Yeah, I know about it. But we still need to prove that the F-15E carried BOL. Alas. We have a strange thing with BOL. The F/A-18C should have them too, but as you can see from the dev…
1 Like
The above linked Marvin Engineering products pages references both the LAU-128B/A & F-15E by name.
2 Likes
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Than idk. Maybe one billion of chaffs is too OP.
For dev, this site does not seem to be an argument. “All photos show F-15A/C”. Funny.
Saab’s website also mantioned just “F-15”.
Why not both?
GBU-53 literally TOO OP for now. I think if add for example… 1 pylon or maybe 2 pylons with it for test this bombs.
About Laser+GPS… It must be on F-15E. It is not some OP thing. Almost all nations have such bombs already, with the exception of… Sweden, Israel and Japan.
It can also be loaded two to a station on the BRU-55 &-57, so capacity for the relevant F-16(C-50+) & F/A-18(E/F) can be reduced by half that of a BRU-61 loaded aircraft, to 4 / 8 AUR’s total, since the inner wing station of the F-16 can’t currently carry guided ordnance even though it’s properly wired ( MIL-STD 1760) for them IRL.
And they could really use some sort of point of difference to the F-15E, outside the lack of GMTI, and assorted A2G radar modes.
1 Like
GBU-53 is it integrated for F-16? Cuz i saw only on Super Hornets, F-15E and F-35. And one test flight for F-16.
Well, the F-16 is currently the best option for testing the GBU-53.
It is a UAI (Universal Armament Interface) store so it’s only a software change, and release certification away from being mounted on most modern airframes anyway.
Well, the only thing left is to wait. I would like to get something interesting and unique for US, but in the end I see an F/A-18C without a single unique weapon.
Biggest issue is that a significant portion of the stores inventory is in some way exported, so is very likely to be able to be duplicated in another tree somewhere (Sub trees really don’t help here) and that the few unique options aren’t actually on the table (due to existing precedent or game balancing considerations, e.g. Post Release control / re-target, LOAL -F&F & submunition warheads).
In reality they still didn’t have much that either wasn’t a Joint Store ( DMLGB / EGBU, JDAM & JSOW), or able to be carried by the A-6E / A-7E that it replaced (AGM-84E, ER/DL kit Walleye w/ datalink, AGM-65E & -65F).
One thing I would like to see would be the AGM-123 Skipper II, or BLU-95 / -96 (500 and 2000lb class FAE bombs).
Also as we don’t actually have a contemporaneous F-16 / F-15 / F-14 it provides no advantages there especially for the BR it’s at doesn’t matter if it doesn’t have a useful lineup either as it is basically overshadowed in terms of A2G capabilities, and it’s strengths are well known and easily worked around for most potential threats in terms of A2A, where it is otherwise at a notable disadvantage.
Even if we talk about Joint Store… JSOW for F/A-18 would be OP? I dont think so. It is literally Grom-like bomb in game. Even JDAM-ER… But we have all same weapons in game. Just Mavs with different name.
Thermobaric bombs will be interesting to view in game.
depends which (sub)variant would be implemented. As the various warheads behave very differently.
the S-13DF was a removed rocket that used an FAE warhead, so it does sort of have precedent, it’s just got a massive radius due to the TNTe that they used.
IIRC, main difference between 65F and 65G it is seekers algorithms. But warhead same as 65G
As far as I remember and know, the developers made it just a HE but with a huge amount of explosives. This was an incorrect settings, because in general, thermobaric ammunition against armored vehicles is not very effective.
Close, the difference is that between them is practically only the presence of a “Carrier certified” (HERO) Safety and Arming device (does nothing In WT), on the -65F. Both the -65F & -65G have an (independent, axial) correlation seeker mode as it allows “point attack” for both large facilities and ships (Zero relative Contrast targets), at extended ranges, and improves slightly over the -65D.
Though the Seekers in game are overperforming known data somewhat.
The S-13DF used a TNTe of approximately 3 or so, it’s still by far the highest “Re Factor” in game as most other explosives run from 1.3 though 1.7 so the BLU-96 would have similar performance to the 5t bombs in game (~100 meter effective radius)
Only if they are fully buttoned up, which is rare even in combat. and even then would still mission kill the engine, they are still far more effective against light armor, AI targets and “Rats”.
Well, that’s what I said. For the game G = F and it’s just a rename.
The EGBU, LJDAM and even mav variants iirc.
Only laser, but it is useless for game.
Yes, I said about it.
1 Like