Place your bets
Which russian source or imagination numbers will the dev use to model to apg-63?
I think it’ll be exactly the same as the 27SM because nothing can better than it of course. Either that or it’ll be the same ratio increase. While the information for the 001V comes from an advertisement source.
I called it on the old forum for stepanov using the soviet manual for the 15A, let’s see if I call it for the 15C.
Its going to be identical to the existing F-15A just with TWS
Maybe one day we will see multitrack and the advanced scanning modes of many already implemented and upcoming radars properly implemented, but for now no.
What will be interesting to see is how they handle the SU-27SM since if memory serves, its radar is supposed to be able to guide 2 R-27s to target at the same time. (I might be wrong, but i’m pretty sure one of the N001s has that capability)
I predict next devblog maybe F-15C MSIP II with AN/APG-63(V)1 radar, IR AIM-9 sidewinder (AIM-9M & AIM-9M-9), MRAAM AIM-7M Sparrow and AIM-120 AMRAAM (AIM-120B & AIM-120C-5)
Now F-15A fitted AN/APG-63 (pre-PSP) radar but no TWS
I doubt we will see AIM-120C-5. Gaijin loves flavor of the month nations, and France and Japan are two nobody really has grinded out, both with functional top-tier premiums. Since both these nations were already playtested with MICA and AAM-4 respectively, they’ll be the hot new thing when they are available in-game
2x AIM-9M stock on F-15C MSIP II ?
AAM-4 on JASDF 4th generation & 4.5 generation fighter similar to AIM-120C-5
My personal opinion. at least AN/APG-63(V)1 radar 2x AIM-9M stock & AIM-9M-9 sidewinder and active radar homing MRAAM AIM-120C AMRAAM (AIM-120C-3 & AIM-120C-5)
But I guess on modification F-15C unlock AIM-7M Sparrow before AIM-120 AMRAAM
Will APG-70 or 63V1 have better scan speed?
It already can guide(should) guide up to 2x R/ER at the same target(using inertial nav, if a third was fired either the third or first target was dropped). To 2 targets I don’t think its possible. Americans tried it with DSTT, but targets had to be in limited space(it was for amraam only) and you had TWS which was better anyway.
Should be the same 70°/sec. Though on all apg 63s if the range selected is 10 Nmiles or 20 Nmiles, the scanning rate is increased to 90°/s.
Scanning rate is a function of processing velocity/wave velocity and results in detection higher or lower detection range along and more/less false targets
Thats why in the early 90s or late 80s, a mode(i forgot the name) lowered the scan rate to detect smaller targets at longer ranges(more integration time)
AAM-4 was not in the playtest.
However there is two ways I can see them balance it.
- The first is to not allow mixing AIM-120B and AAM-4 on the F-15J, this way while you would get significantly faster, longer ranged and more agile missiles, you’d also be limited to having only half of them.
- The second is to let the F-15J combine it’s AIM-120Bs and AAM-4s, then add AIM-120C-5, but not for Japan. While it would have a minor range advantage over AAM-4 it would also be slower and less agile. So this way Japan would end up with a mix of 4 inferior and 4 superior missiles.
I think it’s a bit premature to assume the AAM-4 is going to be all that. It’s a larger diameter missile which will negatively affect its drag pretty significantly in game compared to IRL, and it’s not Russian so any errors with it will be a long time before being corrected, probably until 120C-5s show up anyway.
Yea, from what I can tell, the AAM-4 has more range but the cost of that is it’s heavier and probably slower to accelerate?
My understanding was that it should have some kind of DSST capability where the computer/radar would bounce between targets until X seconds before impact where it would hold track until estimated impact, and then switch to the other target
(Again, I could be entirely wrong)
You wrong, 2 27R/ER can guide only pesa radars like bars, irbis… And etc
I doubt it’s slower to accelerate. From what I’ve seen it would even accelerate rather well.
It is specifically stated that the range almost doubling compared to the AIM-7M it was meant to replace comes from a mix of decreased drag, but also and more prominently a much more powerful motor.
My estimation for maneuverability so far based on tests of modified Sparrows and a statement calling AAM-4 a “highly maneuverable missile” (likely referring to comparisons with AIM-120B, but at the very least comparisons it to the AIM-7) would be 40-45G.
Essentially, it’s a more maneuverable Mach 5 ARH AIM-7.
That however doesn’t mean weight or drag doesn’t affect the missile at all. It will likely lose speed a bit faster in maneuvers compared to the AMRAAM, as well as weighing down your aircraft more with them equipped.
But looking at similar “large and heavy, but fast and maneuverable” long range missiles in game like the R-27ER I still think the AAM-4 will be a powerful missile. It could be seen as essentially a lighter and more agile, but still a bit slower ARH R-27ER.
Sure, Gaijin could always nerf the missile, but considering it is very much possible to balance without that and Gaijin made the conscious decision to add it already over just giving Japan the AIM-120B, I’ll stay positive and assume they know what they’re doing while maybe preparing for bug reports just in case.
Yeah, it does seem weird for it to be implemented before AIM-120C-5, but I’d say this can could mean the C-5 will be added too. Either that or they balance by numbers.
Can AESA equipped F-15 distinguished according to external features ?
No*.
Not that you will see in pictures
Can new F-15C get Talon Hate or Legion pod?
Would need to see the other side of the cockpit for that. Both of those, and the Sniper pod use the PAD upgrade.
No BOL even of F-15C