This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
2 Likes
@LeeyLeey
AIM-7* use, AIM-54 will act the same cause ARHs don’t talk to the host radar once they go pitbull.
Modern HUD doesn’t matter for 2 of the 3 game modes, and barely matters for the 3rd that I play consistently enough.
So yeah, it’d be a sidegrade.
The problem with your statement regarding the F-20 is with the way it was added in-game, it’s virtually the hypothetical “production” standard (at least for post-1979 but pre-1986/1988). Only thing really missing would be the arrestor hook, which I presume would be the exact same one ripped off an F-5E (I should see about bug-reporting it, soon…).
Big reason why the F-20 was mentioned here though is that it currently carries AIM-9L it never even did captive carry tests on, let alone test-firing. Afaik the three prototypes only went through separation tests of the AIM-9J/P, AIM-7F, AGM-65B, and Mighty Mouse FFARs. There’s also the fact that had the F-20 entered service with the intended customers, it likely wouldn’t have had AIM-9L integrated until the 1990s at the earliest (seeing as AIM-9L wasn’t even widely available for export until then, instead just being restricted to close allies and NATO nations).
The F-20 we have was one that had all its weapon systems installed.
This was prior to AIM-120s which were intended for future development but the project got canned.
Now, whether the weapon-capable one had everything it has in WT, I know the fuel tanks, AIM-9s, and AIM-7s are correct, but that’s where my knowledge ends.
Technically, all three prototypes actually ended up testing-firing weaponry, however only two actually had the full avionics set (Prototype 2 started without it, but was retrofitted with the APG-67 after Proto 3 had flown).
As for the AMRAAM, that was more of an advertising thing. Iirc actual integration wouldn’t have been tested until after Prototype 4 had flown, and Prototype 3 was heavily modified with the APG-67 ERR, larger/re-designed nose, and F404-GE-100A (18,000 lbf instead of 17,000 lbf). I should also mention AMRAAM just outright wasn’t available for testing during the entire duration of the Tigershark program (1979-1986).
As for your third point: It does not in-fact have everything it actually tested. It is currently missing its AIM-9J/Ps that it actually test-fired, and is also missing the Sergeant Fletcher 275 gallon drop tanks, which it also flew with (it should be noted that there are virtually no pictures of any Tigershark with the 150 gallon drop tanks). To go even further, AIM-9L was never integrated on any of the flying prototypes, nor was it even captive carried (as I stated in my comment above your response).
Truth be told, the Tigershark’s history/development is extremely convoluted, to the point it’s hard to find actually accurate info beyond surface-level. Also this has gotten wildly off topic (I really shouldn’t have responded because this exact thing would happen lmao. I guess my Tigershark 'tism is a bit too strong at times…)
2 Likes
F-14D upgrades over F-14B:
Vastly better radar (Best Mechanical Radar in the world and on par with Captor-M irl)
Additional IRST and ECM/EW systems
DFCS for better stability, overall boost to high AoA and turn abilities
better AtG weaponry (LJDAM, possibly HARM)
better AtA weaponry (Aim-9M (also Aim-9X eventually), Aim-7P, Aim-54C+ ECCM “Super Phoenix”, possibly Aim-120A/B up to quantities of 8-10, Towed Decoy CMs, Unlocked BOL pylons for Max CMs at all times)
Entirely new cockpit and displays for Sim
Idk what you consider a sidegrade, but this is a straight upgrade to me. Almost every conceivable thing about the plane has been upgraded. And every single shortcoming of the F-14 (except for its pure size tbf) is resolved here.
4 Likes
All things I’ve said myself, except 9X as F-14D was never even tested to see if it could use them, and same with AIM-120s where that was only tested on a select F-14D test platform, a decent event vehicle option.
The radar sadly only matters if you bring AIM-7s over AIM-54s, which you are now correctly forced to choose between thanks to the cooling system.
ECM/EW is still not in War Thunder.
The AIM-9Ms are better for now, but if F-14B gets them then it’s identical weaponry; which is why I want F-14B to keep AIM-9Ls as the best IR missile it gets.
Both of our statements is admitting it’s a sidegrade.
Funnily enough, the whole reason I want the -14D is because of the new cockpit. I absolutely love flying some planes in cockpit view with full real controls (and not even in sim battles, just pilotage), especially when their cockpit is a definite mix between the ol’ steam gauge era and high(ish) tech cassette futuristic MFDs and digital HUD era.
If only the US used A-4Ms with such upgraded cockpits… :<
2 Likes
The Aim-9X is backward compatible with Aim-9M carriers. The only feature of the 9X that doesn’t translate to backward compatible planes (to my knowledge) is the HMD high-off boresight feature, which isn’t present on the F-14.
Aim-120s surprisingly have more direct evidence than the Aim-9X, with sources published before, during, and after its service all detailing that the F-14D was compatible with the AMRAAM. (Including the official SAC).
Not on the F-14D. New Phoenix’s full name is the Aim-54C+ (ECCM/Sealed) which eliminates the need for direct coolant from the Tomcat.
I agree with these things. (This is why I agree with the F-14B getting foldered with the A and not the D getting foldered with the B)
Eh. Not really. A sidegrade implies it’s losing something for all these upgrades it’s getting. It’s only gaining stuff.
2 Likes
Wrong
Wrong
Prove it then. Search through the code of the game and prove they do that now.
Cause k_stepanovich said it’s not a thing in War Thunder a few months back.
And guess what? He’s not the radar dev, k_stepanovich is.
And it is very easy to observe ARHs falling back to IOG(being updated by host aircraft DL) when targets are Notching.
1 Like
F-14B(u) with JDAM and still legacy hud and 9L from 1977… well
1 Like
Used in literally every F-14, including the A model.
I don’t even know where the idea came from that it was only used in the B model.
6 Likes
Every time I dig for information on aircraft these days I keep getting trash from model hobbiest websites. Especially the F-14. It’s starting to become really annoying.
3 Likes
Tbh, still understandable for tomcat cases because post 1980s flight manuals are still classified.
Home of mats is at least a reliable source since it sources several actual flight manuals, but we don’t know how many of them are not classified.
I like mats but looking for dates and variations on their site is not the best.
1 Like
Good. Glad my suspicions were 100% correct.
They’re not meta, but they dictate the flow of the early match by forcing essentially everyone to hug the deck, especially in a down-tier. I love the A Tomcats (have not played the B), yeah the phoenix isn’t the best, but putting it at 13.0 (which is what giving it 9Ls will do) would see it get stomped in uptiers more than it already does