Why don't we employ this tank killer?
Do we still fight tanks?
>>29761789
This thread will go to shit since it is about a British weapon.
>>29761789
because we have hellfires?
>>29761801
They're not the same weapon.
because it would cost too much to replace the hellfire with something that's not significantly better.
>>29761806
oh yeah whats the difference
>>29761789
US loves the missile. US would acquire missile instantly if it could.
The issue is, "muh research and development industry".
And thats not a BAD reason. They do have something faaairly similar coming out, not as advanced with some of the high end attack modes as Brimstone, but similar enough that they're willing to wait and use their own homegrown R&D to support their own companies.
And thats perfectly justified.
It WOULD be nice if they took it though. Massive export success then, and it's already been proven on Reaper, with Apache trials later this year and Super Hornet and F-35 integration very possible.
>>29761854
The difference is that Hellfire can't initiate a 24 missile strong volley from 60km out, with a networked connectivity between each missile to act as a singular swarm that can individually identify, prioritise based on internal database recognition and then attack with focus on front and rear of convoy targets and procedurally adapt as the strike happens to avoid repeated impacts, sense and avoid obstacles and chase targets moving at 70mph perpendicularly. And do all this with a 98.6%+ accuracy rating, each of those being graded by "being within 1 metre" of target, and most of that remaining 1.4% being "within 5 metres". With a low collateral damage that you can snipe off an individual without damaging someone a building away and yet enough concentrated power to wipe out tanks and send their turrets flying, and do all this with all-weather, self guidance and attack ability due to millimetre wave sensors to give a true "fire and forget" independant weapon that doesn't rely on ground targeting at all, and can even self destruct if it detects a catagorised friendly target in the dangerzone.
Hellfire is not Brimstone. It's a COMPLETELY different class of missile.
>>29761916
like any of that matters just killing goatfuckers
>>29761916
So...a more expensive version of the Hellfire for what we use them for.
>>29761930
Assuming we're not going to fight Russia or China one day.
>>29761916
Jesus Christ. Who exactly does the UK imagine it's going to war against? Space Nazis?
>>29761968
The Brits are always getting ready for the next war against the Hun.
Just in case.
>>29761965
Explaining why we're not buying fucktons of UK space magic right now.
>>29761962
I think you mean "more advanced" than Hellfire.
>>29761855
>It WOULD be nice if they took it though
The fact that there's a missile out there called brimstone and we don't use it triggers my autism. Hellfire AND Brimstone, just complete the set god damn it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZrcckN0tn4
>>29761930
It does matter. A huge fucking deal. Absolute precision, low collateral, agile targeting, moving target tracking and complete fire and forget is a BIG deal in this sort of warfare.
You can't mount Hellfire on a fast jet, you can't launch it from a fast jet with that sort of accuracy and most crucially of all, it doesn't have a millimetre wave radar on anything but the Apache version (and even then it's not the same as Brimstone's guidance).
The simple fact is, Brimstone can fire without supporting targeting. Many other air to ground ops DO. And it can target moving targets, specifically, in a low collateral area with an agility of "identify and strike" that has no other competitor in the area right now.
" Ben Goodlad, senior weapons analyst at IHS Jane’s, said the Brimstone missile was the only one being used against Isil that could be either laser-guided onto the target by a weapons operator, or direct itself with radar guidance.
He said: “Brimstone is the only weapon currently being used in air strikes that provides a fire and forget capability capable of hitting moving targets.
“Weapons equipped with GPS guidance have been used to provide this capability against static targets but GPS cannot be used against anything mobile.”
Laser guided missiles such as Hellfire can be used against moving targets, but must be guided by a weapons operator from launch through to impact. "
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/11133680/Brimstone-British-missile-envied-by-the-US-for-war-on-Isil.html
>>29762005
It would be perfect.
America, armed with Hellfire and Brimstone.
Why the fuck not?
>>29761916
>Brimstone missile
Curious on how they managed to get 60km range out of the brimstone 2, I wonder what the launch profile/altitude was.
>>29762012
Screw our pride and protectionism. Buy the damn thing already.
>>29761962
So which US fast jet carries hellfire then?
Oh wait...
>>29761930
>>29761962
>militaries should only prepare for the lowest possible threat class
>conventional deterrence isn't a thing
>>29762029
If we're worried about "local industry", we can build the thing under license.
Boom! Muh manufacturing jobs.
>>29761789
Because America uses glide bombs in the manner the UK uses Brimstone missiles.
>>29761916
Are Brimstone 2 missiles even in service yet?
>>29762027
Fast jet, as opposed to drone, is my bet. It was highlighted for the Tornado more than anything else after all.
The one that interests me is MBDA claiming they can pull 40km from a rotary platform. THAT I am eager to see when they hook it onto an Apache later this year.
>>29761789
Because we don't need any new AGMs.
We should be buying the Meteor, though. The AIM-120 really needs to be replaced.
>>29762031
What's Hellfire....without Brimstone?
>>29762002
I think anon is referring to
>Hellfire Romeo
>$99k
>Brimstone
>$153k
>>29762065
I am really curious since the Hellfire's motor is extremely similar and their realistic max range is half that. It has to be launched extremely high/fast ala sdb.
>>29762067
>We should be buying the Meteor, though. The AIM-120 really needs to be replaced.
lol no
>>29761800
depressing isn't it
>>29762032
>>militaries should only prepare for the lowest possible threat class
I understand being prepared for more than the lowest possible threat class. I'm just trying to figure out who is fielding so many tanks en masse that we need to be able to spam 24 networked swarmbots at a time to deal with them.
>>29762155
I don't get that. What's the big deal about British weapons?
Brimstone seems like a perfectly good weapon of war.
>>29761855
>The issue is, "muh research and development industry".
actually it's mostly an american weapon.
>>29762032
>>29762031
>>29762002
All we use them for is to cap durkas with drones. We have other munitions that fill the role of the brimstone.
>>29762182
You're not worried about the Armata?
>>29761789
>tank killer
yes, because we are fighting so many tanks right now.
hellfire is fine, fuck off civi scum.
>>29761968
Always.
>>29762183
It's an excellent weapon of war, just like the F-22: It's a weapon for a war nobody is actually going to be fighting any time soon.
If that war does happen, something like the Brimestone will be a major part of every arsenal. In the mean time, it's nice that the tech is out there, but Hellfires are a better way to spend your money.
>>29762146
It's faster, has a longer range, better sensors, and has better maneuverability. If we're developing something that much better than the AIM-120 it's still secret.
>>29762208
Haha no.
>>29762211
It is also good for precision strikes.
You know, that thing we place such a priority on nowadays trying to avoid civilian causalities?
>>29762242
>It is also good for precision strikes.
So are Hellfires
>>29762183
because young boys who have just had their first history class about the war of independence need something to stroke to.
it completely kills all interesting threads that aren't about the us military.
>>29762232
Anon, it's foolish to measure a weapon system against its predecessor, or against other comparable weapon systems.
The true measure of a weapon system is its target. Without an enemy fielding large numbers of targets the AIM-120 cannot hit, there's no reason to replace it no matter how superior the replacement is.
>>29762219
i have no doubt that if needed, brimstone could be adapted into use in large quantities in a short period of time. but there are probably other priorities.
>>29762065
They probably loft the missile, since the seeker head doesn't need to follow a laser like the SALH Hellfires. 40 km doesn't seem that unreasonable if the Apache shoots the brimstone at like a 30 degree upward angle.
>>29762029
Doctrine is a pretty big barrier.
Brimstone only has a significant advantage if you put it on Jets. The US prefers bigger ordinance on jets. Maverick and SDB are both in the 100kg range whereas Brimstone is about half that weight.
Mounted on helicopters and drones, the Brimstone isn't enough of an improvement to justify the greater price tag and integration costs.
>>29762263
Oh for fuck's sake, we haven't fought the British since 1812. It's 2016.
We mock the French more and they helped us during the Revolution.
>>29762273
Even USAF officers are saying AMRAAM needs a replacement, anon.
Don't be delusional.
>>29762288
nah, french threads go down better here than british ones. everyone wants to join the legion. seriously, start a british thread, it turns into a clusterfuck in about five minutes. it sucks because it kills variety.
>>29762256
But does Hellfire have fire-and-forget capability against a moving target, with no guidance from a weapons operator?
>>29761789
Hellfires ain't broke
>>29762323
does ur mum?
only if the target is black
>>29762340
I'm American. But I believe in a weapon's quality more than its point of origin.
We are closely allied to the United Kingdom.
This shouldn't be an issue.
>>29762323
Longbows do but besides that, no. Although I have never really had issues killing movers up to 80mph myself.
>>29762369
i don't understand, you're saying that because you're american your mom homes in on black guys without any operator guidance?
>>29762232
>It's faster, has a longer range, better sensors, and has better maneuverability.
The only one of these that is actually true is that it has a longer range, and a longer minimum range.
>>29762310
Not delusional. Just saying that the time to replace the AMRAAM is when the AMRAAM is no longer capable, not simply whenever some new tech comes along.
>>29762310
>Even USAF officers are saying AMRAAM needs a replacement, anon.
You are referring to a gib monies scare tactic that compares the AMRAAM-C to theoretical specs of a Chinese missile.
>>29762397
Chav by any chance?
>>29762323
Gee, anon, are Hellfires being used against anything with significant counterfire capability, that can't be taken down some other way?
No? Then why spend money on Brimestone?
>>29762433
you can't do better than that? i'm not even british.
fucks sake anon, you used to be cool.
>>29762405
>when the AMRAAM is no longer capable
Get back to us when this is the case.
>>29761916
>ally adapt as the strike happens to avoid repeated impacts, sense and avoid obstacles and chase targets moving at 70mph perpendicularly. And do all this with a 98.6%+ accuracy rating, each of those being graded by "being within 1 metre" of target, and most of that remaining 1.4% being "within 5 metres". With a low collateral damage that you can snipe off an individual without da
brimstone is god brimstone is life brimstone is god.. my anus is ready
>>29761789
>rotary wing
We have Hellfire
>fixed wing
We have SDB
>>29762322
>start a british thread, it turns into a clusterfuck in about five minutes. it sucks
This one isn't that bad.
It helps that it's about a truly excellent product. Challenger threads are the way they are because Chally is actually a good but flawed product with backward design decisions.
>>29762402
Not even the guy you are responding to, but ALL of those things are correct.
Meteor has twice the range, is Mach 4+ through the WHOLE flight - not the boost stage like AMRAAM. The missile is a lifting body that has higher sustained G, not to mention the two way datalink (the D variant of AMRAAM is a tiny fraction of deployed weapons).
AMRAAM is hugely inferior.
get cuked.
>>29762505
>This one isn't that bad.
it's a rarity though.
>>29762456
Is that what I supposed to do? Bicker with some anonymous person I don't even know, over a thread that isn't even going to be around that long?
>>29762288
It has nothing to do with Americans vs British, anons like the OP have a huge fetish for British weapons and get rustled jimmies when someone suggests they are not the greatest thing ever. Past threads with the Challenger 2, Type 45 destroyers, Eurofighter, you name it.
Plus there are anons who persistently bait (skijumps, helicopter AEW etc).
>>29762012
sperg detected
>>29762182
>I'm just trying to figure out who is fielding so many tanks en masse that we need to be able to spam 24 networked swarmbots at a time to deal with them.
Every nation capable of deploying conventional land forces.
>>29762533
>who persistently bait (skijumps, helicopter AEW
hey man skijump is fine if you cant afford a proper carrier. :)
>>29762445
Because you cant fly a helicopter 600 miles into Syria, loiter for an hour, refuel, loiter some more, strike then head home.
If you think hellfire is even a comparable to brimstone you're an idiot. You may as well be arguing that dumb bombs and rockets should be the only weapons in the arsenal.
kys
>>29762521
hmm, maybe you should re-program your calculator and watch discovery channel instead.
>>29762584
Arguing with you is a waste of posts.
>>29762405
>Starting to develop things when they're made obsolete, not beforehand to account for R&D
Glad you're not making any important decisions.
>>29762424
I am, and if they're making a shitty copy of the Meteor, it'll still give the AMRAAM something to worry about.
US doctrine is entirely reliant on air superiority. An enemy having a weapon of even near parity is a bad, bad thing.
>>29762533
>anons like the OP have a huge fetish for British weapons
You don't have to be a Britboo to see the worth in swarming missiles that can place a tandem HEAT round on each individual target. This is a more effective but more expensive answer to the same question that drove all the recent self-targeting cluster munitions, as adopted by USA and Russia.
>>29762533
>Americans vs British
It has everything to do with that. The fact that you say the OP has a 'huge fetish for british weapons' when all he has done is post quite a well conceived missile and asked why the us doesn't use it (especially sinces it's effectively an american weapon anyway), is kinda indicative.
The OP has presented no signs of rustled jimmies, so why do you call posting a british weapon and asking an innocent enough question a 'huge fetish'?
>>29762605
great, so why don't you fuck off then? I think I here your mom calling, she must be finished with tyrone and jamal.
>>29762513
>Meteor has twice the range
Tell us the range of both missiles.
>is Mach 4+ through the WHOLE flight
No, it is not.
>The missile is a lifting body that has higher sustained G
Tell us the sustained G of both missiles.
>not to mention the two way datalink (the D variant of AMRAAM is a tiny fraction of deployed weapons).
The latest model of a missile, which is in service, adds a two way data link vs a missile that is not in service yet.
>AMRAAM is hugely inferior.
mfw Meteor cannot into high offbore launches
>>29762568
I'm not comparing Hellfire to Brimestone, I'm comparing Hellfire to its targets, and then seeing whether Brimestone would be a better way to spend money on those targets.
What's 600 miles inside Syria, that needs a Brimestone so badly, where a JDAM, SDB, Maverick, or other weapon can't do the job just as well for less money?
>>29762645
>You don't have to be a Britboo to see the worth in swarming missiles that can place a tandem HEAT round on each individual target.
Longbow Hellfire?
>>29762739
Longbows are lobl so they aren't very effective from most fixed wing aircraft.
>>29762650
>why do you call posting a british weapon and asking an innocent enough question a 'huge fetish'
this isn't OP's first thread on the matter
>>29762645
>You don't have to be a Britboo to see the worth in swarming missiles that can place a tandem HEAT round on each individual target.
They're tanks, anon, not guided missile cruisers. There is no tank in mass production today, with a point defense system so strong that it's worth spending swarmbot money on taking it down.
>>29762057
Technically we mostly use Mavricks for that.. and everything else. If it's air-to-surface and you want it fucked with a missile, the US has a Mavrick for that.
But yeah, for general PGM work the US likes glide bombs. There's points either way but clearly it works.
>>29762762
I doubt I'm the only person who has wondered why America doesn't use the Brimstone.
>>29762690
Damage control.
10 minutes on Google (Maybe longer for you) will answer all of that.
>>29762762
You have magical anon trace do you? Or is everyone that has ever talked about Brimstone on /k/ the same guy? You're sounding unhinged. I seem to recall Reaper talking about it before.
The more you post the more I'm thinking, yeah, it's because it's british.
>>29762794
I think Maverick has a bigger warhead option as well. The only reason I can see the US switching is because they needed to clusterfuck groups of tanks ASAP from rotary. It's undoubtably a good weapon, but it's made for british needs, not american needs.
According to wiki it's been looked on favorably before but never seems to make the cut. But if you're trying to save money I can understand why a new sensor package on Hellfire makes sense, even if you don't get the fancy networking shit.
You don't need a spear to kill people, you can do it with a stick.
Stick with the stick.
>>29763172
Sticks? Hah! That requires trees. Save even more money.
The moment the target's head is in view, hit it with a rock.
>>29762777
>They're tanks, anon, not guided missile cruisers. There is no tank in mass production today, with a point defense system so strong that it's worth spending swarmbot money on taking it down.
>There is no tank
>tank
Can't tell if deliberate or not
>>29762854
No him but I do think the amraam is fine until the CUDA type MRAAM's get into service. The US is going VLO with mostly internal bays and the meteor is probably a bit bulkier since it has the air intakes. The US is looks ng for amraam class missiles in half the size of the current amraam I believe live.
>>29761968
/pol/ just acts the way it does as a ruse, you should see the underground factories
>>29762854
The only one doing damage control is you, if you actually had numbers you would have said them.
>>29763307
I'm sure you'll figure it out.
What can you guys tell me about JAGM.
How does it stack up against the brimstone?
>>29761789
>British missiles
>working
>>29761916
Fuck, is that all? Nigga we built better shit than that in the 80's. 24 targets? Try 60, without millions in research and electronics.
>>29763398
not joking, I can actually picture ISIS start making tanks like these if they have the chance
air power is a fucking meme
Why not just mount brimstones & meteors and whatever else on ground vehicles, save asstons of money, and not need giant air bases all over the world
>>29765014
because ground forces don't have the speed and range, not to mention the penetration abilities
are you twelve?
>>29765014
>>29765240
The missile also has a hell of a lot less range launched at height 0 speed 0.
>>29765014
>air power is a meme
0/10
>>29761796
You ever seen what comes out of mini vans?
Can someone post the webms of brimstone testing with volley fire? My erection needs erecting
>>29761968
Well when you only have a dozen or so operational aircraft, having them be actually dangerous is kinda important.
>>29762002
I'd hope so, the -K model hellfires are nearing 50 years old and we still have tens of thousands of them in inventory (and, at least as of July 2007, were still using them in combat).
>>29765392
I'm pretty sure they everyone is using P or newer now.
>>29765436
Not rotary wing.
We're still shooting Mikes in combat and Kilos in training.
>source
I'm the guy that issues them to the 15J's
>>29765448
I guess it make sense for the Helos, surprised you still have mikes though. The Army MQ-1Cs atleast have Romeos.
>>29765458
Mikes are good missiles. We got a small batch of Romeos for our last trip to Afghanistan with the orders of "these cost 10x what a Mike does, each bird gets *one* and you'd better have a DAMN good reason to use it" so we never shot any.
>>29765448
>We're still shooting Mikes in combat and Kilos in training.
Wait, shouldn't that be reversed?
>>29765479
Romeo's cost like 5-10 grand extra.
>>29765487
Yeah I tried calling them on that bullshit (~$48,500 for a Mike and around $62,000 for a November) and was told that being enlisted I obviously couldn't know what I was talking about and to sit down and shut up.
>am the guy who orders for the whole fucking brigade
>they have both a unit cost and tare cost per shipment annotated on bill of lading
>>29765250
That doesn't matter, it's trivial to add a larger fuel tank to the missile
>>29765240
The ground forces are whats fighting the war, the billions spent on the airpower meme could be better spent on ground forces
>>29765480
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
....
>>29765507
Why were you guys using Mikes operationally? They are delay fuzed and meant for boats and shit.
>>29762232
>It's a secret
Um no it's not
>>29765529
Because they do a damn good job against the 4+ foot thick mud huts with better effect on target than the HEAT heads on the Kilos.
>>29765529
Also the Mikes aren't delay fuzed, and they carry a blast/frag warhead designed specifically for soft targets and urban warfare.
>>29765548
I'm pretty sure they are delay fuzed, we used to use them before the november came out (which was the replaced with the selectable fuzing romeo.)
>>29765574
Huh.
>initiation time delay
A less than 1/10th second delay on a subsonic missile is...not much of a delay. But I guess it's still a delay.
Anyway, the -N is the one intended for ships, and has a mechanically-delayed thermobaric (MAC) warhead. At least according to Wikipedia. I never got to see any of them, and my Yellow Book doesn't go into great detail.
>>29765595
With impact velocities of ~1000 FPS it is actually pretty significant. The november and the Mike are functionally the same, the november is just more efficient at sustained overpressure.
>>29765637
Realistically though the Mike achieves about a foot and a half of penetration on stick-built buildings, and operationally rarely fully through a mud/mud-brick wall before detonation. We had several failures to penetrate even after the detonation in Afghanistan due to the sheer thickness and relative plasticity of those fucking walls. Low percentage, but still. Shouldn't have had any.
>>29761916
>The original Brimstone could not be used in Afghanistan as the rules of engagement required a "man-in-the-loop". Under an Urgent Operational Requirement in 2008, modifications were made to the seeker and software of over 300 existing missiles to create Dual-Mode Brimstone.[17] The new missiles can be laser guided according to the STANAG 3733 standard as well as retaining the millimetre wave seeker; the pilot can select either mode from the cockpit or use both simultaneously.[17] Laser guidance allows specific enemy targets to be picked out in cluttered environments, the mmW radar ensures accuracy against moving targets.
See M8? This 60km range fire and forget fancy tech doesn't matter. What Britbongs find they need is laser guided Hellfire kek. US already has it.
>>29762032
Well, yeah.
>>29761968
> Who exactly does the UK imagine it's going to war against?
Soviet Union.
>>29762208
Armata has APS. Brimstone BTFO.
>>29761855
Cost twice as much as hellfire, does 1.20 times as good as hellfire. It's more about blowing up 50 T-72 instead of 25 T-90 / T14
>>29765875
>instead of 25 T-90 / T14
Neither Hellfire nor Brimstone can deal with T14, laser guided Hellfire will have troubles with T-90 because of Shtora.
>>29765660
>We had several failures to penetrate even after the detonation in Afghanistan due to the sheer thickness and relative plasticity of those fucking walls. Low percentage, but still. Shouldn't have had any.
Kek. Afghan mud huts are stronger than corvettes. Navy boats can't become more pathetic.
>>29765889
Shtora is designed against SACLOS ATGM's only. It is completely useless against laser guided missiles or even SACLOS with modulated flares.
T-90 has a laser warning receiver, not a laser jammer. If it detects the hellfire's targeting laser, the best it can do is slew the turret towards the source and pray.
>>29761789
>Why don't we employ this tank killer?
Because it costs about $ 43000 more per unit then a hellfire. It has added functionality, but that is mostly wasted in the type of strikes we do in the sandbox. There has been some work done on making a smaller, weaker, cheaper yet still accurate missile. When you are doing 40 to 60 airstrikes a month the unit price adds up.
>>29766113
>It is completely useless against laser guided missiles
>The second part of the system defeats laser guided weapons. When a laser beam is detected the Shtora informs the crew with light and sound; it then launches laser defeating smoke grenades, which enshroud the tank and break or degrade the lock. The tank commander can also press a button that will turn the turret front to the laser to meet incoming ATGM with the best protected section and to engage the laser beam source with the maingun.
>Anti-FLIR smoke grenades
>Quantity: 12, 81mm 3D17
>Obscured band: 0.4 .. 14 mkm
>Bloom time: 3 sec
>Cloud persistence: 20 sec
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfNXxV1b2tU
>>29764729
Where's the proof the Brimstone doesn't work?
So does the Brimstone use standard NATO aircraft mounts? And is it compatible with the AN/AAQ-33 targeting pod?
>>29761789
Because we had JCM being developed that was superior, and not JAGM coming out of its corpse that takes over the role of both the HE variant and anti armor variant of Hellfire.
>>29766251
Hellfire is top attack so Shtora is useless.
>>29765889
>17 variants of Hellfire, 9 of which are still in active inventory
>4 different (basic) types of seeker heads, only 1 of which is radar based
Sure.
>>29762189
Except for the fact that it's not in the slightest and the only thing that remains from the Hellfire is the fins on the casing, which were then replaced for Brimstone II anyway.
>>29762690
>mfw Meteor cannot into high offbore launches
[Citation needed]
Especially given it's basically designed from the ground up to complement the high-offbore CAPTOR-E capability.
>>29764285
Similar concept of self guiding accuracy for the precision and ease of targeting without a man in the loop, but it lacks the swarm attack modes and convoy recognition software.
ie - It's a Brimstone that doesn't have the swarm capability, and has a much shorter range.
This is not a bad thing, though. JAGM will be excellent in its assigned role. Brimstone only rarely gets to show its full on rapetastic volley launch. To most knowledge, it's only gotten to completely take the gloves off in Libya thus far, when two Tornados fired a 22 missile strong swarm that completely wiped out an Libyan convoy without a single repeat strike in under 20 seconds.
It's fucking terrifying to imagine.
>>29765863
>What Britbongs find they need is laser guided Hellfire kek. US already has it.
Brimstone has a laser guidance system, mate.
>Armata has APS. Brimstone BTFO.
I'd truly like to see a T-14 convoy try to endure it. 24 missiles (with a secondary 12 strong swarm) striking within a second of one another and redirecting onto failed strikes is no laughing matter.
>>29766149
Hellfire's lower cost is largely due to economy of scale.
The US shit out hellfires like they expire in a matter of days.
It also doesn't cost that much more.
>>29764961
Their most advanced armor is trucks with metal sheets covering them to form Atari 2600 enemies. They don't have the engineering knowledge to actually make tanks.
That said they don't need to. Morons will just abandon real ones and hand them over.
>>29768669
>>29768674
https://youtu.be/np-l2GZk67I?t=58
Not any more!
>>29764938
Shitpost harder faggot!
>>29767902
Hellfire is not truly a top attack, and more important laser designation is not top designator Smoke cloud between tank and heli will block beam. Fighter-bombers dropping LGBs is another story.
>>29762044
Without the R and D jobs, Our economy is very protectionist when it counts
>>29761916
Sounds awesome. Tell me, if you put it through a goatfuckers front door, will it kill him any dealer than a hellfire?
Because the last time we used a hellfire to actually take out a tank was in like 2003, and it wasn't really necessary. Currently the only thing hellfires are good for is putting on drones and blowing up rural shacks.
>>29762012
Jesus christa, we get it, the brimstone is super advanced. But none of that matters, because the only thing the US does with hellfires anymore is put them on drones (so the jet doesn't matter) and blow up stationary buildings, or occasionally some jihadi on a motorcycle (so the accuracy isn't super important, and tracking a motorcycle you only have to get sorta near the unprotected rider to pop him).
The brimstone is way too advanced and expensive to replace the hellfire, in the role the hellfire currently performs.
>>29762568
Retard detected.
I don't understand the world.
Only one nation has bought this missile besides the British, and it's Saudi Arabia.
Not one of the countries bordering Russia has bought this weapon.
>>29769306
Yes, America has Hellfire.
Saudi Arabia has Brimstone.
>Thread has quite literally explained numerous times why this missile has important differences in the kind of aerial campaigns like the one right now
>People still refusing to grasp the reasons why it's regarded as well
>People still believing that preparing for a conventional war is no longer a thing you need to do
>>29769306
Kuwait apparently is getting it. Their Typhoon pics include it. France has also said they'd like it to replace Hellfire on their Tigers.
>>29769470
Is it time to start petitioning the US government to use the Brimstone?
>>29769258
In the role the US military mostly performs, it could largely be replaced by Cessna 172s crewed by an 11x and a bag full of hand grenades.
"Current role performed" isn't much of an argument for procurement either way.
>>29769507
Given the way America uses Hellfires its extra abilities would not be used, so the higher cost has no justification.
>>29770240
How about you read the post above you
Then think about the fact we're using Javelins on insurgents
>>29770240
That's a case of not using the weapon correctly then.
The US military is already interested in the Brimstone
>>29762208
No because US has more tanks, planes, ships, missiles, bombs and everything else than that t-72 upgrade has particles.
US could probably flatten russian with the shear amount of conventional munitions it has and could make.
/raises hand
How much does the bugger *cost*?
>>29770452
Hard to say. The British have a cost for it, but the cost to the US would be massively less, as the order would undoubtedly on a whole other scale in that case.
So basically there is no answer.
>>29770244
That's because soldiers had nothing better to use at the time. It's the main reason why the XM25 and Pike missile are being developed and pushed into service.
>>29770541
>XM-25
>Has been in service for 13 years and still extremely limited usage within select teams
>"pushed"
nah
>>29762208
Is anyone?
>>29761796
only the old rusted russian ones in the middle east and the neutered abrams we gave the iraqis.
>>29770452
>/raises hand
You're a fucking forty year old man, stop speaking like it's your first Warcraft login
>this thread
>2 days ago thread on submarines
>multiple previous threads on various other British weapons
BIDF is real. BAE pays people to shill here
>>29770663
Gosh Gee yeah it's not like BAE is the second-largest defense contractor in the world or something so people are bound to talk about their weapons by sheer inevitability huh
>>29770663
You must be very stupid if you think there's a conspiracy to sell submarines and Brimstones to basement-dwelling manchildren
Quick reminder that Britain France and several smaller countries couldn't even sustain the no-fly-zone in Libya by themselves without American help. Libya, the country ruled by a man who purposely kept his military extremely weak so they couldn't overthrow him. Didn't britain and france run out of munitions?
So yeah, the brits might have some nice technology, though from their recent track record it doesn't mean much
>>29770663
Ah, yes if there's competent and smart people talking about weapons and weapon platforms it must be shilling.
>>29770567
The XM25 would have been in service this year if it weren't for budget cuts and an unlucky misfire.
>>29770727
>couldn't even sustain the no-fly zone
Based on what? Sustaining a no-fly zone is simple, all it is it patrol coverage.
>Didn't britain and france run out of munitions?
No. How the hell can you be wrong about something when we all know how it ended.
>>29770735
Funny that a select group of posters constantly post about the same things. I bet you're the same one harping on about muh astute too.
>>29770777
We know how it ended, it ended that way because America came to the rescue. Britain and France couldn't do it themselves
>>29770785
No, Britain and France didn't do it themselves.
>>29770781
>Funny that a select group of posters constantly post about the same things
Unless you have access to 4chan's internal poster database stop thinking that you know 'who' is posting.
And gee, forgive people for talking about things they like.
>>29770781
Christ what a conspiracy that people on a weapons board talk about weapons huh
>>29766251
Where can I buy anti-FLIR smoke grenades?
>>29770836
I don't think they sell white phosphorus to civilians.
>>29770567
>he doesn't know the XM25 is in LRIP
>>29770452
>/raises hands
>>29764729
it aced its testing phase, its hes been used in combat repeatedly and successfully, its been used in libya and iraq for years now and is extremely reliable
>>29761847
better seeker, better range more than twice the range in fact, better warhead.
>>29761930
ok then its not like militaries have come unstuck before by only planning for the last war.
>>29762286
>Brimstone only has a significant advantage if you put it on Jets. The US prefers bigger ordinance on jets. Maverick and SDB are both in the 100kg range whereas Brimstone is about half that weight.
the small weight was kind of the point, it was partly designed to be a light missile specifically so you can carry more and engage more targets per sortie, the smaller kill radius also being a bonus in a weapon that is expected to see heavy use in CAS missions.
>>29761983
>Just in case.
