They are getting too close if that’s happening lol
They cant keep their distance forever either
Firstly, none of this information is correct.
Secondly, they have all been used in reports previously.
Thirdly, the “maximum thrust” thing is just errant, as thrust changes based on altitude and where exactly it is in the thrust curve, so as the volunteer stated… that data is somewhat useless for us.
We know the mass of AIM-54A, and we know the thrust profile. The current in-game missile overperforms at sea level and underperforms at very high altitude so I think it is as good as we will see with the current implementation of thrust as a static measure instead of some dynamic thing.
If you want more accurate information you can always visit here;
https://special.library.unlv.edu/node/667171
Current problems with AIM-54:
- Top speed should be approx. Mach 6.1.
- Performance should increase quite a bit at higher altitudes during loft, motor performs better there.
- Seeker underperforming against fighter targets, should lock much later and rely more on midcourse updates.
- Maneuverability lacks significantly in both maximum G and turn radius.
(Should be as maneuverable as an ~AIM-7F fairly early on in flight)
I am sure there are other issues but as far as the game is concerned these are the major ones. They couldn’t fix it at the time because it would be too OP but it has been years and there is much better ordnance in the game now. I think they can go ahead and revise the F-14’s.
The biggest roadblock isn’t even the AIM-54 though, it is the poor performance of the AWG-9.
6 Likes
They don’t have any sources or any factual information 'cause it’s all classified. They just gave it the worst performance possible because they have nothing to justify giving it anything better.
AWG-9 was so powerful it took 20 years for a upgrade being the f22 in the 90s
In game right now its eqaul to a F4J even worse in some aspects f14 has 6 mile ACM while f4J has 12 mile
1 Like
Eh, if you stick to Fakour spam + RTB not much has changed.
Tried 2 games and survived with 2 kills in each, 1st and 3rd place. Having +50% Fakours kinda makes up for the + 0.3 br although It should definitely have R-73s imo.
Otherwise yeah, the IRIAF has to be stricly used as a very long range BVR platform, every single thing about it is obsolete. Problem is mildly competent players - those who survive past the initial merge - can’t get killed by the fakour, they just notch it very easily (HDN seekers) and then you get destroyed by their IRCCM + 40G all-aspect fox-3 + all aspect radar + supermaneuverability + HMD combo while you have AIM-9P.
Hydrogen bomb vs coughing baby.
But again, you can make it work I guess.
2 Likes
Now that F-14B has been dropped to 11.7 in GRB F-14A should be dropped as it’s also 11.7.
0 reason to take the F14A over the F-14B as CAS now.
ASB
GRB mentioned
ASB reply?? what?
The AWG-9 was a 70s radar and behaves like a 70s radar, it had good range but the modes and requirement of a dedicated WSO was a lot. Several radars both NATO and otherwise exceeded it’s performance before the 90s but were not without faults. The F-14D got an upgrade for a reason.
They have much more detailed sources than you think, though they generally refuse to share them. What they have and know about is not how it has been implemented in the game. It isn’t due to lack of sources, it is a deliberate decision on their part.
F-14 is vastly superior to the F-4J, what an absurd comment. If you are relying on ACM lock then you are using both aircraft incorrectly and I would not hesitate to jump to the conclusion that you are a newb.
F14 D received APG 71 which is a Digitalized AWG-9 with standardized parts from the F15s apg 70
Proof? cause theres nothing out there on it that is not export restricted its extremely classified plane due to iran owning them
ACM lock is the standard for within visual range combat the F4J get HMD allowing it to fire off bore sight shots the only advantage the AWG-9 offers is the better range perfomance but thats a useless upgrade R27ERs as they are hypersonic the F14B without its aim 54 gimmick would be 12.7 and the A model 12.3 this is ignoring fm differences
2 Likes
This is by far the most absurd comment. A good HMD/ACM is a very important tool to have at top tier, especially if you intend to play at those short range fights after the initial merge and I would not hesitate to jump to the conclusion that you are a troll.
2 Likes
imagine if f-14d is still stuck with 9km acm with no hmd… would be horrendous to play
5 Likes
They replaced nearly everything because it was all deprecated at that point. The APG 71 was a massive improvement by all regards. It has higher power output and replaced just about everything but the antenna. The fact that it shares parts with the F-15’s updated radar is meaningless outside of logistics reasons. It was a massive upgrade. They went from the worlds first production microprocessor to a much more mature fully digital system.
I worked with the tech moderators quite a bit before the devs decided they didn’t want to “fix” the plane or the missile and moved on.
Yet the F-14’s would dominate the F-4 pilots if anyone with more than two brain cells flew them.
This has never been the case, while it is convenient for situations you shouldn’t be in, it is not necessary at all. The MiG-23M is a great example where having no ACM is not a serious drawback.
Though I would say even the MiG-23M makes the Phantoms look horrid and honestly it would be undertiered if not for the serious BR compression issue that this game has.
2 Likes
So they closed the report on the AIM-54A being modeled as SARH by them admitting that it should have SARH guidance… I’m confused
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/yrxn6fpmTrRB
tl;dr It is SARH and has a datalink channel that recieves target speed updates
@Gunjob Is it possible to clarify on this? Shouldn’t the missile be modeled at least as SARH + IOG + ARH or SARH + IOG + DL + ARH similar to the R27ER/AIM-7P?
Indeed the apg-71 nctr
1 Like