Nice to see the BMPTs going up again. Just wish it was up to 12.0 instead of 11.7.
3 Likes
Sad to see nothing of the Falcon in the changes, people probably stopped playing it altogether…
5 Likes
Yeah, time to dust off the 10.3 lineup, but no chance I’m touching 10.7 (though rarely did anyway as it avoids the premium vacuum)
Its actually just good AA now, that can still delete lightly armoured vehicles.
I used to use it to kill IMP-1’s all the time
Though, the only nation benefiting from the change is russia…
5 Likes
More reason for the UK to get serious about Tempest!
5 Likes
Funding a jet we can’t even afford.
One disaster after another
At this rate, the Meteor’s replacement is going to be in service before meteor is actually intergrated on the F-35
5 Likes
I mean we are? It has had its funding commitments paid for outside of the DIP and will get further funding from the DIP.
1 Like
~2035 was what I saw for the Meteor MLU.
There is also the Comet which I thought mentioned 2030, but either the article has changed or I misread
Sorry shouldve been alittle more specific, the Eurofighter Meteor MLU is 2035~ well implied anyway. So the integration work. The missile might be ready sooner.
Oh right, I see.
Still funny though that the next gen missile might be ready to be intergrated before the previous generation has finished intergration and the US will have to start again with the new missile :D
Though with things as they are. They might be able to cut through some of the red tape for the EFT and get the intergration sorted faster than originally planned (9Ls being “intergrated using a metal file” style)
I didn’t saw any articles with the last news for Comet, but yeah it’s 2030 that it is planned.
Well if the plan with comet is to have a larger missile body then we either aren’t planning on using it with EFT. Or it will be fired from the wing stations while retaining Meteor / Meteor MLU for the ejectors.
I believe Meteors current constraints to range are due to limits imposed by the old ejector pylons and their design around AMRAAM.
1 Like
Damn Americans :P
I mean the form factor for AMRAAM is a proven design. It’s compatible with basically every NATO fighter going. But those size limits imposed by using it on ejectors is abit of a problem now.
Eventually you need a bigger stick and there is only so much stick you can get in the foot print of an AMRAAM. Just look at AIM-260 the USA is already well aware of this limitation.
At this point we should just break into the systems and do it ourselves.
3 Likes
And Belgium? Definetly hasn’t told everyone it can be done 😜
Proposed enhancement of Raven with 4x ASRAAMs on a Moog Flexible Mission Platform (FMP) turntable/turret and the armoured cab Supacat HMT, rather than stuff bodged together from surplus
Apparently referred to as “Raven 5” (I’m none the wiser on what Ravens 2, 3 and 4 were)
2x ASRAAM version on the same platform, shown earlier this year with the Hawkeye EO turret in place
The conceptual design that was presented by MBDA at DSEI last year
20 Likes
I need it…
6 Likes