I wasn’t 100% sure what the deal with the F-102 and Super Falcons was in terms of why they weren’t used, just that they weren’t.
However - if their team is going to respond that it gets them because it was ‘technically compatible’ - which is exactly what the AMRAAM is with the F-14D, then I’m gonna hammer them on that fact.
how tho cause they pull less it makes them easier to evade its not nearly as fast as say a AIM-9E either so it would basically be the same if not worse
oh that is interesting but why make the super falcon then ?
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
super falcon is designed for the F-106, which would be flying much faster, leaving less need for the missile to accelerate
The ingame superfalcon (as well as the 26b) are extremely gimped compared to what they should be, in terms of turning performance. Gaijin decided they should only get 5,75º of max fin deflection when the 26b SMC says in plain text that it can go between 9º and 28º of max deflection depending on altitude and speed. Even if you take the worst case scenario by taking the sea level values and disregarding dual plane maneuvering, it still should be much better than it actually is.
And that’s just one of the MANY issues that have yet to be adressed.
A bug report on F-102A’s incorrect thrust was denied because it’s wrong according to F-100D document.
this is a travesty… in what world does any of that make sense??? This aircraft seems to really be getting the short end of the stick this patch… I was even thinking of GE’ing it but like… if it’s this broken and seemingly uncared for?
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/Q0mAldxy3sQq?comment=hniWBdH8431PRpyb2gIP8CHX
There is absolutely no way that the developers did basic research on the AIM-4A/C/D and concluded that they are inferior just because the AIM-4F/G has “Super Falcon” in its name.
You should consult Standard Missile Characteristics sheets and fact-check to find out that it’s quite the contrary.
this is just insulting to the aircraft… unbelievable
And we can’t blame the bug report managers/volunteers on this matter, this apparently comes from the developers themselves. And are they saying that knowing how incredibly buggy and underperforming the AIM-4F and Aim-4G’s are compared to how they should be ???
Had the physical dimensions, weights and warheads not been correct I would assume they just used yandex to search rumours of what the aim-4s were like, but this looks almost like intentional trolling at this point.
That’s why I was being specific that this opinion is of the developers, so no blame is placed on volunteers/BRMs.
At this point, I am suspecting the developers are either straight-up uninformed or lazy and don’t want to add and develop new missiles for the game.
Either way, this is seriously not good news for the upcoming F-102A. It will be half-baked when it’s released in a live patch.
I think quarter baked is generous at this point
You mean torture, not half baked, because you’ll have exactly 2 aim-4g’s to start with and nothing else, and without gunpod or aim-26 available for modifications.
The F-102 could have been a pretty great intro to supersonic jets in the tech tree, an airframe with not a lot of power but very good low speed handling and with no bombs to drop, but otherwise a pretty well rounded kit of rockets, gunpods, ir and radar missiles that are not too overpowered but can be effective when used well and would be a good learning experience for newer players, but the way it’s gonna be launched it will just be avoided in favour of literally anything else.
It really doesn’t sit well with me that one of my favorite aircraft is going to end up perceived by the entire community as a painful hurdle rather than an interesting vehicle… this truly is heartbreaking
it could be put in reserve and still suck
This is terrible. I’m rather disappointed in the treatment the F-102 has gotten from the developers. The fact that they’re even giving the F-102 Super Falcons, which it cannot carry (at all!), is a travesty, let alone the fact that they won’t give it the missiles it COULD carry.
Really, the point that the F-102 CANNOT USE the Super Falcons (not even technically compatible) needs to be driven home more. If the developers acknowledge that fact, then they’ll be forced to add the older Falcons in lieu of any alternatives. I’m curious to see what their response to THAT report will be.
at this point our only hope is it getting AIM-26B
soo f106 but dumber…
