SLAMRAAM - And you thought AA was bad enough..

2006-07-28 07:57:12

#1

USAFDude_1988: Will fly for food.; +120|6888|Daytona Beach, FL

I just saw this at the Farnborough Air Show last weekend.. I have to share it with you guys...

Check out the US Army's new SLAMRAAM system... a Humvee armed with four air-to-air AMRAAM missles.

https://www.defense-update.com/images/slamraam.jpg

Considering the current level of power of AA in BF2, imagine what would happen if Dice decided to add this...

2006-07-28 07:58:59

#2

diglow~Flow: Member; +32|7005|British Columbia, Canada

jeez one of those missles hit you byeeeee

2006-07-28 08:00:15

#3

aardfrith: Δ > x > ¥; +145|7171

I'm just guessing but would the acronym stand for:

Surface Launched Advanced Medium Range Air to Air Missile?

Surely if it's surface launched, it can't be an air to air missile? Or does it only start seeking a target when it's in the air?

2006-07-28 08:02:02

#4

SuB: Member; +50|7054

aardfrith wrote:
I'm just guessing but would the acronym stand for:

Surface Launched Advanced Medium Range Air to Air Missile?

Surely if it's surface launched, it can't be an air to air missile? Or does it only start seeking a target when it's in the air?

Surface Launched Advanced Medium Range ANTI Air Missile?

Last edited by SuB (2006-07-28 08:02:11)

2006-07-28 08:04:46

#5

USAFDude_1988: Will fly for food.; +120|6888|Daytona Beach, FL

The AMRAAM missle (AIM-120 Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missle) is usually used by NATO fighter aircraft for air-to-air combat. They simply took an air-to-air missle and placed it on a Humvee chassis. It's designed to take pressure off of Patriot missle batteries by covering low altitudes.

Last edited by USAFDude_1988 (2006-07-28 08:08:33)

2006-07-28 08:08:34

#6

']['error: Banned; +630|7023|The Netherlands

lol glad we don't got those in BF2

2006-07-28 08:13:57

#7

DeadJim: Member; +19|7127|Valencia, California

Hope you dont' mind if I piggyback on your thread - the SLAMRAAM's are very cool and it made me think of the new Excalibur artillary - it's a GPS Guided shell: In a recent test they intentionally fired one about 4KM off cource, and it changed direction mid-flight and struck it's tarket within 2 meters..

https://www.raytheon.com/products/stellent/groups/Public/documents/image/cms01_054625.jpg

Gotta love geeks with Defense Contracts......

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ … 82-155.htm

Last edited by DeadJim (2006-07-28 08:15:27)

2006-07-28 09:15:05

#8

seymorebutts443: Ready for combat; +211|6974|Belchertown Massachusetts, USA

we have so much better stuff and yet the chinese in bf2 somehow can own us. is there any logic there?

2006-07-28 16:40:08

#9

USAFDude_1988: Will fly for food.; +120|6888|Daytona Beach, FL

seymorebutts443 wrote:
we have so much better stuff and yet the chinese in bf2 somehow can own us. is there any logic there?

No logic at all.

2006-07-28 16:43:17

#10

Capt. Foley: Member; +155|6967|Allentown, PA, USA

USAFDude_1988 wrote:
seymorebutts443 wrote:
we have so much better stuff and yet the chinese in bf2 somehow can own us. is there any logic there?
No logic at all.

What do you expect for DICE, anyways all you would hear is NERF!!!!!

2006-07-28 16:47:14

#11

eagles1106: Member; +269|6963|Marlton, New Jersey.

seymorebutts443 wrote:
we have so much better stuff and yet the chinese in bf2 somehow can own us. is there any logic there?

yeah they have to balance bf2 or one army would be winning the whole time...

2006-07-28 16:51:05

#12

max: Vela Incident; +1,652|6946|NYC / Hamburg

USAFDude_1988 wrote:
seymorebutts443 wrote:
we have so much better stuff and yet the chinese in bf2 somehow can own us. is there any logic there?
No logic at all.

there is logic there. sorry to say this but the US military strategies / PR havent exactly been perfect in recent years. Thats why there hasnt been a real victory for the US since WWII (which they won through numbers and economic strength and not though intelligent planning). Also all those high-tech toys dont help against a guerilla fighter armed with an ak.

_{once upon a midnight dreary, while i pron surfed, weak and weary, over many a strange and spurious site of ' hot xxx galore'. While i clicked my fav'rite bookmark, suddenly there came a warning, and my heart was filled with mourning, mourning for my dear amour, " 'Tis not possible!", i muttered, " give me back my free hardcore!"..... quoth the server, 404.}

2006-07-28 16:55:44

#13

d3v1ldr1v3r13: Satan's disciple on Earth.; +160|7064|Hell's prison

I think the keyword max was, BF2, I dont think he was talkin RL...

2006-07-28 17:10:03

#14

Capt. Foley: Member; +155|6967|Allentown, PA, USA

max wrote:
USAFDude_1988 wrote:
seymorebutts443 wrote:
we have so much better stuff and yet the chinese in bf2 somehow can own us. is there any logic there?
No logic at all.
there is logic there. sorry to say this but the US military strategies / PR havent exactly been perfect in recent years. Thats why there hasnt been a real victory for the US since WWII (which they won through numbers and economic strength and not though intelligent planning). Also all those high-tech toys dont help against a guerilla fighter armed with an ak.

That I disagree with. Korea couldnt be won unless we wanted the end of the world. Period. Vietnam was won in casualty numbers. We lost 50,000 killed to atleast 1,000,000 Vietkong/NVA guys KIA. What lost that was the homefront. It was the first time people actualy got to see the horror of war at home and because they where never there they didnt realy understand the fight so all they did was call for the troops to be pulled out. Again that is what is happening in Iraq, we cant just go take out a dictator and expect the country to bounce right back and live happy ever after, we have to stay there and HELP that country rebuild it and defeat people who are against a democratic goverment.

2006-07-28 17:15:33

#15

USAFDude_1988: Will fly for food.; +120|6888|Daytona Beach, FL

d3v1ldr1v3r13 wrote:
I think the keyword max was, BF2, I dont think he was talkin RL...

2006-07-28 17:37:38

#16

spawnofthemist: Banned; +1,128|7021|Burmecia, Land of the Rain

i dont need one of those to own jets.

gimme a Type98 anyday.

2006-07-29 01:21:49

#17

souljar: Member; +8|6863|Liverpool U.K

spawnofthemist wrote:
i dont need one of those to own jets.

gimme a Type98 anyday.

Lol your not serious .

2006-07-29 01:28:47

#18

(US)THE.DEVILS.HITMAN: Member; +88|6923|Boise, Idaho

Okay listen up this is not very important but I have to point this out. There are five missles and you said four so you might want to edit your post so where is my +1

2006-07-29 01:46:56

#19

EvilJebus: Member; +11|7004

Yeah, pretty sweet stuff in real life, but if it ever found its way to Battlefield I'd still be better off trying to kick the guy in the balls instead of trying to use whatever "hightech" war fighting is lying around, it's probably nerfed anyway.

2006-07-29 02:06:38

#20

daffytag: cheese-it!; +104|6954

I went to farnborough also. I liked how the MiG-29 was pulling of all those great monouvers, shame bf2's isnt like that . Also is it me or do the jets in BF2 seem a little bit to small? The ones at farnborough really did seem quite big. Especially the F-15.

Last edited by daffytag (2006-07-29 02:08:24)

2006-07-29 13:57:21

#21

USAFDude_1988: Will fly for food.; +120|6888|Daytona Beach, FL

ronin|THE.DEVILS.HITMAN wrote:
Okay listen up this is not very important but I have to point this out. There are five missles and you said four so you might want to edit your post so where is my +1

Oh well I could've sworn there were four on the Humvee at Farnborough.

daffytag wrote:
I went to farnborough also. I liked how the MiG-29 was pulling of all those great monouvers, shame bf2's isnt like that . Also is it me or do the jets in BF2 seem a little bit to small? The ones at farnborough really did seem quite big. Especially the F-15.

Yeah the MiG-29OVT was doin some awesome maneuvers. Its a brand new type of MiG though.. it was first flown just last year, Mikoyan Guervich officialy renamed it the MiG-35. Plus if it was in BF2, well it would be eating J-10s for breakfast.

Nah I don't think the planes are undersized, I see F-15s all the time.. they seemed to be scaled right.

2006-07-29 18:26:48

#22

VeNg3nCe^: ¦Tactics Øver Principles¦; +314|7084|Antarctica

USAFDude_1988 wrote:
ronin|THE.DEVILS.HITMAN wrote:
Okay listen up this is not very important but I have to point this out. There are five missles and you said four so you might want to edit your post so where is my +1
Oh well I could've sworn there were four on the Humvee at Farnborough.

daffytag wrote:
I went to farnborough also. I liked how the MiG-29 was pulling of all those great monouvers, shame bf2's isnt like that . Also is it me or do the jets in BF2 seem a little bit to small? The ones at farnborough really did seem quite big. Especially the F-15.
Yeah the MiG-29OVT was doin some awesome maneuvers. Its a brand new type of MiG though.. it was first flown just last year, Mikoyan Guervich officialy renamed it the MiG-35. Plus if it was in BF2, well it would be eating J-10s for breakfast.

Nah I don't think the planes are undersized, I see F-15s all the time.. they seemed to be scaled right.

I thought all the BF2 vehicles were scalled 3/4 size?

2006-08-13 00:50:23

#23

Twist: Too old to be doing this sh*t; +103|6902|Little blue planet, milky way

Sweet mother of god.. Just PRAY that you're not the passenger on that thing when the driver decides to fire those missles without warning.... You may need a new haircut !

2006-08-13 00:58:38

#24

Stags: Member; +26|7035

lol.

I'd love to see that in BF2... just for the kick of it. Other than that... no not really... unless it was on like Karkand because then people would really say WTF. (Dice's answer to the Armorwhores, replaces all armor with SLAMRAAMs)

Excalibur is pretty sweet... although I do think they use that in BF2 already. Arty is already deadly accurate (just point and click... )

2006-08-13 20:49:22

#25

CITYHUNT3R: Member; +15|6847|Winnipeg

I think it'd be pretty good addition - powerful when facing the right way, but really vulnerable from behind or the side. Unless the missile holder thing can swivel, that is.

Last edited by CITYHUNT3R (2006-08-13 20:49:49)

BF2S Forums SLAMRAAM - And you thought AA was bad enough..

aardfrith wrote:

seymorebutts443 wrote:

USAFDude_1988 wrote:

seymorebutts443 wrote:

seymorebutts443 wrote:

USAFDude_1988 wrote:

seymorebutts443 wrote:

max wrote:

USAFDude_1988 wrote:

seymorebutts443 wrote:

d3v1ldr1v3r13 wrote:

spawnofthemist wrote:

ronin|THE.DEVILS.HITMAN wrote:

daffytag wrote:

USAFDude_1988 wrote:

ronin|THE.DEVILS.HITMAN wrote:

daffytag wrote:

Board footer