This is a perfect time for me drop this lil baby
https://forum.warthunder.com/t/dcs-inspired-pve-mode-for-air-battles/39468/27
1 Like
They can, the question of the countries building those planes selling them to Pakistan is an other problem however.
As for JF17, it currently lacks AESA and does not have built in stealth like the Rafale or EF have. The JF17 is just not in the same category, especially when you consider the lack of long range AAMs on pakistani’s side. A PL12 isn’t going to cut it when faced with a meteor.
Don’t get me wrong, the thing is good for the buck, but i wouldn’t say it’s in the same playing field.
As for J10, it can somewhat catch up with the PL15 and an AESA, but still lacks the low radar signature. There’s also the question of the electronic suites and combat range
1 Like
Cool, thanks
therefore A10’s are not that usefull in game
no problem
Take it with a grain of salt though, as the mods would say : nothing is confirmed yet
it omits those weapond because they havent found a solution on how to add it yet
congratulations, you figured it out
PL15 should outrange even the newest ARAAM and is reported having a range of 150km since it is mainly made to compete with F22. Radar signature wise I don’t think it matters too much cause they are both not designed for full stealth and as China did apply radar signature lowering paint to J16 I think it could also be applied but just wasn’t considered necessary. I don’t have any specific idea about J10C radar but it is described to be competing with APG81 so I doubt it is much worse than Rafael plus the RBE 2 has limit due to number of gallium arsenide components. I think early rafael could even find itself in a disadvantageous position against J10, as for JF17 the newest block 3 has the same equipment and radar as J10 so it should be similar.
note: I have no particular idea about electronic suites cause i think China’s idea is to have specialised J16D to do the job.
The equipment on both sides is constantly upgraded. The latest version of the JF-17 Block III is equipped with AESA and PL15E, which is sufficient to counter 4+ fighters such as the Rafale or Typhoon. Also There is no denying that the JF17’s airframe has a greater disadvantage, but it is still qualified as a 4+ fighter.
There are many political factors involved in foreign military sales, but as a seller, we still provide Pakistani friends with quite good products, although the performance does not do the suppression of typhoon/Rafale, but combined with the market price, this is a very good product.
As for the stealth performance, I personally do not believe in this 4+ semi-stealth fighter, especially combined with the high cost, I think this is a compromise for not being able to develop and build a 5+ stealth fighter
1 Like
It’s hilariously bad
Yeah the A10C with those HMD markings is a bit wierd. If its Buddy-lasing, then AGM-114Hellfires are about to get a pretty nice buff.
Yes a Rafale F2 would be at a disadvantage against a late J10 or JF17. If we compare each contemporary variant (Rafale F2 with JF17 bock 1, F3 with Block 2, F3R - F4 with block 3, and same thing for EF), it is not the case
RBE2 has around 800 T/R modules. Little is known about its performances at this time.
AMRAAM is about to become obsolete, that’s why the US are working on the 260. I’m also not too convinced having a long range missile against a stealth jet like the 22 is that useful, since the range limitation comes from the seeker head / the mothership’s radar and not the energy the missile can give (unless it’s IR, then why not).
In any case 150km isn’t going to help against a meteor.
Isn’t PL15 supposed to be in a fork of 200-300 km instead of 150 though, unless you specifically refer to the export variant ?
5th gen and stealth applied to fighter jets didn’t exist at the time EF and rafale were developped, except for the 22 program which wasn’t in service. Stealth isn’t binary though, but linear, so it’s still undeniable it gives an advantage. To what extent though, difficult to say.
the crosses are friendly units, marked on the hud to reduce “blue on blue” incidents, but yeah if the US don’t get AGM-114Ls then they’ll need something to reduce time spent out of cover
Would be a nice way to even out the playing field for Hellfire Helis without adding the 114L.
definitely, but if you ask me… the fact that the khrizantema has a radar that goes through smoke with 14 or so missiles that can be guided through said smoke… idk, it doesn’t seem like its too far fetched and besides, there’s still hard cover to block it too. #MyOpinion
While it has a radar and 14 missiles, it cant fire all 14 at once at different targets. And unlike 9M123 , The Hellfire has a warhead that isn’t anemic.
1 Like
TBH i never knew about the su-24, or just never remember hearing anything about it, but when it was put in the leaks i went down the rabbit hole and got excited. It looks to be a lot of fun depending on the armament they give it ( also Gaijin when cluster bombs? ) Its defiantly a great looking plane.
I hope something can be done. It is fun to to ground RB with the planes, and sim ground depending on the br for the time period. Would be nice to have something that would let the attack aircraft utilize theere specialties rather than its a plane go bomb a base then try to shot down planes that can fly circles around you, or its a cas plane so you want to play it in ground RB. I like playing ground rb but im not that great at it and being able to fly a fun plane for 3 min per game is just kinds eh. Game mode specifically for attackers or give it a pve mode like helies with lots of ground targets not just convoys and group spawns. Bunkers to blow up , sam sites, radar ect ect.
I suppose that’s valid.
As for the anemic warhead? I’ve had my fair share of hellfires do diddly squat to a tank, and they don’t come down from top attack either, probably a bug but idk, seen it on the bug reporting site but have yet to see anything new about it.
Cluster munitions would be sick, they’ve already added napalm so surely it’s in the works