F-5E Tiger II - Armament & Viability Discussion

[Scandiium 7]

• Northrop F5-E Tiger II

• Foreword

To start this thread I first want to note that I don't have access to classified or other declassified information that isn't publicly available.

This is solely based on research and online gathered documents which of I have compiled a report. All sources will be linked bellow.

 

As this plane is the predecessor of the F-16A ADF in the USA TT, which was added to the game in December 2022, some players including me

had become aware of some irregularities the F-5E brings with it. It had already gained some attention but seemingly not enough hence it inspired me to dig more into this topic.

Furthermore I want to add that I won't go into detail about it's current win rates and battles played.

I'm fully aware that those aspects aren't bad right now but that's because this plane is/was well used to grind the F-16A ADF.

 

 

 

 

• Armament & Combat Style

The Tiger II already is in a good spot regarding how it performs in battles. Due to its tight turn radius and high energy conservation it emerges as an excellent dogfight aircraft.

Yes, other planes you are facing will be faster and have other strong advantages but it defenitly wont be easy to shake this stinging bee off your six.

The real drawbacks are burried in its limited armament. To be specific, its air-to-air armament.

To further explain this I will be comparing the F-5E to other aircraft in the BR range.

 

 

1.) Short comparison of the missiles:

Spoiler

It is (sadly) correct that only 2 Aim-9s could be carried on the wing tips. Later versions of the F-5 could also carry 4 Aim-120 AMRAAMS underbelly but lets just disregard that. 

In War Thunder we also have access to two Aim-9s and that are the E and J versions. Those missiles aren't bad at all and fitting its style, but not at that BR.

 

See, for example you will face german MiG-21bis-SAU (11.0 BR as well) which are quite good at energy conservation but way worse at turning. 

Therefore you will defenitly win a dogfight. If you get there. The point I want to make is that the MiG-21bis-SAU can carry up to six R-60MK all-aspect missiles.

 

 

 

Or lets just take a look at the french Mirage F1C.

 

It is also good at dogfighting with a good turn radius but lacks a bit at keeping its energy. But contrary to the F-5E it has access to two Matra R550 Magic 2 missiles and adding to that three SARH missiles or

2 Matra R530E (IRH) and one Matra R530 (SARH) missile.

Matra R550 Magic 2s are beside the Aim-9L the best air-to-air weapons and just like the R-60MK, high G all-aspect.

 

 

 

 One more prime example is the also german Panavia Tornado IDS Marineflieger. Yeah the all bad event vehicle.

 

This heavy but fast thing is sitting rightfully at a 10.7 BR.

And here`s the big but , he gets Aim-9Ls.

If you are thinking "Well you can't just compare a heavy strike aircraft to an excellent jet fighter", I totally agree. You're dead right you can't.

Why am I doing it though? Easy enough. The battle rating plus the technical advancement.

Later on I will explain why.

 

 

 

Bellow you see part of how far Aim-9s have advanced in contrast to what the F-5E gets.

 

 

Here are the missiles stats lined up

 

 

The armament that you can take into battle is just old and outdated.

 

 

2.) The F-5Es true potential:

Spoiler

If the title above cought your interest, good. But here it is where the information online gets quite slim.

I still have dug out quite a bit.

 

Lets just start with what you can see on pictures. If you are an missile expert and can distinguish different variants from another you might could help me out here. I surely can't. This didn't stop me from looking into it more.

 

 

From what you can see here, they tend to differentiate from the color of the seeker tips and guiding fins.

To get a better picture of how the shapes changes, here's an easier picture:

 

 

How does that correlate to the F-5E now, you might ask?

Well let me go into detail and a bit back in history.

Luckily I'm Austrian and familiar to aviation (duh), so I do know that Austria had leased Swiss F-5Es in the time we got rid of the Saab 35 Draken until the we got the EFT.

To be exact, 12 planes were rented for four years and that timespan was roughly between 2005 and 2008.

 

So that got me asking and poking around what armament we had.

And through a few reliable sources, one linked bellow, I learned that we had Aim-9P5 missiles. 

 

 

If you're thinking now "So what?"

Hear me out.

This made me aware that the F-5E was well capeable of carrying better air-to-air ordinance.

(Couldn't find a better picture than that, excuse me on that one)

 

This is the so called Aim-9P5 missile. IIRC it was even more advanced than the Aim-9L we have in the game. Yes, also all-aspect.

So here's where I'm at. Why do we 'only' get Aim-9Js?

As seen in the comparison before, other planes outclass the F-5Es weaponry by a lot! And it would be technically correct to get better

missiles. I can only guess on that one but if a plane is able to utilise 9P5s then handling 9Ls shouldn't be a problem.

 

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not begging for a new missile to be implemented into the game, just something a bit better.

 

 

 

 

• Viability & Usability

This topic is about what really bothers a lot of players.

Firstly, no questions asked, the plane is playable. 

But this also is where the Tornado comes into play. As we have seen before it as well has only two Sidewinders and is way worse in any kind of dogfight but the strong point he has going for him is the speed.

As weak as he might be, he still has the most powerful engines and is sitting at a BR where he wont face rank VIII planes anymore even though he is one himself.

So if you're only comparing the Tornado IDS Marineflieger

to the F-5E (which is dumb I'm aware), then he is just getting benefitted while the F-5E is left out.

 

The other point, when it comes to repair cost the opinions of everybody merge.

They are just too high.

Compared to other planes in its class the repair cost of the F-5E is nearly double or at least 1/3 higher. (Completely ignoring some Rank VIII planes that are almost free)

You will burn through your SL easily in the stock grind wich just disappoints so many people.

Even when spaded you want to survive only not to pay that fee.

You can take a check it out for yourself or merely take a look in the spoiler where I compiled some examples.

 

Spoiler

USA  |  F-5E Tiger II  |  BR 11.0  |  Rank VII

 

 

USA  |  F-4J Phantom II  |  BR 11.3  |  Rank VII

 

 

Germany  |  MiG-23 MLA  |  BR 11.3  |  Rank VIII

 

 

Germany  |  MiG-21bis-SAU  |  BR 11.0  |  Rank VII

 

 

USSR  |  MiG-23MLD  |  BR 11.3  |  Rank VIII

 

 

Italy  |  F-104S.ASA  |  BR 11.3  |  Rank VII

 

 

Great Britain  |  Harrier GR.7  |  BR 11.7  |  Rank VIII

 

 

Sweden  |  JA-37C  |  BR 11.0  |  Rank VII

 

That said, even if you don't agree with the armament part, this doesn't sit right with me.

 

 

 

 

• Conclusion

I want to end my spoiler-wall and open the discussion with saying that this is no rant or crying at all.

Just maybe this encourages those people reading to think about it. Or maybe I'm biased and got into thinking that an overpowered plane deserves even more.

 

Anyways thanks for looking through the post and happy flying!

 

 

 

 

 

• Sources

Spoiler

^₁   MiG-21bis-SAU (Picture)

https://www.key.aero/article/east-german-mig-21s-cold-war-fishbeds

 

^₂   Dassault Mirage F1C (Picture)

https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/5999451

 

^₃   Panavia Tornado IDS Marineflieger (Picture)

.www.flickr.com/photos/classic_aviation/8217613627

 

^₄   Northrop F-5E Tiger II (Picture)

https://www.airliners.net/photo/Austria-Air-Force/Northrop-F-5E-Tiger-II/6233511

https://www.bundesheer.at/english/dynmod/artikel.php?id=2476

 

^₅   Aim-9 tech tree (sadly the picture isn't on the english wikipedia)

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIM-9_Sidewinder

 

^₆   Aim-9 models

 

^₇   Aim-9 shapes

https://plane-encyclopedia.com/cold-war/aim-9-sidewinder-missile-series/

 

^₈   Austrian F-5E stuff

http://www.doppeladler.com/oebh/luftfahrzeuge/f5tiger.htm

http://thecombatworkshop.blogspot.com/2017/10/sidewinder-overview-part-iv-aim-9jnp.html

 

 

 

Edited January 26 by Scandiium
Formatting & grammar

[Adr_Farling 228]

+1 would love to see it getting better missiles

You should do a proper suggestion so the Devs might see this ^^

[Scandiium 7]

19 minutes ago, Adr_Farling said:

+1 would love to see it getting better missiles

You should do a proper suggestion so the Devs might see this ^^

 

Considering that I'm very new to the forums and this being my first post I thought it might fit in here. How would I go about doing that?

[Adr_Farling 228]

21 minutes ago, Scandiium said:

 

Considering that I'm very new to the forums and this being my first post I thought it might fit in here. How would I go about doing that?

Go to Home -> Technical -> Moderated Suggestions -> Suggestions -> Aircraft Suggestions -> USA

There should be a template and an explanation how to do it 

[Ttttjjjhhh 21]

My mate is stock grinding this thing at the moment (luckily I spaded mine many a moon ago), and even with the new br update it's painful as it is a 12.0 full uptiers almost every game. I have rarely seen us get our BR.

With aim9Es as stock and no flares almost impossible to dodge the spam of aim9Ls, and you can't even research flares first haha

 

Surely the F5E can get a better starting missiles?  I agree if it had Aim 9Ls historically it would be nice to get them so it can compete with 12.0 BRs if that's is what it's facing 90% of the time.

[Cpt_Bel_V 4,426]

About making Better Missile, since it is AIM-9P5 able, you must ask for AIM-9P4 which is basically an underdog of AIM-9L

 

The aircraft itself still is pretty OK.

 

PS If you do it right, you can bring 2 AGM-65B to be used as Short range bad maneuvers AIM-7C ^^"

[Metalwave 1]

So I don't have any actual evidence to back me up here, but consider that the US version of the F-5E used in combat squadrons probably didn't carry Limas since it wasn't in service with the USAF that long. Sure other versions of the F-5E used the various Papa versions in other air forces, and USAF/USN F-5E/N Aggressors used inert Limas for training, but not in US combat service AFAIK. Again I don't have evidence to backup my statement, I only want folks to remember that what other services do isn't what the USAF did, and that's what the USAF F-5E model is based on.

 

I play top tier AB regularly and the F-5E, although no longer as competitive with the new update's planes, can still do serious damage if you get close in. If you watch your speed/energy, you can dance with Mig29's and F-16s no problem after merging for a turn or two (you're screwed after that if you don't kill them). I'd love better missiles and the guns are completely sub-par and in BVR combat you are forced to hide behind a mountain, but hey if that's what it was IRL that's all there is to it. Yes the stock grind blows hard, but that's true for all jets - grinding top tier planes comes with the understanding that you'll need a little patience (or cash) to spade. Like many previous top-dogs in WT, with the addition of newer, more capable planes, it's now just a support aircraft. Play it that way..

[csla1972 830]

Quote

Here are the missiles stats lined up

One minor detail. Statistics in the game often do not have the correct data. According to the game files, the R-60MK has a maximum range defined at 15km and Magic 2 at 18km. Here you can see table of missile stats. I just can't tell why the statistics cards show incorrect values.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1r9ko9WlEoNZtJLd37Is8MS4_sYqO9Mz3_lDs-y5EhNQ/edit#gid=1726112384

[Cpt_Bel_V 4,426]

1 hour ago, csla1972 said:

One minor detail. Statistics in the game often do not have the correct data. According to the game files, the R-60MK has a maximum range defined at 15km and Magic 2 at 18km. Here you can see table of missile stats. I just can't tell why the statistics cards show incorrect values.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1r9ko9WlEoNZtJLd37Is8MS4_sYqO9Mz3_lDs-y5EhNQ/edit#gid=1726112384

Might be because of altitude ^^"

[CodeNameColdWar 811]

15 hours ago, Metalwave said:

So I don't have any actual evidence to back me up here, but consider that the US version of the F-5E used in combat squadrons probably didn't carry Limas since it wasn't in service with the USAF that long. Sure other versions of the F-5E used the various Papa versions in other air forces, and USAF/USN F-5E/N Aggressors used inert Limas for training, but not in US combat service AFAIK. Again I don't have evidence to backup my statement, I only want folks to remember that what other services do isn't what the USAF did, and that's what the USAF F-5E model is based on.

 

I play top tier AB regularly and the F-5E, although no longer as competitive with the new update's planes, can still do serious damage if you get close in. If you watch your speed/energy, you can dance with Mig29's and F-16s no problem after merging for a turn or two (you're screwed after that if you don't kill them). I'd love better missiles and the guns are completely sub-par and in BVR combat you are forced to hide behind a mountain, but hey if that's what it was IRL that's all there is to it. Yes the stock grind blows hard, but that's true for all jets - grinding top tier planes comes with the understanding that you'll need a little patience (or cash) to spade. Like many previous top-dogs in WT, with the addition of newer, more capable planes, it's now just a support aircraft. Play it that way..

Even if F-5E getting x2 Aim-9P4/P5.

it wouldn't instantly become top dog or break the game in anyway. Especially if it going to fight F-14A/16A on regular basic (with BR compression)

 

About "historically / irl thingy".

Gaijin seem to follow to that as long as irl vehicle variants can use them and would allow them for balance purpose.

For example we have XM8 light tank with non us service round like C76A1 when it should have M833.

And now German F-4F using Aim-9J that never enter German service which Gaijin reply with "This is a balancing decision to have this missile"  .

 

[Cpt_Bel_V 4,426]

1 hour ago, CodeNameColdWar said:

Even if F-5E getting x2 Aim-9P4/P5.

it wouldn't instantly become top dog or break the game in anyway. Especially if it going to fight F-14A/16A on regular basic (with BR compression)

 

About "historically / irl thingy".

Gaijin seem to follow to that as long as irl vehicle variants can use them and would allow them for balance purpose.

For example we have XM8 light tank with non us service round like C76A1 when it should have M833.

And now German F-4F using Aim-9J that never enter German service which Gaijin reply with "This is a balancing decision to have this missile"  .

 

No,... about F-4F they answered you that they were mounted on the German F-4F for training exercice in USA.

[CodeNameColdWar 811]

2 hours ago, Cpt_Bel_V said:

No,... about F-4F they answered you that they were mounted on the German F-4F for training exercice in USA.

https://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/520107-remove-aim-9e-and-aim-9j-from-the-f-4f-and-put-it-in-the-tech-tree/&do=findComment&comment=8947441

Yes it is similar to F-5E and Aim-9P4/P5 case.

They were mounted for training exercice. Though didn't enter combat service for said aircarfts.

F-5E getting Aim-9P4/P5 shouldn't be much of a problem as you said.

Edited February 7 by CodeNameColdWar
Add more info.

[Very_merry_Jerry 1,200]

F-5E can carry AIM-9L/Ms. You can see photos of F-5E carrying CATM(Captive Air Training Missile)-9L/Ms below.

Spoiler

 

It is possible as the AIM-9L/M carry coolant container inside its GCS. It doesn't require external coolant inside the launcher.

 

[Cpt_Bel_V 4,426]

1 hour ago, CodeNameColdWar said:

https://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/520107-remove-aim-9e-and-aim-9j-from-the-f-4f-and-put-it-in-the-tech-tree/&do=findComment&comment=8947441

Yes it is similar to F-5E and Aim-9P4/P5 case.

They were mounted for training exercice. Though didn't enter combat service for said aircarfts.

F-5E getting Aim-9P4/P5 shouldn't be much of a problem as you said.

I'm OK for P4 currently.

[Adr_Farling 228]

Did anyone do a suggestion for this in the suggestion section?

Edited March 6 by Adr_Farling

[Shin_Kazama_ 180]

On 30/01/2023 at 07:12, Ttttjjjhhh said:

My mate is stock grinding this thing at the moment (luckily I spaded mine many a moon ago), and even with the new br update it's painful as it is a 12.0 full uptiers almost every game. I have rarely seen us get our BR.

With aim9Es as stock and no flares almost impossible to dodge the spam of aim9Ls, and you can't even research flares first haha

 

Surely the F5E can get a better starting missiles?  I agree if it had Aim 9Ls historically it would be nice to get them so it can compete with 12.0 BRs if that's is what it's facing 90% of the time.

The F-5E we have in-game could not use AIM-9Ls, as it lacked the proper rails.
It could use the AIM9-P-4 and maybe AIM-9P-5 (doubtful, since that missile didn't exactly enter wide scale production)

[Elijah1573 10]

+1 Id love to have this
The F-5E is way too expensive to run in the current meta with constant uptiers to 12.0 And its lacking missiles dont help
Afaik the Aim-9P-4/5 Would fly like a J But with a much improved seeker

[wrecklessduck 69]

I would like to see the F-5 (and other jets) get auto flaps, maybe with any luck we can see such a system and I feel that it shouldn't be that hard to pull off as the game already functions with auto leading edge slats/flaps. 

[Scandiium 7]

On 06/03/2023 at 08:27, Adr_Farling said:

Did anyone do a suggestion for this in the suggestion section?

I did. Made a better composed post the day after this one or so but it either got rejected or just voided. Either way never heard back from it again.

[Adr_Farling 228]

1 hour ago, Scandiium said:

I did. Made a better composed post the day after this one or so but it either got rejected or just voided. Either way never heard back from it again.

It probably wasn‘t approved yet.

[[email protected] 93]

All I can see for this plane is BR10.7 soon

[Alopen 46]

Repair cost is just unacceptable when this thing sees BR12.0 every single match. This fighter is clearly outdated and has no business in 12.0 matches. F4 is outclasses as well but has some tools to play with. Meanwhile, the F-5E is like taking a badass top of the line knife to a gun fight. And then it gets slapped with insane repair costs. It is basically unflyable at the moment at top tier with those repair costs. 

Edited March 21 by Alopen

[oom1992 576]

I agree developer consider AIM-9P-4 on F-5E in USA & China tech tree in the future but at 10.7 soon

[Russian_____Bias 128]

Due to the current game environment (r27s, T7 Premiums), F5E need a BR decrease urgently. This thing is literally flying RP pack in the current air RB matches.

[Cpt_Bel_V 4,426]

On 21/03/2023 at 14:50, oom1992 said:

I agree developer consider AIM-9P-4 on F-5E in USA & China tech tree in the future but at 10.7 soon

It's AIM-9P4 or 10.7,... but not both.