F-15 incorrect missile count

Machinery of War Discussion Aircraft
,
1

The F-15C should have more AIM 120 AMRAAM missiles than the F-16C, which it currently doesn’t, when viewing the livestream. According to the United States Air Force, the F-15 has “One internally mounted M-61A1 20-mm, six-barrel cannon with 940 rounds of ammunition” and can carry either “four AIM-9 Sidewinder and four AIM-120 AMRAAMs or eight AIM-120 AMRAAMs, carried externally.” ( https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/104501/f-15-eagle/), while the F-16 “can carry up to six air to air missiles” (https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/104505/f-16-fighting-falcon/)

All of this is public, hence the URLs. I am also 16 so it is highly (99.999%) unlikely for me to obtain classified documents

4 Likes
2

Ngl, pretty sure that the Devs are aware of this, and will more than likely implement these changes before the update goes live or when it does. The dev server really feels rushed, like they weren’t able to flush out what they had on it already, i.e. the premium T-80 they removed from the tree.

5 Likes
3

.mil pages are not accepted as evidence as they need supporting documents for the vehicle, but there are already bug reports submitted for the missile count. Also, it is possible to view and post “classified” documents from the internet, as they are merely “export restricted” documents and not allowed on the forum or bug report section.

1 Like
6

Would this work? https://tealgroup.com/images/TGCTOC/sample-wmcab2.pdf

image
image1428×824 328 KB

[/quote]

1 Like
7

Dude… it’s a dev server, it physically cannot be “rushed”, it’s not the update itself.
T-80 wasn’t removed as it wasn’t added either.

8

I personally have no idea as what sources Gaijin considers trustworthy as it is not my area of expertise. I was just speaking from experience as my bug report from a couple years back got shot down due to “insufficient sources”, but it doesn’t hurt to try creating a report.

9

F-15A incorrect BR. move that BS up to 12.7

10

Give it HMD and 4x SARH that are as good as the R-27ER, then it should move up

11

I mean, is there even a R27ER equivalent SARH that the F15 can get?

12

Depends on how far you are willing to bend the equivalent part of the statement.

HAVE DASH II

Or the upcoming AIM-260.

13

Aim-260 isnt bending the “equivalent” part
Its taking it, twisting it in a pretzel and then turning it into an origami swan.
Also i have failed to add a “Sarh” before equivalent when i edited the message

14

no, its good at 12.3
better look at russian wunderwaffe where r24r (11.3) >= aim7m (12.3) and r27er is unmatched until fox3 enter

15

So then why are there clips, screenshots and videos of people playing with it and being super bugged, and not to mention the Russian stream literally showed it off lol

16

Dunno, but the version of the dev server has not been updated at all since initial release. It’s still on 0.16 as of a few hours ago.

17

not the only plane not to have historical loadouts, AV-8B+ for Italy it lacking 2 additional AIM120s, it should have 2x AIM9M and 4x AIM120

18

My friend tested the F-15С, Su-27, F-16.
The F-15С has low thrust values. All had reduced fuel consumption in all modes

19

No, which is why the R-27ER shouldn’t have been added. At least until ARHs are added.

20

The closest thing I know of would be the Navy’s Aim-7P, which should have a better motor than the 7M with lofting and a datalink. If we go to “prototype?” missiles the the Aim-7R would be a further upgrade on the 7P and have a dual-mode IR seeker for terminal guidance.
I used this as a source but I have no idea how reliable it is.