Laser Maverick for A-10C ?

[mvsgas]

Remember that laser mavs would sacrifice the Fire-And-Forget nature of the K and D variants, forcing the aircraft to keep flying towards the target if it doesn't have someone "painting" for it (unsure if the C mav is programmable enough in the air to allow changing of laser codes to enable that, though).

AFAIK, all aircraft I ever seen carrying modern TGP can change laser code on the fly, the only things that have to be set on the ground is the laser code on the weapons themselves. Normally on GBU-12/10/24/27 you can see a set of dials on the seeker head. You use those to set the laser code. I would imagine ( and I'm completely guessing here) that the AGM-65E would be the same way.

[greg765]

I don't think game play will be degraded in anyway if AGM-65E is not in the release version of DCS A-10. I have only seen very few photos of the A-10C carrying those things and I will bet is more related to logistics and availability of the missiles rather than capabilities. What I mean by this is, there may be some situation where AGM-65E is probably more useful, safer to use or more accurate, but I bet the reason A-10s are carrying AGM-65E is because they where in the base available ( I think USMC was station there before with AV-8B+) Why bring a new set of missiles to the AOR and removed them out of the storage packaging where there are already missiles with open crates there. Opening the packages means the missiles now have to have regular maintenance cycles ( battery changes, corrosion checks, etc) Lack of training with the missile could be one of the factors for it's seldom use ( beside cost, practicality , etc)

 

Just my 2 cents

 

 

 

Yes but if it has been used in Afghanistan , it means that it is operational.

It's maybe not as useful as a JDAM in Afghanistan for example, but the important is that the A-10C can use the weapon, (see the picture + SFJB post + 636_castle post) .

So, in order to make a good sim, it's better to have the choice to use or not to use this missile , it's always better than being forced no to use it because it is missing in the inventory.

 

It's a possibility of the A-10C, so it must be with DCS : WH.

It's better to have this weapon, which is realistic because operational.

It's not like the Kh-25 of the Ka-50 of DCS which is unreallistic.

 

I request a realistic missile for the A-10C, to me that's normal ! Is it an hardcore sim or not ? :music_whistling:

[mvsgas]

I guess we will see when the final product comes out.

[greg765]

I guess we will see when the final product comes out.

 

Yes, you're right ;)

 

But it would be so great if we could have the answer !

Wags ! :smartass:

[mvsgas]

Good luck

[Blaze1]

The latest laser-guided Maverick is the AGM-65E. And this model is normally used by the U.S. Marines only. The E-Mav was deployed for fast targets.

 

Since 2007, the A-10C carries the AGM-65E in combat.

 

Source: http://frontierindia.net/us-air-force-uses-agm-65e-laser-guided-maverick-missile-in-combat

 

 

AGM-65 variants: http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/smart/agm-65.htm

 

 

kind regards,

fire

Thanks for the update fire. I was also under the impression that the AGM-65E was the preserve of the USN/USMC. Obviously thinks have changed.

What about the hellfire, I think I may have seen somewhere that the hellfire is clear for use on both the AV-8B and the A-10?

[greg765]

Smaller Weapons Are Better

 

The Senate Appropriations Committee has voted to fund efforts to put Hellfire missiles on Air Force A-10 Warthog attack jets. The 100-pound Hellfire is normally a helicopter missile, but in recent years has been carried by Predator drones, too. A-10s have traditionally carried the 700-pound Maverick missile for killing tanks; integrating Hellfire will allow Warthogs to carry many more missiles to attack many more targets -- and the smaller missile's smaller warhead is actually better for missions in Iraq and Afghanistan, where targets are often close to civilians. All over the U.S. military, the trend is towards bigger loads of smaller munitions. The Air Force is adding the 250-pound satellite-guided Small Diameter Bomb to most of its bombers and fighters; the SDB saw its first combat use in Iraq in October.

 

--David Axe, cross-posted at War Is Boring

 

http://aviationweek.typepad.com/ares/2007/03/smaller_weapons.html

 

So yes, it seems that the Hellfire are MAYBE used by A-10 nowadays.

I'll search for a picture or an official announce.

 

EDIT : I searched, but there is nothing (no pictures, no official announcement ....) so the project of carrying Hellfire must have been stopped.

 

So let's return to the Agm-65 E!

Edited June 28, 2010 by greg765

[Deigs]

Sorry to come into this late, but didn't a ED developer on the 9th of May in the 104th teamspeak channel say that laser Mav's wouldn't be included because its like classified and stuff (sure there's knowledge of it, but you know what DCS is like, 'if it's not totally legit, then its not in it'.)

 

I know this is chinese whispers and that I haven't read the last 3 pages to this question or was even there in this teamspeak channel, but I thought this was common knowledge in the A10 rumour mill. Gotta love the internet.

 

Regardless of whats going on with the US Marines A10 Laser Maverick A10 test facality in buttfuknowhere, or internet wiki research proving that we don't have 'everything' for this sim, but you gotta focus on whats modelled in the game and just focus on learning that. We can sim-geek out as much as we want. But I'm keen on just seeing whats avialble and working with what we have in the sim.

 

(this post was made after a night on the booze and the author is in no way responsible for the spelling or military logical thought)

Edited June 28, 2010 by Deigs

[GGTharos]

Sorry to come into this late, but didn't a ED developer on the 9th of May in the 104th teamspeak channel say that laser Mav's wouldn't be included because its like classified and stuff (sure there's knowledge of it, but you know what DCS is like, 'if it's not totally legit, then its not in it'.)

 

No, it's more along the lines of 'the A-10C could equip this weapon, but the USAF does not use it so we're not providing it'.

 

I know this is chinese whispers and that I haven't read the last 3 pages to this question or was even there in this teamspeak channel, but I thought this was common knowledge in the A10 rumour mill. Gotta love the internet.

 

Then read next time ;)

 

Regardless of whats going on with the US Marines A10 Laser Maverick A10 test facality in buttfuknowhere, or internet wiki research proving that we don't have 'everything' for this sim, but you gotta focus on whats modelled in the game and just focus on learning that. We can sim-geek out as much as we want. But I'm keen on just seeing whats avialble and working with what we have in the sim.

 

Actually you will get nearly everything that the USAF puts on this plane. 'Internet wiki searches' are notoriously unreliable, reporting things that may have been tested but never in fact used (AIM-9 on AH-64A anyone? ATAS? The US versions of the aircraft do not use either, but 'wiki searches' might tell you they do just because they were tested).

[greg765]

Yes, but AGM-65E was used in Afghanistan (that's sure,there is no doubt), so it is used by USAF so you will provide it :music_whistling: :thumbup:

 

It's maybe not the most used missile on the Warthog, but it is used.

Please !

You know that it is used, there is no doubt about it.So don't say that it isn't used please !

I would prefer you to say "we don't want because we don't have the time to do it than saying "USAF does not use it", which is false ! Say the truth please.

 

If you don't want to put the missile in the sim, (not enough time, confidential datas...)Ok, but don't say that it isn't used, that's false and you well know it !

[GGTharos]

Who said it was launched from an A-10?

 

I'll try to explain it this way: ED has gotten the list of weapons used on A-10C from the USAF itself.

 

'Funding efforts' does not equate to 'operational use'. It isn't used, no matter what you want to believe.

[greg765]

Who said it was launched from an A-10?

 

 

The press article was only speaking about the A-10s in Afghanistan (no F-16, F-15E, Harrier, and so on...just A-10)

So it was launched from an A-10.

 

1/5/2010 - KANDAHAR AIRFIELD, Afghanistan (AFNS) -- More than 10,000 flight hours and 2,500 sorties marked the closing stages of a six-month tour for the members of the 354th Expeditionary Fighter Squadron here New Year's Day.

http://www.af.mil/news/story.asp?id=123184118

 

And that's on the official website of the USAF.

[GGTharos]

I don't see 'A-10' mentioned anywhere in the article.

 

The press article was only speaking about the A-10s in Afghanistan (no F-16, F-15E, Harrier, and so on...just A-10)

So it was launched from an A-10.

[Steve Davies]

When I visited the 422 Test & Evaluation Squadron at Nellis in February 2009, they were at the end of developing tactics, techniques and procedures for the AGM-65E for the A-10C community.

 

They explained that the reason they are rarely used/seen is because they are in exceptionally short supply - they had only a handful with which to test and develop the TTPs, for example.

 

Based on this experience, and the empirical data about the production of the missile and limited use in combat, I think that it is fair to reason that the USAF does indeed 'use' it.

[Steve Davies]

Who said it was launched from an A-10?

 

GG

 

The article is written by the A-10 unit's PAO about the unit. She doesn't need to say that it was an A-10 that launched it.

[GGTharos]

Alright, I stand corrected (also was looking at the wrong article :P )

 

Also, would you happen to know where this development is going, if anywhere? Will they restart production of the E or are they just going to wait for the new joint attack missiles instead?

[greg765]

I don't see 'A-10' mentioned anywhere in the article.

 

Read the whole article : they are speaking about A-10, it's mentionned many times.

It's even written in the title !

 

And the 354th Expeditionary Fighter Squadron is an A-10 squadron.

And it's the on the official website of USAF.

 

Edit : ok, yes, confusion about the article ^^

[Steve Davies]

 

I'll try to explain it this way: ED has gotten the list of weapons used on A-10C from the USAF itself.

 

That's really the crux of this debate - if ED are modelling the A-10C before the 422 started developing TTPs, then the laser Maverick will not have been on the list.

[GGTharos]

That is a good point.

 

That's really the crux of this debate - if ED are modelling the A-10C before the 422 started developing TTPs, then the laser Maverick will not have been on the list.

[Steve Davies]

 

Also, would you happen to know where this development is going, if anywhere? Will they restart production of the E or are they just going to wait for the new joint attack missiles instead?

 

GG

 

My understanding is that they wanted a missile quickly that they could use in coordination with SOFD and other SOF forces in AFG. I have never seen that written anywhere, though.

 

Afraid that I don't know whether they are going to restart E production, but given that these missiles are in very short supply (the F-16 guys at the 422 wanted to develop it for their community, but actually allowed the A-10 guys exclusive use of their few test examples), you have to think that some kind of limited production run would make sense.

[greg765]

That's really the crux of this debate - if ED are modelling the A-10C before the 422 started developing TTPs, then the laser Maverick will not have been on the list.

 

Yes, true.

 

But we can refresh a list - the product isn't released yet, and that's to correct it that I have created this topic -

To me , it would be great to add the laser Maverick.

 

The release dtae is for the end of the year (maybe beginning of 2011, depending on the versions)

So it would be great to update the list (if that's possible) and add the laser maverick (Agm-65E)

[Steve Davies]

Greg

 

I cannot speak for ED, but I suspect that - as GG says - they set a time line in place for the A-10C, and that's not going to change. If it was not on the list then, it won't be now. That strikes me as being a very sensible way of doing it; if you want something that is right up-to-the-minute, you'll never see the sim because they will constantly be having to add new OFPs, weapons, avionics etc.

 

Personally, I don't have a problem with them not including it because there is just SO much other stuff in A-10C to engross yourself with.

[greg765]

Yes, I well know that they have already lots of things to do for this sim.

But I think that it was important to speak about this point (the Laser Maverick).

 

Because if it is not for the release 1.00, it could be for the following patch, etc...

The important is to give the idea, and that was my goal writing this topic.

Now, ED knows that those missiles are used by USAF's A-10s.

They are maybe seldom used for today's conflicts, but they well exist.

So, for the following patch, now ED knows that some people here are interrested in this missile, which would be a very good thing for the sim.

Now it's up to ED to choose to add or not to add this missile, but if they want a realistic sim (with A-10's real capabilities), a sim that well represents the A-10's world, they must add the missile.

 

ED, it's up to you !

[sobek]

Because if it is not for ce release 1.00, it could be for the following patch, etc...

The important is to give the idea, and that was my goal writing this topic.

Now, ED knows that those missiles are used by USAF's A-10s.

They are maybe seldom used for today's conflicts, but they well exist.

So, for the following patch, now ED knows that some people here are interrested in this missile, which would be a very good thing for the sim.

Now it's up to ED to choose to add or not to add this missile, but if they want a realistic sim (with A-10's real capabilities), a sim that well represents the A-10's world, they must add the missile.

 

I think you are focusing way too much on this one missile. If ED decided to update the plane to a more current revision, there would be other things to consider as well, like all the other updates that are going on all the time.

 

I'm sure that at the time of release, you will be pleased with the array of gadgets that are at your disposal, be it with the missile or without. I can't say that i can see how this one missile will change the simulation in a big way, though.

[The Beast]

HMMM Well to answer a few questions 1 yes the A-10C fly's the 65E, I want to say the A model could too. If you can fly one model of 65s you can fly them all. As far as what the point of a 65E is. Its simple a more reliable 65. Mavs are bad at tracking targets. So now you have a guy on the ground laze the target and you get a better hit rate.

 

 

Just for the record I am a weapons troop on A-10Cs currently in Afghanistan