Ever since F-14 IRIAF was uptiered to 13.0, which is a good change, games were getting more enjoyable.
But the abusers have moved onto the next vehicle; the American counterpart of the F-14s, which has AIM-54s.
No doubt, the AIM-54s are a worse missile than Fakour, with slower speed and so on.
But the basic ingredients of what makes them so oppressive is still there; they have giant splash radius, rendering multipathing useless.
Moreover, they fight 11.7-12.0 planes with horrible RWRs. Notching fakour and AIM-54 is very easy with a competent RWR like in the case of Mig-21 Bison and F-4EJ Kai, but not for planes such as Mig-23 and Mirage F1Cs. The way these planes defend is to “fly in circles” and therefore be late-arrivals to the battle, which is not fun, or fair.
Most maps are also horribly mountainous, so MP isn’t consistent, especially with the small 60m window.
So then don’t solely use multi-pathing to defeat them?
Pretty sure that at very least 98% of all Aircraft they can face also has access to chaff. And even then Notching remains useful.
Just remember that you also need to defeat the INS, so changing altitude is also needed to escape the predicted point of impact.
They’re just designed to fit perfectly into the air RB meta which allows them to easily dominate their opponents.
In an F-14, you want to meet opponents that are flying towards you, that aren’t able to easily dodge your missiles without negatively impacting their positioning, which is exactly what air RB provides.
A rework to air RB spawn points and map sizes would be a much better solution to the F-14 issue.
I already said they’re easy to notch but only in planes with good RWR. The problem is lots of planes has bad RWR, which only had 4 directions. Some planes like F-104 Italy has a noise only “RWR” as well.
So just preemptively notch instead of always fly straight to the base to bomb ? Have you ever thought about that ? Also check the score board to see if there are ARAAM in the game or not. Which you clearly don’t because it is 2025 and you still complain about the ARAAM at that BR even after the br change
If they did they would also;
Have All Aspect Missiles(e.g. AIM-9L / -9M)
Be able to carry the Extended Chaff (and Flare) Adapter
Have the EO / IR Search and track systems also be functional (the ALR-23 IRSTS / AXX-1 TCS )
The Flaps and Slats wouldn’t always be deployed wasting energy at high speeds
The Engines wouldn’t have anywhere close to the IR signature they do.
AIM-54 would have Bank to turn performance(25G overload), and be smokeless
And more.
To notch with those keep turning until the two sectors to the side the missile is coming from are lit and hold it there.
You can only do so much, within the bounds of a given airframe configuration. Just be happy that Self-Interference isn’t modeled, otherwise many Eastern designs couldn’t use the Radar(including SARH missiles guidance), RWR, or Jammer simultaneously. They had to pick one, and only one at a time .
The only thing they do worse than the F-14A is dogfighting, In the Mid / long range interceptor role the AIM-47 / -26B & ASG-18 / MG-13 are perfectly serviceable for the expected (Read useful) launch ranges for the AIM-54 as is currently implemented.
Well it basically the last of the 3rd generation Airframes for the US so it was always going to perform poorly against 4th & 4.5 Gen airframes, especially considering it’s ordnance, with its Stores availability limited, and it doesn’t get trialed ordnance & features (e.g. VTAS III( HMS) & AIM-95) that could also provide an edge.
Doesn’t help that it’s missing numerous features, and unfairly held to an arbitrary (1977 SAC) configuration, instead of actually being representative of an early (introductory) configuration (e.g 1973 SAC, Looses AIM-7F & AIM-9D). which would slightly reduce mid range pre-merge performance.
So it’s not like there aren’t options for both Tree US F-14’s to go either way, though the -14B is Held to SparrowHawk (though lacks the eponymous HUD upgrade in game) configuration (Circa '98 / '99, due to JDAMs + LANTIRN (T3) GPS handoff).
Nope, It;'s solidly a 3rd gen airframe.
No CAD systems or techniques were used in it’s design.
It doesn’t have a digital fly by wire system. (CDAC is something different)
It Isn’t statically unstable.
7.5G design overload, not 9G
It’s basically just the final step to realizing the F-108 Interceptor and as such utilizes many of the electronics envisioned for the system (XF-108>F-111B>F-14A).
For the US, the F-15 pioneered many of the required systems and techniques to meet 4th Gen requirements as outlined above, and the F-16 was the first proper design to make use of them, and the F/A-18 benefited from an additional decade of Electronics advancements built off the AWG-9 / APG-63 before entering service at least for the basic airframes.
The F-14 itself is basically the result of 'Nam era penny pinching and the USN / USAF being strong-armed by the SecDef into cutting costs, by eliminating parallels developmental programs between the services where possible (on the USAF, additional purchases were directed into the F-4, not the at the time preferred mix of F-105 / F-106).
So they they salvaged the AN/ASG-18 / AIM-47, and F-111 airframe & engines, as directed and trialed the F-111B configuration in order to meet the Critical need for Fleet Air Defense missions ( historic failures of the F6D ).
Armed with the resulting poor DACM & alarming Carrier suitability trial results (The F-111B had better Fleet Air Defense performance due to more fuel and High end performance due to the complex air intake schema / mechanization and no need for a Blended wing design, which was possible due to using staged wing sweep instead of continuous and so could more closely be optimized) and further learnings about Swing-Wing pivot design.
They successfully petitioned Congress to have a Clean-Sheet airframe design greenlit which resulted in the Design Study Model 303 which became basis for the F-14 being selected and the rest is effectively History.
The F-14B (the original airframe, not the A+) was to improve the engines (would retain USAF commonality with the F-16C Block 3x and later), and the F-14C was envisioned to improve the electronics & radar.