile turned out to need modifications to suit our needs. The flight path was changed to make the flight altitude more appropriate for Scandinavian weather conditions with low clouds, and the seeker was modified to function better in the naval environment with reflexes on the water and chalk white bow waves.

The book also mentions that the SwAF primarily intended to use the Maverick against ships and bridges. Tanks and other smaller targets was not on the agenda.

More specifically:

That's interesting! Thanks for sharing Farks and renhanxue!