Does the AGM-65 Maverick have a place in modern warfare?
>>64656768it's always best to have and not need than to need and not have
>>64656768>Does a tv/it auto fire and forget anti tank missile have a place in modern warfare?Zelenksy wasn't democratically elected btw and is a de facto dictator
>>64657599You said that because you wanted to talk about Nuclear Option and knew it would get you free bumps
>>64657601You're the IOP, not me
Not really aside from the laser variant, the TV/IR ones have a really short range due to the ancient seeker, and the warhead is in an awkward spot where its too powerful with huge collateral to use against some insurgents in a truck, but too small to hit e.g., a building.
>>64657720Have you ever fired an AGM-65 in real life? No, you haven't, why in gods name did you reply you to this thread, fucking moron
>>64657720But why would you use the laser variant instead of JAGM-F or Brimstone?
>>64657743What do you think he meant by this?
>>64657720>the TV/IR ones have a really short range due to the ancient seekerDumb War Thunder player.
>>64656768noSDB2, APKWS and JAGM have replaced it with smarter and more efficient systems
>>64658365>Reverse image search>warthunder.compot, meet kettle? Nice document by the way, pretty incredible they got over 24000 nm out of a Maverick
>>64658820What if I want to blow up a building
