F-104G Missile Loadouts | Italy having less missiles then Germany

So the Italian F-104G gets either two Aim-9Bs or two Aim-9Js and its at 10.7. The German F-104G is able to get 4 Aim-9Bs, 4 Aim-9Js or 2 Aim-9Es and is it 10.7. Did Italy not use that many missiles or did Gajin just not want Italy having that many missiles on a jet at that BR?

War Thunder 2_15_2024 7_26_14 PM

1 Like

The Chinese one doesn’t get flares, the Italian one doesn’t get a full load if missiles, and the german one exists. Their all the same BR as well lmao.


Yeah I don’t understand. They are all the same model of F-104s but yet still don’t get the same payloads. Plus the F-104G is the only 10.0 aircraft Italy has so I don’t see why they shouldn’t be able to get the F-104Gs payloads.

The Taiwanese F-104G is 10.3 while the German and Italian F-104G is 10.7 cause they have countermeasures. I still think having no countermeasures on a F-104 in 10.3 is like going through hell though.

1 Like

Italy went to the F-104S while Germany continued to upgrade their F-104Gs. Simple as that.


Yet is it not the same model so why would the Italian one not be able to use the same amount of missiles?

1 Like

The Italians never used the underfueselage twin launcher on their G, and it was rarely seen on the S as the BL22 mounting they chose failed testing. As the drop tanks were an almost standard carry that meant only 2 Sidewinders on the tips . You could in theory take 2 underwing Sidewinders but it seems very few air forces did so, at least on a regular basis, and Italy wasn’t on that list. .

The other launcher type was known as the ‘Catamarans’ and was used by several air forces including Germany instantly doubling the number of AIM-9s available.


The Chinese one was rightfully lowered in BR last patch to match the Japanese F-104J

1 Like

Just to add: The reason for the catamaran rails was that, in theory, it would allow the F-104G to carry two sidewinders, two anti-shipping missiles, and two tanks on the wing tips. In practice however, the front wheel would kick up dust on to the seeker head of the catamaran sidewinders, particularly on less developed airstrips, so they weren’t used all that often.

Just to add to the Just to add…

The underfueselage launchers were shown to result in potential engine surges as the Sidewinders were fired and the rocket exhaust entered the air intake. Bad enough on its own but for a single engine type it was potentially fatal, particularly at low altitude.

Countries who did use the launchers frequently operated with the wing pylons carrying tanks and ground attack stores so the risk was balanced by the missile availability. For those planes focused on QRA and air intercepts it may tip the other way.

And there are always exceptions to muddy the water …eg you can find pics of 104s with just the fuselage Sidewinders and no wing stores at all!

1 Like

So you’re saying that there’s no chance that Italy would get more then two missiles on the wings due to these issues?

Italy won’t get them because their F-104Gs never did or could use them.

1 Like

that’s actually fake. not using them operationally doesn’t mean it couldn’t use them, quite the opposite. if we talk about operational loadout most of the loadout present in game shouldn’t be there. there is literally no reason why the italian F-104G cannot carry 4 aim-9 sidewinders.

the fact that the under fuselage launchers were not used operationally doesn’t mean it couldn’t use them or they cannot be used in game. going with this concept a lot of loadouts in multiple planes in game shouldn’t exist, not talking about planes using weapons they couldn’t use at all. it makes literally no sense why the italian F-104G cannot carry 4 missiles in game and the same goes for the taiwanese F-104 for the flares

What’s funny, that some (majority?) of Taiwanese 104Gs were actually ex Luftwaffe ones. What I’m wondering is if some of Marineflieger 104Gs were transferred to Taiwan, because Marineflieger ones were actually ones fitted with ALE-40


And the US never mounted flares or AIM-9Es on the F-5C but it gets to have them because it could mount them in real life.

No reason the Chinese or Japanese F-104s shouldn’t get flares.


If you can find evidence of the Italian F-104Gs using the catamaran launcher then feel free to submit a report on it. Otherwise it probably won’t change.

Nope, all of the were ex-Luftwaffe.

If you read what I said the Italian operated G’s Never used the launchers. The type that were flown were tested exclusively on the S. Feel free to provide pictures if they are available as I couldn’t find any, and many threads across the Web also stated the same. Their inclusion would certainly help the plane in game.

1 Like

Again, this statement makes no sense. Is not like in wt planes and tanks use operational loadout, quite the opposite, some planes carry loadouts that couldn’t exist IRL. So “feel free to provide pictures” doesn’t work in this conversation, since Italian F-104G were no different from the german ones and didn’t have the capability to use those rails for AIM-9 removed. same for the F-16ADF, they never carried sparrows, they even had their cables removed to carry sparrows because they were only used with AMRAAMs and AIM-9, but since they were able to use them they have them in game. “Feel free to provide” a valid reason on why the taiwaneese F-104 and the italian one shouldn’t be on par with the german one. or put the german 1 at 11.0 since has more to it to the other comparable vehicles for no reason at all.

read my above message and think again about your nonsense. so when the eurofighter will arrive your won’t have the Pirate (IRST) because you didn’t want it installed? uhm? Why are you german mains so close minded that you have to annoy everyone else for no reason but being petty. things will back fire, again.