AAM-4B for F-2A

AAM-4 we have currently uses the status of the AAM-4 but the model of AAM-4B

Not to mention we have the Late version of the F-2A which has HMD AAM-4B and AAM-5/5B, (we can ignore aam5 for now to fit the balance)

but Why did they just ignore AAM-4B for japan + the F-2A’s HMD

4 Likes

I did get this document from a friend, not sure how real it is but he told me he got it from a public archive of sorts. I’ll ask for more details and let you know again if its real or fake :D

Maybe it was on me and i’m the one that followed everything wrong.

1 Like

the Japanese Mod.go has quite a bit of public information about the F-2A and its ability to use HMD+AAM-4B

It has been bug reported but gaijin put it as “not enough info” and refuses to let people put more info

1 Like

AAM-4 is already AIM-120C equivalent, especially with any further fixes.
AAM-4B is AIM-120C8+ equivalent which isn’t coming to the game.

120 countermeasures is not low.
F-15E does not carry 10 missiles.

it does not have 120 countermasures, it has 60 total. AAM-4 in game is quite literally worse for BVR than 120B with only positive going off rail quicker.

it has 120

2 Likes

i think the countermeasures is a bug tho, there is a bug report for it last i remember.

1 Like

This is correct, it has 120 not 60

Didn’t see the bug report then, my apologies

https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/hQX9V3yYZmc1

Also while we are here, ASM-2 is incorrect also on dev its ARH-IOG when its actually IR-IOG (with proof from jp mod.go public info)

I think its explosive mass is also wrong? its like 70kg explosive for a 600kg missile

1 Like

the F-2A’s in their current state is just plain wrong

idk how gaijin managed to fuck it up despite DMM being right there

4 Likes

Correct, it was accepted quickly and there were multiple bug reports on the matter.
And right now against a target 15 - 40km away the AAM-4 gets there sooner compared to AIM-120C-5 @AAM-3

Against a 20km target, both AAM-4 and AIM-120B get to the target at about the same time.
C-5 has a longer range because it lofts more, which slows it down. Even with a more powerful motor it will get to targets in a similar amount of time.

The seeker improvements of AAM-4B/AIM-120C8 [possibly C7 and C6 as well] are currently not necessities when AAM-4 still has some issues left to fix, even if C5 has inaccuracies.

@かがり
DEV IS NOT THE LIVE CLIENT!
Claiming placeholder things are wrong is just duh, they’re placeholder; they’re working on the code for the finished product for the placeholder stuff.

Gaijin knows the ASM-2 is IR guided, they’re finishing the code…

1 Like

Then gaijin should know the F-2A thats currently being added has AAM-4B as well as HMD, Sniper TGP, and if they “know” why havent they corrected it before? or even Just put a “Accepted” tag on the bug report for it?

sometimes not being a corpo bootlicker can make you realise how many mistakes they make

I couldn’t find them but what are the remaining issues for the AAM-4? If i may ask

2 Likes

The pic you have shown with the 63-8501, the pilot is not wearing any HMD but a FHG-2 helmet
image
F-15J pilot with JHMCS HMD helmet

2 Likes

image

Never knew 501 changed number

@かがり
Sniper targeting pod is coming to the game.
HMD is not present on F-2A on dev.
And AAM-4B model would be a general inaccuracy. Sometimes missiles are coded correctly but given the wrong model. AIM-9s have had this occur, PL-8s have, and apparently AAM-4. It’s a general mistake.

2 Likes

well AAM-4 is in the game for how long now? still uses the AAM-4B model

at this point its just neglect