No.
:P
10 Likes
Is there a link to this? I remember seeing it but I can’t find it.
I was making an intentional point to the “15 year gap” statement when it came to missiles, INTENTIONALLY
if we wanna talk about them actually entering service
" SM for Serijnyi Modernizirovannyi - “Serial Modernized”. Announced 2011, a specialized version of the thrust-vectoring Su-30MKI for the VKS to be produced by the [Irkut Corporation] NATO reporting name Flanker-H." AND
“The Su-30SM attained [full operational capability (FOC) in January 2018, by a resolution of the Russian president.”
and the F-18C
“The F/A-18C and D models are the result of a block upgrade in 1987”
Which is still a gap of 24-31 years, SO YES, i believe that the USA should get at least its missiles from the early 2000’s if not the aircraft.
I love how quotes such as this exclusively follow suggestions that are not balanced in the first place.
A) 9X is miles ahead of current IR A2A missiles aviable to planes
B) other advanced IR A2A missiles would be even worse (EFT with IRIS-T or Rafele with IR MICAs) to balance
C) US airframes arent as bad as to need 9X
7 Likes
And? The AIM-9M-1 and R-73 were both finalized in 1982, there is no “gap” in the date of either nations’ missiles.
In terms of capability, you have missing guidance enhancements on the 9M that aren’t reflected in the game (have fun trying to dictate an IRL missile’s PID analytics) while the R-73’s FM is gimped.
Both have their strongest attributes slightly misrepresented in-game, giving them pretty equal playing field.
And? Your current F-16C-50 was first procured in August of 2004, the exact spec of Su-30SM that you have in-game was first assembled in June of 2002.
Congratulations, you’re nitpicking the details of a third-rate aircraft that never received extensive modernization and funding.
Must have sucked to lose ACF, eh?
The current top-tier aircraft are an Aug '04 spec F-16C, an Aug '99 spec F-18C (not '87), and god knows whatever the hell the F-15E is supposed to be… I couldn’t care less, half of them don’t exist anymore so it’s irrelevant in my mind.
Why in the world would America get missiles from the '00s if not a single other nation would get them? No R-74M '750? Hell, that was the same date as the 9M-9. By this rate we should have the R-74M before the AIM-9X-1, giving us another 3 R-73 variants to go.
3 Likes
Even though the introduction of AIM-9X is too early and it will doom US mains eventually, for arguing’s sake, if we consider that AIM-9X is needed for F/A-18C because it is awful.
‘Finnish F-18C which still stucks with AIM-120B just passing by’’
Why OP completely ignore the ‘other hornets’ but claimed that [F/A-18C for USA] is needed to get AIM-9X to USA?
I just wonder.
This topic somehow reminded me about another topic about ‘USA needs to grab AIM-120C-7 exclusively to maintain superiority’
https://forum.warthunder.com/t/the-new-version-of-the-american-tech-tree-f15-e-f-18c-late-should-get-aim-120c7-to-adapt-to-the-current-wt-air-combat-landscape/
2 Likes
I would agree if we didn’t already have the MICAs and R-73s- both of which are significantly better DF missiles than the Aim-9M.
Actual competition against the Rafale/MICAs.
If you get AIM-9X, french will have access to the IIR version of MICA.
and will use it against you with the AAM version of MICA, which you are already seeing.
Then things will be even worse to ya guys.
I’m okay with the IR MICA. The radar variant is already a death sentence. In fact- it might be better because flares might actually do something when all the tricks used to evade radar missiles dont work against the MICA.
Okaaay… Good luck with evading rain of ASRAAM/IRIS-T/MICA while you need to get a lot closer to them for AIM-9X :|
I somehow managed to understand why US mains wants to get AIM-9X that badly, but it will not going to be a magical solution to current problem.
Things will get even worse, mate.
The tech gap will be wider, and you will be craving more.
Alright theeen… I will go back to my Tonka and be ready to frag F-15E with ASRAAM when that time has come. :|
spectral countermeasures and its BOL if/when it gets it should help. IIR missiles are good but tbh i dont think they are all they are said to be, otherwise why not just make long range IIR missiles that DL their way to target instead of ARH missiles.
those tonkas will also have to deal with F-22’s
Good luck spotting the F-22S/f-35s and evading the onslought of Aim-120s coming your way with datalink from AWACS… But alas “balance”
TBH I would be fine with artificial game balance, if it’s actually balanced. Top tier is largely fake anyways. Just give everyone the same capabilities.
wheres the fun in that?
give the russians their full force r-73+hmd combo that was made to beat American fighters, and give the US the F-22 made to beat the Russian air force into a pulp :P
A valid question 2 years ago.
In year the year of our lord, 2025- a nullity. The people asked for copy paste, and they got copy paste.
You do know the USSR went bankrupt and collapsed right? From 1991 until about 2012 there was basically no Russian military development, that’s why there is a 20 year gap in military tech, all the stuff coming out around 2012 was things that where being developed in 1991 but had to be mothballed due to their economic collapse and they only started getting the money to restart the projects in the 2010s.
That is why Russia has 2012 tech at the same level as late 80’s, early 90s NATO tech.
3 Likes
they catching up fast tho
i find it especially funny how some people shit on American equipment then proceed to beg for US jets and tanks and act like putting US jets in the US is an affront to humanity
1 Like
The Su-30 is a modification of the Su-27 from 1977. It is not a 2012 development.