IIRC integration of those was cancelled.
Britain removed the missile wiring to the wing pylons to save weight, so that won’t happen unfortunately.
Originally the Tejas had the R-60 to be homologated, thing that was partially done, but abandoned as soon as the requirement changed to the R-73 (wing had to be reinforced due to the weight difference of both missiles). Years later the Python V was homologated and there are plans to also add the ASRAAM (and an indigenous version of it or something like that) to its armament choices, although this last ones are still plans for the future …
As for the long range missiles…the navy (who wanted a naval version of the LCA) issued a requirement that the LCA had to use the Elta 2032 + the Derby BVRAAM that the Indian harriers had, on the other hand the air force wanted to integrate the R-77 and the indigenous astra missile (thing that only very recently was accomplished) . The R-77 was never integrated and the air force had to content with the Israeli Derby…only recently (this year) the Astra was homologated.
As for capabilities, i think the missiles choices are quite potent, specially knowing that the Astra Mk.1 is on par with the R-77 (it was developed from it… it even uses the same seeker)
Some pics
R-60
R-77 displayed with the first technology demonstrator
Python V
Derby and R-73
Astra Mk.1
1 Like
yeah
The F-5C never carried flares, the German MiG-29 never carried the R-27E, the MiG-23ML couldn’t use the R-24, and the Yak-41M never existed. I think there’s a chance.
1 Like
but it is British
3 Likes
For reference regarding the FOX 3 missile available on the TEJAS
Max range:
Derby : 70/75 km
R-77: 80km
ASTRA MK1: 110 km in head on chase mode at 15km (90km for maneuverable target)
Maneuvrability:
ASTRA MK1: 35/40G
R-77: 40G
Derby: 40/50G
Seeker:
Derby: Active radar seeker with 12km range against fighter jet (poor ECCM)
R-77: 9B-1348 seeker with 16 km range for a medium size target (5M^2 RCS)
ASTRA MK1: Active radar seeker with 13-15km range for a 5^m Rcs target.
So those missile are pretty close in capabilities, you either get shorter range but greater maneuvrability (Derby) or longuer range and poorer maneuvrability (ASTRA MK1) or a mix or both (R-77)
For reference regarding the FOX 2 missile available on the TEJAS:
Max range:
R-73 : 30km
PYTHON 5: 40km
ASRAAM: 50km
Maneuvrability:
ASRAAM: 50/70G without TVC
R-73 : 55/60G with TVC
PYTHON 5: 70G without TVC (Lag pursuit)
Seeker:
R-73: MK-80 seeker with 2-element. 45° Gimbal limit before launch, 75° Gimbal limit after launch.
ASRAAM: Imaging seeker with 128128 pixels with 90° gimbal.
PYTHON 5: Imaging seeker dual waveband with 320240 pixel, 100° Gimbal limit.
*All of the classment were done from worst to best.
*Max range values are only an indication since we don’t know in what parameters those range are for.
3 Likes
like suits the role that we are lacking without it just being copy and paste
Thanks for the data!
Yep, its quite “potent” haha
very informative, thanks
The F-5C got flares to sell better, no other reason
The German MiG-29s got R-27s for balance reasons to match up with the russian MiG-29s
Not sure which MiG-23 variants could mount R-24s irl, but the premium ML got them to sell better and the MLA/MLD, should they also never have had them irl, got them to match up with the MLs capabilities (edit: just looked it up, the MLA/MLD had R-24s, so the premium ML has them to match up with the MLA/MLD)
The Yak-141 probably only got added because it looks cool and is unique to russia, secondary reason being the US also having 2 different rank 8 airframes. Personally I don’t have any problem with it though, since I love seeing prototypes ingame.
According to Gaijin the Spey Phantoms already are supposedly well balanced, so I don’t see them buffing them in any way anytime soon.
1 Like
What? MLD and MLA never used R-24 missiles irl?
From what I could gather online the MLA got R-24 capability in 1981 and the final version of the MLD also had R-24 capability
Heck, apparently the R-24 was a upgrade for the R-23 specifically developed for use on the ML/MLD
1 Like
Had me freaked for a minute mate.
Guess I worded it a bit weirdly, @FlyingOstridge claimed the ML couldn’t use R-24s tho
I literally didn’t know anything about the R-24s before and was just offering an explanation as to why the ML would have them ingame, should their claim be accurate
1 Like
The Spey Phantoms are not well balanced at all. They are much better than the F-4E but a side grade to the F-4J.
Pros: Better engines and 20mm Gau-4.
Cons: more drag, no HMD, no AIM-7F, Worse A/G weaponry, and no wing pylons for SARH.
I would like them to get the 1000lb mk N.1 and 540lb WT community bombs.
I know they really aren’t well balanced for 11.3 when the F-4J is more of an upgrade than a sidegrade (and the F-4S being a direct upgrade over the F-4J)
However, according to the latest Q&A Gaijin considers them to be balanced with their current loadout options and specs at 11.3
Spoiler
Q: With the recent BR changes, and other recent additions, several aircraft at 11.3 now have AIM-9L and/or Python 3. Have there been any reconsiderations for the British Phantoms to receive AIM-9L too?
A: We have looked into this based on feedback, however the British Phantoms already are balanced in terms of their overall efficiency at their current Battle Rating given their current loadouts. Adding AIM-9L to these aircraft is likely to naturally increase their effectiveness and as a result drive their BR up to 11.7. An increase in BR to 11.7 might lead to an increase in rank too, however right now Britain has a total of 4 aircraft on Rank VII. So there are numerous considerations to be made that currently means adding more advanced weaponry to them is not suitable at the moment.
Consider this
1 Like
Now we’re talking. I’d go for another 2200 kills with that one too.
2 Likes
I haven’t played it before (outside of dev servers) but with my track record with the FG.1 and FGR.2 I’d say it’s something I’d do great in.
Dunno what you are trying to tell me, but that sure is a nice looking RSAF Tornado ADV