Analysis on why the f-16a block 10 is borderline useless for air RB:

and i applaud your copium 👏👏👏

The F16 block 10 is the best turn fighter in all top tier.

However, I do see your complaint. Also I got into the block 10 last night and it seems that if your missile do not have IRCCM its very unlikely of sucess in a CM rich environment.

Iduno I still would not say useless its really hard to die in the block 10 and just got to be more judicial in when you fire Ls or pythons.

I will play it today a few games and see what’s going on.

Additionally, Fox 1s are a liability imo. The aim7M is not modeled and they fly very slow compared to the R27 with no midcourse guidance like they should have. I always fly the A+C with just Aim9Ms, Ls. The F16 was designed not to dogfight with heavy radar missiles & pylons hanging from it and the difference is night and day. It was originally designed to be a very slick knife fighter slinging small, short-range IRs.

They also nerfed the ACM range for the new F16s to 9km (1km shorter than the Mig29 interestingly). More reason to use just aim9Ms.


F-16A and Netz are possibly the worst 12.0/12.3 aircraft in game since the last patch because of their lacking weaponry. They only have AIM-9L/Python-3 which don’t cut it anymore as primary weaponry.

1 Like

besides the fucktastic fog effects that completely nullify fox2’s unless they’re an r60m or a magic 2 with great all aspect sensitivity. This makes aim9l’s 100 percent useless even as active countermeasure to take down incoming fox1’s. Flying a mere gunfighter at 12.3 feels like going back to the f-2 sabre dealing with su25’s everywhere; you fly better but you’re useless cause you don’t have the weaponry to cope.

If you’re useless, it’s because you use it wrongly,…

I have no problem playing my F-16A with Only AIM-9L,…

1 Like

Like every missiles,… sooooooooo,… how can this is a problem?

You’re may be good players (or think so) but most of your post on this threads are wrong, make no senses, or are completely forgetting some part of current game/physics,…

Make it better, for now it’s just a big comical thread.

You never even played the F-16A…

1 Like

I have F-16 ADF on which i never use AIM-7 despite being good missiles, because i always end up dieing when i try to use them.

As i don’t want to have a lost missile for nothing, i keep on locking, and end up killed by another AIM-7/R-27

So,… now i only AIM-9L

Mid-course is not necessary for a missile whose seeker limited and no datalink / inertial guidance… It requires lock from moment of launch to point of intercept… there is no LOAL as there is on R-27R/ER for AIM-7 until AIM-7P block 2.

That is not very smart…

Can someone translate this into English thanks.

No AIM-7 until AIM-7P Block 2 has mid-course update capability. The rest are all guided by STT, must maintain lock from start to finish and there is no inertial guidance feature for any AIM-7 in the game.


source, please.

The next version of the AIM-7 was the AIM-7M , whose main new feature was the new inverse monopulse seeker for look-down/shoot-down capability in a new WGU-6/B (later WGU-23/B) guidance section. There is no evidence of any Sparrow variants officially designated -7J/K/L (although the designation AIM-7J is sometimes associated with the AIM-7E license-built in Japan). Source [2] says that the suffix “M” was deliberately chosen to mean “monopulse”, suggesting that suffixes J/K/L were indeed skipped. The monopulse seeker improves missile performance in low-altitude and ECM environments. Other new features of the AIM-7M are a digital computer (with software in EEPROM modules reprogrammable on the ground), an autopilot, and an active fuze. The autopilot enables the AIM-7M to fly optimized trajectories, with target illumination necessary only for mid-course and terminal guidance. The AIM-7M also has a new WDU-27/B blast-fragmentation warhead in a WAU-17/B warhead section. The first firing of a YAIM-7M occured in 1980, and the AIM-7M entered production in 1982.

This is indicative that the missile is not a copy paste Aim7F and it is not going to simply explode the second you drop a lock. Additionally, it should have better lower altitude performance than the Aim7F, but it is still exactly the same.

Let me know when you submitted your report on nerfing the insane performance of the R27ER. Still waiting for you to undermine any soviet weapon system. What about the 10km ACM of the mig29 (you know we can like 15km-20km). At the same time you simply want to stand by and watch GJ nerf the ACM range of the most advanced F16s to 9km range. Please just admit you are biased in everything you post.

Again, you still have not provided a single piece of evidence justifying that the Aim7M should be a copy paste of the Aim7F.

I am patient though. Still waiting,

1 Like

Per the NTSP (Navy Training System Plan), unclassified and unrestricted… there is no “rear receiver” on the AIM-7M, nor is it visible on any AIM-7 until the AIM-7P blocks. You cannot get mid-course updates without one. It is describing the guidance methodology of all AIM-7 sparrows, they come off the rail and find / begin their track after launch but require a STT and must be able to pick up the target returns from launch until it hits the target.

1 Like

All primary sources on the R-27ER over time have done nothing but buff it, this is not my fault. I didn’t even do most of these reports. The reports I did do to various missiles changed them historically, and I currently have a report open to buff the guidance of the AIM-7M to incorporate a modest loft and improved time to hit gains. There isn’t some crazy bias here.

It has been explains many times by the developers that they are not modeling the differences between conical scan and monopulse, which both buffs conical scan and in some ways nerfs monopulse. All seekers across the board are treated equally, which harms the performance of missiles such as the R-24, R-27 ultimately. This has been explained to you many many many many many times.

1 Like

What does this have to do with EEPROM modules

All those do is allow software to be re-programmed in the missile without replacing entire memory modules. Yes, I’d like to know what this has to do with EEPROM modules.

So because you do not see “a rear reciever” you therefore do not believe the missile has any midcourse update?

omg lol yes or no.

1 Like

It has no method of receiving mid-course updates, and cannot be fired without first some sort of return from a CW emissions device or a STT from the onboard radar. There is no inertial mid-course because the missile has no inertial guidance section to update information. This only changes on the AIM-7P.

1 Like


TARGET ILLUMINATION is a form of updates. It is literally a signal from the mothership radar.

It does not need another receiver just to tell the missile the general direction of the target. That is point of the autopilot. Yes, target illumination is required but the autopilot assist if the illumination is cut out for a moment. Jesus.

1 Like