Don’t make me laugh dude, no one can know the RCS of the Su-57
1 Like
None of these aircraft in-game have AESA radars, nor should they receive them as it would be WILDLY ahistorical.
The AN/APG-68 family as a whole, the AN/APG-63v1, and the AN/APG-65 are NOT AESAs.
The first applicable AESAs of these aircraft are the AN/APG-80 or AN/APG-83 (40/42++, 50/52+, 60, 70/72) for the F-16, the AN/APG-63v3 for the F-15, or the AN/APG-79.
Can you tell me what aircraft in-game have these radars listed? Why do you think they “should” have them now, if the variants in-game were never fielded with them? How is what they have currently “wrong”?
5 Likes
You must be dyslexic. The F-15C in-game has an AN/APG-63v1.
Almost no F-15Cs in service field the AN/APG-63v2, as it is a WILDLY unreliable system. It cost $15M per unit and was only given to a dozen ANG platforms, coming out to less than 8% of the operationally capable F-15C fleet.
Then you have the APG-63v3… This was first put into F-15s a year after the model we have in-game.
Yes, those are also heavily upgraded variants. Those being upgraded are already gen 4.5 fighters, and possess a myriad of upgrades that put it to the standards of a Viper. The radar itself is not a standalone upgrade that you can cherry pick, if you wish to have an upgraded F-16 (as said before, 40/42++ or 50/52+) then you can put it in suggestions. I’d love to see my 42++s in game.
6 Likes
Yes, because that’s what the F-15C MSIP-II was given.
The F-15Cs equipped with the APG-63v2 were part of a bombardment group, and only 1 singular squadron of 5 were given it in the group… That also translates to every other ANG base and even active aircraft, with that 1 singular squadron being the only F-15s to ever operate the AN/APG-63v2.
Our F-15C in-game is from Oregon, not Alaska. It was from an entirely different ANG wing, which purely operated the base 2005 spec MSIP-II model. Seeing as it isn’t modelled after an Alaska ANG aircraft, nor does it have the possibility of receiving an AN/APG-63v3, I don’t see how any option of it receiving an AESA is viable or even needed.
2 Likes
Incorrect.
Also incorrect.
The F-15C ingame is modeled with JHMCS, ehich means it is a mid 2000s aircraft. The APG-63v2 was the first operational AESA, equipping an entire squadron of F-15Cs by the end of 2000. It not being equipped with one ingame is a balance choice, as that is also a valid configuration.
The specific tail number they chose to base the skin on does not matter, and if it did, would not be in ANG service until well after it had recieved the 63v3 radar.
12 radars.
Only 4.5, and that only brings it down to the MiG-35… Which was nothing but a grasp at relevancy. Almost nobody operates it (which was its purpose, being an export-oriented aircraft) and very few exist. At this point there are more Su-57Ms than MiG-35s.
Yeah… Except for MAWS and RWR. “Passive radar modes” are nothing but missile handoffs, and will still alert an enemy that they are either spotted or have been launched on. On top of having radar coverage of quite literally every angle, it has a very high chance of spotting an incoming missile.
It most definitely does not have the RCS of an F-18… Unless you mean to tell me the F-18 is now a VLO aircraft.
Ah yes, AIM-260s… Almost as prevalent as the Mako!
1 Like
Can you point to an aircraft in-game that has an AESA?
Tell me again that I’m incorrect after doing such.
The v2 was never mass produced, nor was it more than a test venture done through an ANG unit that decided to commission them. They were immediately switched to 63v3s half a decade later.
It not being equipped on the one in-game (a 2005 model) has nothing to do with being a “balance choice”, it’s the fact that our current MSIP-II model is what was standard for the United States at the time. A handful of one-off aircraft is by no means a regular choice.
The camouflages made for the aircraft equate to a model aircraft that it was based upon. Our block 50 in-game is based directly on an iteration of 91-391 from 2010, and in-game reflects things as such.
Why wouldn’t it be in ANG until after it received it? The 123rd received their F-15Cs 8 years prior to upgrading a handful of airframes’ radars.
There are 12 N036 radars on the Su-57.
x1 N036
x2 N036B
x1 N036Kh
x8 N036L
Lmfao thats rich. It equipped an entire squadron. That far surpasses what many aircraft in game could hope to accomplish.
That is as far from accurate as it gets and there are numerous examples of such.
I find it hard to believe it could both be “in the configuration it was in 2005” and “in the configuration it was when it joined the 123rd in the ORANG”, given it was assigned to an ACTIVE DUTY squadron in Japan in 2005 and was so until very recently. 85-123, the specific jet livery you are so pent up over, is what I’m referring to in case it wasn’t clear. And funnily enough, you can find the exact same aircraft in Elmendorf, AK livery. The same place the 63v2s were sent. It is entirely possible the exact aircraft ingame was modified with it.
It was a balance decision to give it the 63v1, one I’m not arguing with, but to say it couldn’t have been the 63v2 is plainly false.
5 Likes
Thanks for the info, but I’ve only heard of 6 radars.
1 Like
I’m of the opinion that we are missing air-to-air missiles more than we are actually missing airframes, AESA, and sensor fusion. We could expect to see F2 with AESA in the near future but we should expect more missile progression first than other stuff.
A list of missiles that are still yet to be added:
AIM-9X Block 1, AIM-9X Block 2, AIM-120C-5, AIM-120C-8/D, AIM-260, AIM-174, R-74, R-74M, R-77-1, R-37, PL-5E, PL-10, PL-15, PL-17, IRIS-T, ASRAAM, MICA IR, MICA NG EM, MICA NG IR, Meteor, Derby ER, Python 4, Python 5, AAM-4B, AAM-5, AAM-5B.
This is 26 air to air missiles still missing from the game and I still might have missed some more.
This is also not pointing out that current missiles are still gimped and have acknowledged open reports on them.
5 Likes
27, you forgot ASRAAM Block 1 and ASRAAM Block 6
:P
I have one question for you, how will adding any of these things be monetizable?
1 Like
Is there enough information known or available for Gaijin to model the differences?
Potentially, though Id imagine about as much as there is for half the missile you listed
An entire squadron… 18 aircraft. Less than a quarter of the bg.
Far surpasses? There were close to 190 F-15Cs of the exact same specification that we have in game.
Yes, simply say there are numerous examples. Don’t give the examples, simply say that they exist and leave it at that.
Which means exactly diddly squat. A Group is just for organizing personnel. It has basically nothing to do with aircraft.
Yes… And? That has nothing to do with what I’m saying. Outfitting an entire squadron is far more service than “one off’s” or many of the literal single digit production number aircraft ingame.
F-14A, F-4E, both F-16ADFs, both A-10s, A-7K.
I can keep going if you’d like, doesn’t really seem necessary.
Whats more telling is you completely ignoring it being a ‘specific aircraft as displayed ingame’ when shown that ‘specific airframe’ doesn’t even lineup with their supposed date.
Again, for balance reasons, it shouldn’t have the 63v2 right now. But saying it can’t is patently false.
Except there is very much information known for the differences of aim9x block 1 and block 2, python 4 and python 5. I can’t say the same for asraam block 1 and 6
1 Like