I saw someone saying the JASSM is incapable of flying below 3000 ft. Is that true?

I saw someone saying the JASSM is incapable of flying below 3000 ft. Is that true?

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Clearly not, based on your image. In all seriousness though, I don't see why that would be the case. It's a sub-sonic craft using an air-breathing engine. The closer to sea level, the more air to help burn the fuel. Although engines can be optimized for different altitudes, I can't think of a reason why it couldn't fly as low as you want.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The argument was that it didn’t have TERCOM so it was limited to 3,000 ft

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It used GPS. Flight plans are mapped out prior to launch and altitudes are chosen. If they want it to fly down into a canyon it will. The first time it ever got used it was flown low behind terrain features.
        >Through the use of a stealthy airframe, low-altitude ground-skimming flight, and the ability to fly around known enemy defenses, JASSM was a “day one” weapon capable of attacking targets on the very first day of an air campaign before enemy air defenses were shut down.
        >low-altitude ground skimming flight

        https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a19843076/syria-attack-jassm-er-new-long-range-strike-missile/

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Tercom is ancient tech

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          It used GPS. Flight plans are mapped out prior to launch and altitudes are chosen. If they want it to fly down into a canyon it will. The first time it ever got used it was flown low behind terrain features.
          >Through the use of a stealthy airframe, low-altitude ground-skimming flight, and the ability to fly around known enemy defenses, JASSM was a “day one” weapon capable of attacking targets on the very first day of an air campaign before enemy air defenses were shut down.
          >low-altitude ground skimming flight

          https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a19843076/syria-attack-jassm-er-new-long-range-strike-missile/

          No you don't understand, GPS is horribly inaccurate and systems developed in the 70s and 80s are clearly the best.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >GPS is horribly inaccurate
            I know your joeking, but my fancy civilian receiver gets a claimed 1cm horizontal/2cm vertical error, and in truth its far more consistent that would imply, with readings even years apart rarely being more than a hundredth of a foot (~0.3cm) off. I do have access to M-code, which I hope is not the case for JASSMs navigation system.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >I do have access to M-code, which I hope is not the case for JASSMs navigation system.
              M-code upgrade for JASSM starts deliveries in Feb 2026 at the rate of 5-10 missiles per month.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                it seems like autocorrect fucked me, I do NOT have M-code, and I assume JASSM does

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Not currently, but as I said, deliveries start in Feb 2026, so it's coming.
                I believe most JASSMs in service have jam-resistant GPS modules from like 2015/16. Which should be good enough until M-code becomes the standard.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              It is physically impossible to have lower than 5m CEP with GPS. M code is the same accuracy with a slightly boosted signal to reduce the ease with which it is jammed.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Lol that's not true at all.

                You just need 2 signals to compare, then subtract their difference from each other, and boom, you get sub centimeter accuracy with GPS.

                M-code helps even more since the GPS III satellites have "spot" beams that can be directed to provide extremely high signal strength to a specific targeted region to overpower any potential GPS jamming.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >You just need 2 signals to compare, then subtract their difference from each other, and boom, you get sub centimeter accuracy with GPS.

                Retard detected.

                >https://www.gps.gov/technical/ps/2008-SPS-performance-standard.pdf

                >M-code helps even more since the GPS III satellites have "spot" beams that can be directed to provide extremely high signal strength to a specific targeted region to overpower any potential GPS jamming.

                I already said this, an extra 20db of signal makes jamming harder, it doesn't make it impossible by any means.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                here you go from 7 fucking years ago using consumer grade equipment.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You're literally proving my point that it's a hard limit of GPS, finding work around using other tech doesn't somehow change the capabilities of GPS.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Not him, but that's D-GPS.

                https://i.imgur.com/ruWpcz8.jpg

                I saw someone saying the JASSM is incapable of flying below 3000 ft. Is that true?

                Has everyone in this thread forgotten that radar (and even laser) altimeters exist? It doesn't take much power to detect the ground 50' below you, so it's not like you're ruining your stealth profile by using one.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >radar
                yes, we know, we're just teasing OP about it
                >altimeters
                it's not just about knowing how high you are, it's about knowing where you are and being able to steer a Mach 0.8+ missile around hills, trees and buildings, navigate a map by reference to those objects and hit the target (by the way, CEP doesn't necessarily have anything to do with GPS by the way)

                and the answer is synthetic aperture radar

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You clearly have never worked with land surveying, or GPS-assisted farming robots or similar shit.

                You just need 2 GPS signals to calculate to a very high degree of accuracy.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Have you considered why you need to make an average from multiple readings? it couldn't possibly be because the system itself can't provide much more than 5m CEP?

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You don't need to average, you just need to compare and correct between the two signals continuously.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >You don't need to average, you just need to compare and correct between the two

                >you just need to compare and correct between the two

                You are no longer worth my time based retard.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >have two GPS antennas connected to two different GPS satellites simlteaounsly

                >every time the antennas get a ping, they BOTH report to the computer their positions, the computer takes both of these positions, and finds the difference between them, That's your ACTUAL position within a centimeter or two.

                Again, as long as you have access to two GPS signals and you have two antennas and can compare both of them at the same time, you can do real time correction to that and you have very high accuracy.

                >You don't need to average, you just need to compare and correct between the two

                >you just need to compare and correct between the two

                You are no longer worth my time based retard.

                You're literally proving my point that it's a hard limit of GPS, finding work around using other tech doesn't somehow change the capabilities of GPS.

                Lmao please continue to explain to me how GPS doesn't have centimeter-level accuracy for missiles.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                None of which is part of the GPS standard.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                What does this have to do with the JASSM? Your arbitrary lines in the sand don’t mean anything. The fact is the US can use gps combined with whatever tech they want to get their missiles to fly through the eye of a needle

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Thanks for conceding

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >if I insist you are wrong, even in the face of overwhelming proof to the contrary, I'm still actually right.

                Because we have functional examples of sub-centimeter accurate GPS working in the real world on consumer level products, you don' have to concede, we all know you're wrong. Hell even you know you're wrong, you just too retarded/stubborn to admit it.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >sub-centimeter accurate GPS

                Not part of the GPS standard.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Someone should tell the military, i'm sure they'd love to know.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                not him but holy shit you are dumb as fuck

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Retard

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Dont they use differential GPS?

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                That's one method and generally will be used for a long term setup where you'll need that accuracy in the same area all the time.

                But active real time comparison using 2 active GPS signals works too, it just generally costs a bit more and can be more complicated to set up, and makes the most sense for someone that needs very high GPS accuracy all over the world (or county/state) without needing to have a set known GPS position like us done with differential GPS.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You can do error correction with any combination of repeated readings at a known location (or even velocity), readings from more than one receiver a know distance apart and/or readings from a network of base stations in known locations to allow you get get much better results than the system's base accuracy.
                >verification not required

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >REEE THE US ARMY CAN'T DO THIS IT'S NOT CIVILIAN STANDARD
                are you high?

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Never said that, I'm simply stating a fact about GPS not being able to produce sub 5m accuracy.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                and you think somehow this precludes the military from having a method of doing it which you have not a clue about?

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                A single GPS signal sure.

                But you're retarded if you think they wouldn't just add a 2nd GPS antenna for centimeter level accuracy.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >this bro doesn't know about PPK and RTK
                and you can bet your ass they shove enough processing power into that multi-million dollar cruise missile to compute that shit in realtime

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                This might be the most pedantic argument I've seen this year.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >chairs are only three feet tall so you can't go higher than three feet high by standing on a chair
                >if I stack two chairs I can be six feet high. If I stack three chairs I can be nine feet above the ground
                >reeeeeee it's physically impossible to be higher than three feet off the ground while standing on a chair! Reeee
                This bro really said

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >it didn’t have TERCOM so it was limited to 3,000 ft
        Lmao
        What a retard

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    LRASM uses the same hardware more or less just different software and it's a sea-skimming anti ship missile. So clearly the hardware is capable of low altitude flight.

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >I have proofs look at this photo of a terminal dive.

    ? reminds me of retards thinking a TLAM would impact the pentagon at an almost 90 degree angle not stooping from 500 ft at 45 degrees.

    It says a lot that I can't even tell which side is more autistic in this JASSM operational height argument. Just because OP is right almost by accident doesn't mean he isn't low functioning autistic

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It’s just a random picture friend why are you so upset

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        He is low functioning autistic

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Then how does it get above that to begin with?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Anon...it's an air-to-ground missile, you fire it from a plane.

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Someone post the JASSM sea skimming video

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >be me, burger pilot on the prowl for targets of opportunity
    >command radios in with a time sensitive HVT in a building up ahead
    >not enough time to close into JDAM range, so I fire my AGM-158 Joint Air to Surface Standoff Missile at the target instead
    >forget that the JASSM cannot fly below 3000 feet, making the engagement of ground targets impossible
    >watch helplessly as my million dollar missile veers off into space and the target escapes
    >commamd is gonna be pissed

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It can hug terrain

  8. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >This amount of replies to a warriortard bait thread
    Kek

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      What

  9. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Is that true?
    It's clearly below 3000 feet and about to crash, so I'd say it is obviously true.

  10. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Test models remain in perpetual orbit being unable to descend. It's like Kessler Syndrome but with JASSM. The new model, Joint Inertial System Missile cures that problem by spattering over target from far above. JISM will be decisive on future battlefields.

  11. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    So…JASSM is a Tomahawk and JSM is a JDAM, correct?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      No

  12. 3 weeks ago
    sage

    why is warriortard a useless NEET?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Oh he’s mad

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        and warriortard is still a useless NEET

  13. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I didn’t realize how good the JASSM was until I started researching it

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >the video in question
      >no mention that the ghost of Kiev was the gunner
      clown

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *