slow down heavy AT missile

[charliegrs]

so i read recently that in the next version of PR the heavy AT will get an assault rifle, which is definitly awesome, but i think another thing that needs to be done to the heavy AT is to slow down his missles. i think right now they go WAY too fast. why would the i want the missiles slowed down? so i can actually guide them. the way it is right now, the missiles fly so fast that you really dont get a chance to guide them, so trying to hit a moving target is incredibly hard. its basically a glorifed bullet right now. only on a map like kashan or quinling have i noticed if im trying to hit something on the very outer edge of my view distance can i really guide it. i dont know how fast these missiles go irl, but from the videos ive seen they appear to be going a bit slower than the missiles in PR. i suggest perhaps changing the speed to maybe the same as vanilla or slightly faster? let me know what you all think.

[Jaymz]

The guidance systems have been improved for the patch. You will be able to start guiding them almost immediately after launch. Not too fond of slowing them down to be honest, they currently travel at relatively realistic speeds.

Keep in mind that in RL these weapons (well the SRAW anways) work on a "fire and forget" guidance system which is actually being discussed atm.

[LtSoucy]

great now we can guide them and not into a wall or hill. So is there a chance of Javelan?

[Atomhic Bohmb]

A Javelin would be very nice, can they be deterred by smoke though? If not, it would be a bit like an I win button because they are self guided once they lock on.

[markonymous]

a javelin has already been made and actually tested in-game but was put on hold for several reasons bugs and such.

[Atomhic Bohmb]

Oh, quite interesting. A javelin would no doubt be fun to play with.

[Spec]

Would be a bit unbalanced, since the other nations still have to guide their H-AT. Maybe its possible to get it balanced by reducing ammo / kits available or something. Dont know about the bugs, but that's prolly another reason, yes.

[charliegrs]

oh no not another javelin discussion, this has been discussed to death. it would be cool, but from everything ive gathered its not gonna happen.

anyway thanks Jaymz for the reply, its cool something is being done about the heavy AT even if it cant be slowed down a little bit

[Atomhic Bohmb]

Bah, I started typing before the post above me was posted :/
Anyway, I wrote it, why waste it.
-------------------------------
Perhaps if the Javelin kit was only accessible from the American/British main, similar to how to the insurgents get RPGs and LMGs in Basrah. If it was in short supply (1 to 2 per map) spawning every 5 to 10 minutes, this way we could avoid overuse.

It could also spawn at a CP, say if it was held for a certain amount of time. There are a number of way in which you could regulate something like a Javelin, I guess it's all a matter of what people are willing to go through the trouble to code.

[MikeDude]

isn't there any test movie about the javelin.

[billdan]

hope the HAT kit (not the javelin kit) gets a burst carbine, not the full size rifle

[ReaperMAC]

hope the HAT kit (not the javelin kit) gets a burst carbine, not the full size rifle

Nope

[Cp]

Really dont mind the speed since the HAT shouldn't be fired at close ranges anyway.

wrong, SRAW = Short Range Assault Weapon, it has a range of maximum 600 meters and minimum 17 meters.

though it dosent really matter.

I vote for keeping the current speed.

[BloodBane611]

SRAW also = rarely in service. Marines have a few hundred, everyone else 0. Javelin is much more prevalent with the UK, and will soon become more prevalent with the US, as no more SRAWs are going to be ordered. 75m-2500m is the Javelin range, so not much of a close in weapon.

Anyhow, a fully guided system would make it totally suck to play as a tanker in PR, and as realistic as it is, there have been very few situations where javelins have been used against tanks so far in combat, and not once have they been used against modern MBTs. So it's not easy to create a realistic model of it, since it has yet to happen.

[Artnez[US]]

Javelin in BF2:

BF2: Satnav's Javelin

[Rico11b]

Dam,

Artnez that is a really cool video. What mod is that for? Someone add it to PR... Pretty please! Hehehe

R

[Rico11b]

The guidance systems have been improved for the patch. You will be able to start guiding them almost immediately after launch. Not too fond of slowing them down to be honest, they currently travel at relatively realistic speeds.

Keep in mind that in RL these weapons (well the SRAW anways) work on a "fire and forget" guidance system which is actually being discussed atm.

Not to be a stickiler for details or anything, but the speed of the projectile is a bit on the "too fast" side. In game the missile fired from the HAT and the LAT are a bit faster than reality. I'm not trying to start a flaming war, just throwing out some details.

The specs are as follows:

Data for FGM-172A (missile without launcher):
Length 70.5 cm (27.8 in)
Diameter 14 cm (5.5 in)
Weight 6.4 kg (14.1 lb)
Speed 900 km/h (560 mph)
Range 600 m (2000 ft)
Propulsion Dual-thrust solid-fueled rocket
Warhead Downward-firing EFP (Explosive Formed Projectile)

900 km/h converts to 820 feet per second or 250 meters per second. That is hardly faster than most pellet or BB guns. Adult air rifles fire pellets at around 1000 to 1200 feet per second. Much slower than the muzzle velocity of most handguns. The speed of sound at sea level is something like 1116 feet per second, so with respect to any launched missile weapon system, this is one slow puppy. Doesn't seem so ingame
Now compare that the the TOW missile system, which has a missile velocity of 300 m/s (1000 fps).

[Spec]

The question is, can you compare "ingame" meters with real ones? Werent there huge differences?

[Rico11b]

The question is, can you compare "ingame" meters with real ones? Werent there huge differences?

You should be able to compare the two. I think there are huge differences, but I've been told that the scale is correct. I Still don't buy it though. But that's just me.

R