wrong the Python-4 is not better than the R-74 or AIM-9X Block 1 you are confused with the Python-5, first of all the Python-4 was started to be developed in the mid-80s entered in service in 1994, the Python-4 IRL have a dual-waveband seeker IR/UV like the (AAM-3 that we have in game right now, its just gimped right now), second thing between the Python-4 and the AIM-9X Block 1 exist a 10 year of gap in the technological development of each missile its a HUGE GAP!!, the AIM-9X Block 1 have a way to much powerfull IIR seeker (IMAGING-SEEKER) (IRIS-T, ASRAAM, MICA-IR, PL-10 have this type too), the Python-4 is way less powerfull than those, the only dangerous thing about it is his manouvrability right now, can you understand guys for once that the Python-4 cannot be technological compared with missiles with IIR Seekers, LOAL, LOBL and INS.
just one thing my friend the Baz Meshupar is a 13.7 jet and it lacks 4 vital things that the other 13.7s have, TWS, Radar HMD, Datalink and Datalink channels just put you in context this jet does not have those 4 vital things being a 13.7 if you dont have the jet you cannot talk about it because you cant feel how it does in this meta just saying, people that did not play with this jet cannot say anything about this.
also about the Python-4 there is no comparable missile because the Python-4 is the best of this generation that we have in game, you are insanely wrong if you think that the Python-4 is comparable to an 9X, ASRAAM, IRIS-T, MICA-IR, PL-10, R-74, the contender for those is the Python-5 that is the succesor of the Python-4 Presented in 2003 at the Bourget Aeronautic saloon practicaly at the same time that the 9X Block 1 entered in service.
if you are going to still talking no-sense lets end this discussion here and lets not keep debating about something that is really well known by other educated people in this subject am really tired of the people missinforming the rest about something that they dont actually know.
Well, yes. If you seriously came to the bug report team and told them “the Israeli F-16 doesn’t have the Python 4 missile, so give it one” then yes, you are a small and not very smart boy. So what if it’s an IR missile with 1120 ΔV and 2-in-1 IRCCM in a 50G airframe? A trifle. It won’t break the game. And then you come to the bug report room and repeat the same request.
How is it worse than Gripens? Oh, right. Gripen. The same Gripen that flies with the R-Darter missile that it never carried IRL. Welcome to War Thunder, where the payloads are a balanced value.
Barak 2 has HMD, TWS and 6 datalink channels. Yes, we talk about Barak only.
No, it’s not.
Python 4 is a Derby with an IR seeker with powerful IRCCM. If even with this description you do not see the imbalance breaking and putting the barracks in the position of a disintegrator in close combat, then I do not see the point in further explaining to you why Gaijin will not add Python 4 in this patch and will do the right thing
Let me remind you that our current level of light IR missiles is -
acceleration - less than 900 m/s
overload - 30-40G with rare exceptions
IRССM - one of two options
Ааааааnd Python 4 violates all this. Python 4 missiles will appear when dogfights in ARB become rarer. Now adding Python 4 will be genocide in close combat.
This is a reason to reduce the BR, and not to add a missile with an imbalanced seeker.
Python 4 is a Derby with an IR seeker with powerful IRCCM. If even with this description you do not see the imbalance breaking and putting the barracks in the position of a disintegrator in close combat, then I do not see the point in further explaining to you why Gaijin will not add Python 4 in this patch and will do the right thing.
just reading this you told me that you are not a smart person, you are actually the type of guy who thinks that the Python-4 have the range of the derby like some other “smart” people out there.
“powerfull IRCCM” like what? told me like what? we all want to know what you can say about this come on explain am just all ears.
(Magic-2 have a 4 element seeker IRL, AAM-3 have a dualwaveband seeker IRL) and here we are, soo… whats the matter?
come on boy explain your self.
Is it going to be available on console?
Have you ever heard of such a term as “example”? So Python 4 and Derby are as similar as possible flight performance. Of course, you can’t launch a python head-on from 60 km like Derby. But when launched sideways or in pursuit, they will have very similar energy and flight range. And since the launch will take place far beyond the conditional “player’s attention zone”, and the player will not receive a notification about the missile being launched at him, since he has an IR seeker, this will be very imbalanced.
War Thunder currently has 2 types of protection - narrowing the field of view after launch and disabling the seeker to ignore flares. All top-tier missiles use one of them. Depending on the situation, one or the other option is better. Python 4 uses both of these options at the same time. The protection on the IR seeker on the Stinger works on the same principle.
The point is how it will be implemented. Python 4 is already in the files and almost everything is known about it as about any other missile in the game.
Have you ever heard of such a term as “example”? So Python 4 and Derby are as similar as possible flight performance. Of course, you can’t launch a python head-on from 60 km like Derby. But when launched sideways or in pursuit, they will have very similar energy and flight range. And since the launch will take place far beyond the conditional “player’s attention zone”, and the player will not receive a notification about the missile being launched at him, since he has an IR seeker, this will be very imbalanced.
well you cant use the derby to give an example about how the Python-4 performs because its wrong different missiles developed for different combat doctrines, and just a little detail the derby was developed after the Python-4, the Python-4 does not have a flight performance similar to the derby, you actually know that the optimal combat range of the Python-4 are 15km right? compared with 55km that the derby have, just saying you are still talking no-sense, you are not giving sources, numbers, you are giving nothing just assumptions you didnt see a Python-4 in action you didnt see a derby in action compared with me, another thing you are saying: the launch will take place far beyond the conditional “player´s attention zone”, i need to remember to you that we have the R-24T, R-27T and ET in the game? being the R-27ET the most nasty IR missile when we talk about range, speed and manouvrability all combined? soo… whats the matter now?, the Python-4 have a powerfull motor: YES, but you always need to remember that it have a lotttt of control surfaces that moves AIR in many directions at the same time this implies that the missile have a lot of drag and when its turning this implies a important loss of energy and speed, if the enemy jet is fast above mach 1 while turning at 4.5km let me say to you that the missile would not reach that target if it needs to reach his max G overload to intercept the enemy jet. at the end of the day the Python-4 have less range than the R-27T just to put you in context.
War Thunder currently has 2 types of protection - narrowing the field of view after launch and disabling the seeker to ignore flares. All top-tier missiles use one of them. Depending on the situation, one or the other option is better. Python 4 uses both of these options at the same time. The protection on the IR seeker on the Stinger works on the same principle.
you actually tested how the IRCCM of the Python-4 performs to say anything about it? ( you keep making assumptions with nothing in hands ) as far as i know someone in the israeli discord that i am could somehow realize a user mission testing the IRCCM of it and i can say that the seeker is underperforming at “medium/long ranges” ( 2.5 to 5km to put you in context ).
The point is how it will be implemented. Python 4 is already in the files and almost everything is known about it as about any other missile in the game.
i agree with that, but all i can say why it could not be implemente in the same way that they implemented the Magic-2 or the AAM-3 or is just because is israeli and “we cant do something about it” type of excuse, and we are the ones that cannot recive that type of treatment in our armaments.
Oh ! part 4 soon ?
maybe right before update
Jammers
dont forget about COPE CAGE
Next level cope cage: Cope Dome
To be honest Barn like cope cage is pretty good. Enemy side will mistake it for a small house lol
Heh, screw camouflage, just build houses around your tanks
There has also been the option of RCWS with 30 mm and programmable HE for Anti drone features
If we reach part 10.000 War Thunder 2 will automatically come out.
That someone can be you :)
They wouldnt add ukrainian vehicles to the game. The trophy is most likely some middle east country vehicle captured by US
Yeah, when particular real world events have ended and are solely in the history books then i’d expect them.
Easier said than done. Jammer would be a way cheaper measure without blind spots