The F-14D could easily get the AIM-120 and AIM-9M instead, which it actually fired to my knowledge. The AGILE was used on the F-14A/B only iirc.
The AIM-9M was used in service, the AIM-120 was used in testing and service models required only the physical pylons be mounted and software updated before program was cancelled.
Software limitations are incorporated in game tho, for example mav’s could be mounted on 6 different pylons on the harrier 2, but without proof the software could handle 6 missiles we couldn’t argue for it. You’d need proof that the software can handle amraam in service realistically.
I think AMRAAMs were mentioned in a manual for the F-14D (I could very well be wrong though). The main reason Tomcats didn’t get them was due to budget cuts forcing the Navy to chose between either full AMRAAM-integration/clearance or LITENING/LGB, and the Navy went with LITENING (since I think that would extend its service life a bit).
You remember correctly!
Ah, it was LITENING, not LANTIRN. My bad on that
This I can agree with.
The only point in which I could see the Tomcat D getting VTAS, AMRAAM, and AGILE is if Gaijin adds 9L to the F-14A early (which wouldn’t make it an early anymore) and 9M to the F-14B. However, I can’t really see Gaijin doing that.
I saw AIM-120 in F-14D SAC sheet. AIM-120s were marked as “provisions made for”
Certainly these would be unique, but I would like to see loadouts that used only for US Navy service, NOT loadouts used only for testing.
F-14A (2000s) is basically an F-14B with a TF-30 pushed into it, and the F-14B(U) is an F-14B with some F-14D features added, so it may not be that unique.
However, they would still fit well into the game meta (mainly ARB/SBEC) even if they had a better AAM.
The only one tested and acceptable is AMRAAMs for F-14D for me.
Probably, F-14B can gets AIM-9Ms but, AIM-9Ls for F-14A Early wouldn’t come in soon because they are one of meta planes is SBEC rn.
In the current SBEC (basically an 11.7 BR top), the F-14A Early and Mirage 2000 C-S4/C-S5 are meta, and if the F-14A receives an AIM-9L, it’s BR might go up.
I myself am not opposed to the F-14A Early getting the AIM-9L per se and I would like to see all Gen’4 jets gets all-aspect missiles. However, 12.0BR F-14A with AIM-9L is questionable because they are still using old RWR and would gets insta wiped by F-16s, MiG-29s, or Su-27s with BVR missiles without alert.
And That’s why I would like to see late models of F-14A that has modern RWR. Also, late F-14A is very similar in appearance to the Tomcat used in the films Top Gun and Top Gun Maverick )))
1980s F-14A can see several features found in the F-14B, such as TCS, but the RWR is still old and will most likely not fit the game meta.
And I dont care whether a loadout was in service or otherwise as long as the SRAAM and Yak-141 exist in game.
If a aircraft was capable at some point in it’s existence of deploying a weapon it should have that weapon and / or system available for it in game.
Gaijin is very picky when it comes to this.
I don’t think that we need 120s on the F-14A, but if we want an F-14A that’s fully kitted out with new modules but that doesn’t have the new engines, that’d be pretty sick.
I believe the proper pictures are already in the discussion somewhere
And remember that the 1980s to early 1990s F-14A still has the analog style RWR.
As far as I know, the F-14A used for AMRAAM testing differs from the F-14A “late” seen in the late 1990s and 2000s.
Not really… Gaijin just adds or doesnt add whatever they want to fit their (flawed) view of reality
The German F-4F (Late) still doesnt have its 9L’s despite being a relatively mid airframe with a low missile count AND it being the only Fox 2 it used in service IRL.
The US F-5’s never used CM’s or RWR’s in US service (iirc there are even accounts of US pilots buying civilian RWR’s and sticking them in their jets just to have said capability)
The YaK-141, which id argue shouldnt even be in-game seeing as it never had a radar, HMD, IRST, or any weapons, got them all because it “wouldve” had them “had it gone into service” (ie, its russian so the rules dont apply, or at the very least can be stretched to their absolute limits)
The Kronshdadt was laid down (fitting gaijins rules for implementation of naval vessels) BUT its final configuration was supposed to use 6 german 38cm guns, NOT 9 hypervelocity soviet dream cannons (because the russians werent actually able to build the stupid things and scrapped that idea for something they could theoretically get). Gaijin gave them the russian fever dream guns cuz theyre better.
AIM-54C has a reduced smoke motor IRL, but doesnt in-game despite the bug report that was approved for it pre-dating all reduced smoke motor missiles now in-game, and they STILL refuse to add it.
There are tons of examples of gaijin breaking their own rules, and at this point, id just say dont expect gaijin to actually stick to anything they say. They lie as naturally as they breathe.
To add on to this;
They refused to add the GPU-5/A 30mm gunpod to the F-15A because the following image is of an TF-15A[F-15B] (The airframe that became the Strike Eagle prototype)
Even though neither the Brochure or video makes a mention of a specific variant and there is no change to the mounting brackets (MAU-12/A) between the Eagle and Strike Eagle.
And that the A-4E can’t get the GPU-2/A (M197 20mm w/ ~300 Rounds), because the airframe seen for a few frames in the promotional video can’t be proven to be an A-4E, not an A-4F (even though during the timeframe the specific unit operated both simultaneously, and there is little actual difference between them).
There are also a number of outstanding reports that they are sitting on, like;
I’m current teasing out exactly which airframes should have access to the various sizes of Snakeye & AIR High Drag kits, and working on the addition of the M117R (750lb bomb with H-D kit, this is important since it is the optimal loading for the MER in terms of Tons of HE per station), and confirming that their release limits (either 500 or 700 kts (~1.05 Mach at SL), depending on the release configuration and size of the kit in question) are accurate.
Also I have a lead on Correcting the RE factor of a number of explosive types in game, though it would basically be a slight reduction across the board that impacts most Western A2G bombs, rockets and missiles. (may also be extended to others if Comp. B-2 and -B-4 are similar enough)
Also the Paveway series (I , II & ?III?) may be being adjusted with a delay before it starts to guide depending on the variant. and an associated reduction to the Pave Spike (and Pave Tack / A-6E’s illuminator) maximum range (though in exchange may receive ground stabilization)
Kind of a pipedream of mine is to see Gaijin eventually add an option of the GAU-12 pod for the AV-8A and AV-8C (AV-8C is iffy, but it was technically still an AV-8A but with some minor improvements, and still had the same wiring [I am also in favor of the AV-8C getting the ALE-37 pod]), but that’s for another topic lol
The F-14 radar is glitchy af since a couple of weeks back and AIM-54 hit rates have gone down drastically compared to before the latest micro patch, Does anyone else experience the same? Posting a screen showing that I fly the F-14 a lot so it’s not just nonsensical ramblings.
Something has drastically changed.
Glitchy as in TWS target cue jumps between targets and severs the original connection, essentially making Phoenix INS missile? Yeah, that really didn’t go away with fix they did a long time ago. I don’t really understand server infrastructure but sometimes Missile all of a sudden behave poorly, maybe they decreased the resources for missiles serverside… IDK
