R-27ER vs AIM-120C-5 and newer would be unbalanced. The AIM-120C-5 would just eat alive R-27ER slingers and have multi-launch capability against multiple targets.
The early F-15A MSIP program allowed TWS track of a single target at a time for AIM-120A/B initially… honestly an interesting compromise.
Whatever the case, it’s up to Gaijin.
Exactly my point. there is a massive favour towards the Russians. They have the best SARH and IR homing missiles along with having a HMD well before any decent Western aircraft had them.
For now the only way for the USA to become competitive against the Russians is the AIM-9X BLK 1 and the AIM-120C-4.
Top tier was power crept way to hard and way too quickly
AIM-9X is absurd, and the AIM-120C-4 isn’t necessary.
The AIM-9M is sufficient, they should just get the AIM-120A/B right now. That would solve a lot of issues.
The best IR missiles go to AIM-9M and soon to be AAM-3.
Maneuverability isn’t everything.
Magic 2 & R-73’s lower-FOV IRCCM is still easily flared compared to 9M & AAM-3’s IRCCM.
There’s a discussion to be had here but I’m too tired to think of any counterpoints here. From what I can tell the block 1 -9X should be on par with the R-73. But for now a better version of the 9M should be added in along with a Br increase to 14.0 or something. Su-27 Vs FGR.2 is a very good idea and we need more 70’s designed aircraft Vs 50’s designed aircraft.
Yes of course maneuverability isn’t everything so is speed, drag, and motor. AAM-3 definitely beats the R-73 in the latter. But AAM-3 will not pull a 100° turn to hit a target moving parallel to the firing aircraft
Besides the AIM-9M seeker is much easier to flare than the R-73 at every range.
This comment is absurd. There are two entire generations of IRCCM between current missiles and AIM-9X type seeker.
The AIM-9X is capable of 90°+ off-boresight.
AIM-9M we have in-game is already performing as it should, if not overperforming. There is no better model of it that can come. “Push-ahead” if modeled as it should be would be very easy to defeat compared to what it has now.
I’m just learning so am curious but, how is the 9M overperforming? Is it the flight performance or more with the IRCCM stuff?
The IRCCM it uses is called “Push Ahead”. When it senses a countermeasure, it will stop tracking and push the reticle further in the direction the target was last moving hoping to re-capture the target.
To defeat this is as simple as ejecting a flare forward of the direction of travel or continuously flaring while maneuvering to lose the lock.
In-game it is much harder to lose it’s track, and it can’t be decoyed to the flare at all… Also it should be more susceptible to accidentally tracking a missile fired off from the aircraft due to its’ design.
Oh, I see, thank you!
120a/b will be fine
Again though because of this it can be defeated while in full afterburner while dumping flares. The R-73 is 100% going to kill you within 1.5km rear aspect.
Yes it did. I was wrong. I thought it used the seeker of the M-8/9 but obviously I misremembered. I wonder then if there was any prototypes that used more components of the M-8/9 instead of the motor and warhead.
Then there was the F-16A and before that was the tomcat. The Russians haven’t been on top since before the Tomcat. But at least you tried.
I believe it would be more fair if the F-15 was allowed to carry 6 Aim 9m’s like the F16C to make it more fair to the Su-27’s ability for 6 R27ER’s.
f15 could never mount more than 4 sidewinders irl the belly pylons were build solely for sparrows and later amraams
The A and J aren’t identical
The J heavier But thats it
Can someone explain the differences pros and cons the Japan F-15 compared to the others and why is that.
Of course besides the new missiles.
I think it’s heavier about 500kg, a bit more fuel, and stronger landing gear. That’s about it?
It seems there’s some different about the radar but doesn’t seems like there’s any different right now
You can see a few people point out the different in this post
Thank you!
You’re welcome