How are the engine nerfed? Most nations also don’t have their modern IR missile
I agree with this
F‑16C Block 52 carried AIM-9X operationally from 2005. Matches Rank IX tech (AMRAAM‑D + AESA).
Gaijin added AIM‑9X to NASAMS and CLAWS SAMs last year. Missile is fully modeled, tested, and balanced. Already Implemented.
6 Nations Have Modern IR Already (SPAA/SAM):
| Nation | Modern IR Missile | System |
|---|---|---|
| USA | AIM‑9X Block II | NASAMS/CLAWS |
| Germany | IRIS‑T SL | IRIS‑T SLM |
| Russia | ❌ None | Buk-M3 |
| UK | ❌ None | Sky Sabre |
| Japan | Type 81C | Tan‑SAM Kai |
| China | FB‑10/A | CS/SA5 |
| Italy | ❌ None | SAMP/T |
| France | ❌ None | SAMP/T |
| Sweden | IRIS‑T SLS + AIM‑9X Block II | EldE 98 + NASAMS |
| Israel | Python‑5 | SPYDER AIO |
F-16 test team conducts first guided launch of AIM-9X by U.S. Air Force:
https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/136511/f-16-test-team-conducts-first-guided-launch-of-aim-9x/
F-16’s first AIM-9X Sidewinder launch by Lieven Dewitte:
Raytheon Delivers 1,000th AIM-9X Sidewinder to U.S. Navy and U.S. Air Force by Raytheon Company:
2005
https://defense-update.com/20051213_feature-advanced-f-16.html
The R-73 is nothing like the AIM-9X. The AIM-9X is IIR, 100 times more lethal than the R-73, and in my opinion, the R-73 does not outperform the AIM-9M. They are missiles for completely different situations.
The missiles that are in the anti-aircraft systems are created, they don’t work like that, and they are stupidly limited because they are being launched from the ground.
9M outperforms R73 in longer range shots. R73 dumpsters 9M in a knifefight. Yes, two very different missiles two very different situations. Personally I’d take the 73 over the 9M any day of the week.
I really dont like the 9m as they pretty much cant be used in the way I want to use IR missiles. I need them for in a dogfight when I am chasing a six o clock. In that scenario the 9M is terrible imo. Id take an R73 or a magic 2 there.
1 Like
Why would you want this piece of junk anyways buddy.
Because I’d rather have it go to as many nations as possible straight away than get waste of time events or devblogs
I guess you got a point, but if the purpose of Gaijin is to delay the inevitable day in which they will run out of vehicle content, the copy paste slop will continue.
I’m not against copy-paste as much now that we have this new ‘policy’ in place.
New policy? It’s not a new policy
As why I put policy In apostrophe
The exact quote is ‘whenever possible we’ll include these shared vehicles in other tech trees right away’
So for the sake of simple language
BVVD said ‘From now on, a vehicle will go into as many tech trees as possible within the same update (unsure about events or battlepass)’
I guess they must have missed the f18F and D going where they should the first go around
I agree.