Question about the AGM-65E

Greetings guys,

Stupid question...

I see people getting all exited and wet about the AGM-65E, here's my question, what would be the major difference between using the E model vs the G and maybe the K model (DCS wise, cuz in real life one of the factos might as well be the price) Since all 3 has same warheads, G seems to have the same penetrating capacities as the E, E being a tiny less heavy, with the AV-8B able to lock with eitehr the TPOD or without using the DMT makes G and K pretty useful. I can see maybe moving targets benefits from E, since it goes where your laser is going versus other models might be tricky specialy with the DMT? Ok E has a few action less to be taken, no need to uncase, select sensor switch preperly into IRMV... Range is the same...

EDIT: Deleted the aprt with GBU-12 so replied focus on the main reason of the post.

Unless lasing works with them now also, haven't tried.

Not sure what you're talking about with the GBU-12s....I was nailing targets with them both with self-lase from TGP and JTAC lasing today.

Not sure what you're talking about with the GBU-12s....I was nailing targets with them both with self-lase from TGP and JTAC lasing today.

JTAC lasing and buddy lasing with GBU-12 was working for quite a long time, but self lasing GBU wasn'T implemented, but does work in 2.5.2 Beta for sure, just tried, not sure in 2.5 since i haven'T tried for a few months.

Wasn't implemented? I've been self-lasing GBU-12s and GBU-16s for months. Not sure about when, but I found one of my posts on another forum announcing that the GBU-16s worked well with the T-Pod. That was dec 23 2017.

I'm confused ...

You could self lase GBU's for more then at least 3+ months now

I'm also wondering about the advantages of AGM-65E?

I guess JTAC & buddy-lase. I still find the IR-MAV's superior, ie. I can get all 4 off in one pass, something I can't do with E.

As I understand it, in DCS the IR/EO Mavericks are far more robust AND capable than they are in real life. IRL successful locking depends on a lot of criteria so the lock behavior is quite variable. From what I've heard this boils down to typical lock ranges that are less than what we see in DCS.

For example: IR mavericks are inhibited by a variety of environmental conditions that aren't present in DCS. IR mavericks can only lock onto targets that have sufficient thermal contrast to lock. So ambient temperatures, target conductivity, reflectivity, degree of convective cooling, background conductivity, reflectivity, etc all play into whether or not you can lock. At certain times of the day IR mavericks will tend to be completely useless, even on a nice clear day, because the environmental conditions cause the targets to be a similar temperature as the surrounding terrain. I forget the term but it's something like 'IR inversion' or the like.

Now contrast that with an AGM-65E. If you can successfully point a laser at the target and the seeker can see it, it will track. Much more reliable!

Wasn't implemented? I've been self-lasing GBU-12s and GBU-16s for months. Not sure about when, but I found one of my posts on another forum announcing that the GBU-16s worked well with the T-Pod. That was dec 23 2017.

Cool but the main reason of the post was the advantages of the AGM-65E, but seems turned most as a GBU-12 self-lasing.

I'm confused ...

 

You could self lase GBU's for more then at least 3+ months now

Guess i haven'T really tried it since a few months, since i'Ve been fooling around VR games for about 1.5 month at least and not just DCS :) But again the reason of the post is the AGM-65E not the GBU-12 mainly. Thanks for the reply though :)

As I understand it, in DCS the IR/EO Mavericks are far more robust AND capable than they are in real life. IRL successful locking depends on a lot of criteria so the lock behavior is quite variable. From what I've heard this boils down to typical lock ranges that are less than what we see in DCS.

 

 

For example: IR mavericks are inhibited by a variety of environmental conditions that aren't present in DCS. IR mavericks can only lock onto targets that have sufficient thermal contrast to lock. So ambient temperatures, target conductivity, reflectivity, degree of convective cooling, background conductivity, reflectivity, etc all play into whether or not you can lock. At certain times of the day IR mavericks will tend to be completely useless, even on a nice clear day, because the environmental conditions cause the targets to be a similar temperature as the surrounding terrain. I forget the term but it's something like 'IR inversion' or the like.

 

 

Now contrast that with an AGM-65E. If you can successfully point a laser at the target and the seeker can see it, it will track. Much more reliable!

Makes sens. thanks for the reply :)

An interesting piece about the AGM-65E back in production and why it's still needed (2014). https://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/raytheon-restarts-production-of-laser-maverick-missiles-05397/

That’s what I was thinking. The Es are more of a tool for CAS precision attacks. Yeah sure, a G can easily take out a vehicle(s) or a structure. But to prevent as much collateral is the goal, using buddy lase by ground forces really out shines even the best shots from a IR source. They know much more about the situation on the ground and can easily direct the point of impact. Like a surgeon with a scalpel.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Guess i haven'T really tried it since a few months, since i'Ve been fooling around VR games for about 1.5 month at least and not just DCS :) But again the reason of the post is the AGM-65E not the GBU-12 mainly. Thanks for the reply though :)

When you complained about how you were disappointed and rather would wish for Razabm to have worked more on GBU-12 when it's clear you haven't even tried it in months, rather than AGM-65E a new type of Mavericks that Community has waited for ages to come back in DCS only to get this response pissed me off slightly.

To answer your initial question ... Why use Echo Mavs?

Every weapon has their advantages and disadvantages, Echo Mavs for example:

- Can be fired from much longer rage (You don't need to wait for good enough TV picture to lock pixels)

- Much more precise (TV screens sometimes don't lock right targets unless you're really close)

- In a heat of the moment, you don't have to spend time looking for a target and setting up for an attack

- Gives DCS even more of an intrinsic buddy lase functionality that's easier then GBU-12's

Downsides are obviously you're limited to how many missiles you can fire at the same time.

(Unless you fire 4 in a span of 10 seconds and just move laser about)

Laser MAVs is another reason I wish DCS could be combined with Arma infantry for some truly awesome lasing <3

The ability to fire them off further away than regular mavs does sound like a pretty big deal...but maybe I'm exaggerating that aspect ^^

As I understand it, in DCS the IR/EO Mavericks are far more robust AND capable than they are in real life. IRL successful locking depends on a lot of criteria so the lock behavior is quite variable. From what I've heard this boils down to typical lock ranges that are less than what we see in DCS.

Yeah, what we have are fairly impressive results compared to example:

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3035132&postcount=15

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3262448&postcount=40

TLDR so forgive me if someone has already said this. A big advantage of the E is being able to target anything you want...like if you want to put it through a window or target a specific spot on a bridge or whatever you can think of. I think the range of the maverick is something like 15-20 miles maybe from altitude so you should get some more range from the E since the limfac will be the laser distance as apposed to the seeker getting a lock. Along the same vein, max distance JTAC lased targets really helps keep you out of the enemy WEZ.

Anyone know the in game range for the E's?

Just tried an anti-ship strike with one, and got a successful lock at 25 miles (whilst flying at 20k). Didn't hit the target, but made me wonder what is realistic.

I've hit ground targets on Friday at 12 miles range.

Anyone know the in game range for the E's?

Just tried an anti-ship strike with one, and got a successful lock at 25 miles (whilst flying at 20k). Didn't hit the target, but made me wonder what is realistic.

I've hit ground targets on Friday at 12 miles range.

I expect between 8-12nm since that is the max range you can force correlate in the A-10C

The E can be fired at a much greater distance than the D/G (up to 12nm iirc, depending on the flight conditions at time of release).

It can also be fired at a friendly-designated target (e.g. dropping ordnance on a target threatening a Special Ops commando equipped with a SOFLAM laser designator)

It carries a biger payload (130 kg iirc) than the D (40kg iirc).

Thanks. Will try out to 15 against some other ships.

Can't help but think that the Rb15 and Exocet are circa 200kg for their warhead. So the AGM65E is roughly 2/3rds of that, so probably enough to seriously hurt some ships.

Civilian ships maybe ; because navy ships will make minced meat of a few LMAV : they fly slow and high, and as such are easy prey to anti-aircraft defences.

Thanks. Will try out to 15 against some other ships.

Can't help but think that the Rb15 and Exocet are circa 200kg for their warhead. So the AGM65E is roughly 2/3rds of that, so probably enough to seriously hurt some ships.

Exocet warhead is 165kg :smilewink:

However it isn’t necessarily supposed to sink a frigate with one missile. Depending on the size mutltiple missiles may be needed.

But for sure, 130kg already hurts...

Exocet warhead is 165kg :smilewink:

 

However it isn’t necessarily supposed to sink a frigate with one missile. Depending on the size mutltiple missiles may be needed.

But for sure, 130kg already hurts...

Bearing in mind that the Harrier can carry x4, that's a lot of pain that could be inflicted on a ship.