The argument is the Hornet should get the AIM-174 to compete with more capable platforms that also carry the AIM-120. Fixing the missile that all the planes carry doesn’t fix the balance issue with other trees getting vastly superior platforms.
But it would improve a whole lot other planes carrying AMRAAMs, which would level the field against other airframes with other missile series, especially on medium/close ranges.
Anyway, I honestly think the F/A-18E shouldn’t get the 174, but not because Gaijin will gimp it. But rather I’d argue the fact the Hornet series will never be seriously close to the meta, unless Gaijin commits to deliver the best possible version of the plane.
With the ESA of the 18E…they would Smoke people like crazy from across the map! Side climb at start of match to 5000 meters, build to 1.2 Mach fire and assist with TWS track…would be CRAZY even on a SLOW platform like the 18E.
Gaijin is NOT going to make the 5th Gens TRASH, just like the new missiles and now new Radars change things, 30SM2, Gripen E and EFT…stealth is going to be strong. The Stealth they have will be able to give them the first shots at range and then defend before you know you where shot at! This is why Gaijin has said they have to put a hand full of air mechanics in before 5th Gens show up next year. One of them has to Electronic Warfare to give the jets we have now a fighting chance!
It would have to have datalink of some kind to be launched as a fox 3. Pretty sure they can be even datalinked to an AWACS to increase the effective range because the current f18e’s aesa cant see the maximum range of the missile.
I mean it wouldn’t be detrimental, but if you give 2 planes the same buffs, they cancel eachother out and the already more powerful plane will still be more powerful by the same margin as before.
It would still help the Super Hornet and F-15C GE, but it wouldn’t close the gap between these planes and let’s say the AESA EFT.
I acknowledge it, yet a buff to an entire missile series would still improve all the planes who carry them when facing other planes carrying another missile series, that was my point all along.
i dont think so. the super hornet and F-15C GE both depend on their missile counts for offensive capability over anything else. buffing the missiles would help them more than it would help other AMRAAM users imo
Sucks to be those nations specifically (it’s only like what, Israel?).
AIM-120D & C8 are the same missile, PL-15 is in the same region as AIM-174B performance wise (and probably even better seeker wise) and the R-77M is basically the AIM-120D equivalent by this point, so not quite PL-15 but also nowhere near AIM-174B.
???
R-37 is not on a worse platform lol. Even the Su-30SM2 is much better, leagues even–than the Super Hornet. Putting that on the cracked MiG-31BM would make it even more deadly.
A mix of both, tbh. It would be the F-14 of top tier, basically. Of course, with AESA the tracking/DL updates are more reliable/constant so might be a bit difficult if whoever firing maintains lock for longer instead of turning around the second it goes active.
AMRAAM are better on Eurofighters than they are on anything that isn’t the F-15E. Wdym “would help them more” lmao.
But for AMRAAM, what I mean is the F-15C GE and SH both depend on it which is part of why they suck. I’m not saying they would be really good but I do believe the difference would be more noticeable on a platform that relies on them so much
120D is already in game files… and its a copypaste of C5 but with 360 launch capability.
Extending range on any future AMRAAM successor is meaningless as far as War Thunder goes, maneuverability upgrade is what is really needed. And no missile in US inventory seems to compete with MICAs/R77s in that regard.