F-15A is in such a weird place

[Cpt_Bel_V]

@Sergeantpwn

So you’re saying korean war era jets with guns only operate on the same weapons employment premise as modern jets with advanced missiles? When one can shoot a target only within a mile and the other can shoot a target within 100? lmfao.

…
you change subject in the middle of it.
If you want me to tell you that Low flying was seenable in EVERY war, yes they’re.

If you guy can’t understand simple discussion, nor simple fact avout how Gaijin manage it’s game, you just unable to propose anything,…

@Sergeantpwn

If things are balanced purely based off results, then why does the Tornado ADV not have the AIM-9M and AIM-120? Why does your beloved F-104S not have AIM-9M and AIM-120? Clearly loadouts are determined by historical factors first and not balance.

Maybe because stupid players are in Russian / German and USA TT?

Playing UK means you are either an UK fellow or Playing a 4th TT to see how things goes in there.

@Sergeantpwn

It really is. In fact, I can reliably beat F-15s in a guns only fight with both the F-16A and the MIG-29, so if anything the F-15A is worse.

Still comparing light to heavy fighter,…
You don’t wanna understand do you?

@Sergeantpwn

Nothing wrong with the R-27. The sparrow is the only thing that needs to be changed, but the multipathing is implemented for “balance reasons”, so a bug report will do nothing. Please educate yourself.

Please go do bug report then,…
I may repeat myself until you understand that multipathing have been made through some document and reality physics, it’s up to you to prove them wrong.

Btw, i have no problem using both 7M, 7F or even S.530D.

In conclusion to this thread, and how i see your PoV in F-15A:

Being bad is a state,
Being stubborn is a default
Being both means difficulty
But talking over real facts, like they never happenned only shows that this thread have no future,…

[Sergeantpwn]

@Cpt_Bel_V

you change subject in the middle of it.
If you want me to tell you that Low flying was seenable in EVERY war, yes they’re.

I’m not changing the subject at all and i think it is in fact you who is unable to understand simple discussion, or the basic principles with which air-to-air weapons work…

@Cpt_Bel_V

Still comparing light to heavy fighter,…
You don’t wanna understand do you?

Light or heavy fighter doesn’t matter… weaponry and capability matters. You are sticking to this argument because you know what you’re saying is wrong.

@Cpt_Bel_V

Being bad is a state,
Being stubborn is a default
Being both means difficulty
But talking over real facts, like they never happenned only shows that this thread have no future,…

I’d suggest you do some serious self-reflection then, because I am presenting you with facts and you are ignoring them and instead choosing to insult me… possibly because you can’t come up with any logical arguments. /shrug

[Cpt_Bel_V]

@Sergeantpwn

I’m not changing the subject at all and i think it is in fact you who is unable to understand simple discussion, or the basic principles with which air-to-air weapons work…

Initial talk:

@Sergeantpwn

Never in a real war have planes hugged the ground until they merged in giant furballs where only IR missiles were of real use.

Derivation n°1:

@Sergeantpwn

You talking about the ones that happened in the 1960s when radar missiles were in their infancy? when I’m talking about an aircraft with weapons from the 1980s with much more reliable models? seriously?

Derivation N°2

@Sergeantpwn

So you’re saying korean war era jets with guns only operate on the same weapons employment premise as modern jets with advanced missiles? When one can shoot a target only within a mile and the other can shoot a target within 100? lmfao.

Insults

@Sergeantpwn

in fact you who is unable to understand simple discussion

Basically,… subject was PLANE HUGGING GROUND
Not missiles, be it IR or Radar,…

You’re the one making this co.versation unfit to proper discussion,… as said earlier, as an answer of the initial point you were wrongly making:

@Cpt_Bel_V

Please add spacing in your text,… somewhat indigest to read.

If you were spacing it & making ideas CLEAR

and not
confusing people with 666 differents informations, some of which only are implied while not being told (aka i talk of radar missile but nowhere do i speak about them directly)

On a forum used by Non-English speakers, already trying their best to communicate the best as possible, then MAYBE

JUST MAYBE, you could have a discussion…

Yet, i’m not the one insulting for a “non-told idea”

And again, everyone wanted to hit the ground in MiG-23 and F-14,… was also true in Iran-Irak, yom kippour, Desert Storm,…

And was already true in Korea :
F9F Panthers, F4U’s, AD-2/4 trying to hide from MiG-15’s

And was already true in Vietnam :
A-4’s/A-6’s goinglow to avoid MiG-17’s

Or again, at Gulf of Sidra incident of 1989,
where 2 F-14’s and 2 MiG-23’s engaged each other?
F-14’s were fit with AIM-7F or M (both were in service at that time)/AIM-9L’s
MiG-23’s were using R-23’s (AA-7 APEX) / R-60

The first to get hugging the ground were F-14’s, descending rapidly from 20.000 feets to 3000 feets, to avoid R-23’s being launched at them.

Maneuvers that was immitated by MiGs,…

The Lead F-14 fired 2x AIM-7, both of which didn’t tracked (for RIO reasons), and only the third missile, which was fired AFTER merging tracked and spalshed his target, meanwhile and also after merge, the AIM-9L shot a SINGLE AIM-9L to the MiG-23, and splashed his target right away.

So if we’re looking here to modern Weapons and Tactics
→ diving to “hug” the ground (reducing ennemy Radar effectiveness)
→ AIM-7F results 1/3
→ AIM-9L results 1/1

So i’m pretty happy with the current in-game implementation letting me able to kill pretty much more often.

Btw, F-15/F-14 historically were superior,… those aircrafts pushed Russian into adding new aircraft in their inventory, which eventually got MiG-29/Su-27.

So currently the F-15 is welleol placed in BR, as it take away a 90% advantage out of it, to fight it’s contemporaries counterparts

[Sergeantpwn]

@Cpt_Bel_V

Basically,… subject was PLANE HUGGING GROUND
Not missiles, be it IR or Radar,…

You have to be trolling. My whole point is that advancing missile technology which was able to discriminate against multipathing better made ground hugging not viable as a tactic anymore.

Let me restate it for you a different way:

Missiles sucked in the 1960s, they couldnt discriminate against ground clutter. So fighters hugged the ground. Missiles didn’t suck in the 1980s, so if a fighter hugged the ground in the 1980s, he would die.

Advances in missile technology (inverse monopulse seeker in particular) are directly responsible for the tactic of ground hugging becoming obsolete.

@Cpt_Bel_V

If you were spacing it & making ideas CLEAR

Again, typed it the exact same way you did.

[Cpt_Bel_V]

@Sergeantpwn

Again, typed it the exact same way you did.

Go check around that:

@Sergeantpwn

My problem with the F-15 is that the way it is played in this game so viamently contrasts the role it should really fill. Never in a real war have planes hugged the ground until they merged in giant furballs where only IR missiles were of real use. This game has departed from its mission of keeping realistic battles somewhat realistic and the F-15A is the worst symptom of that. If it lost the 9M, moved down, gained a counterpart in a lower SU-27, and multipathing was removed, it would play in a way much closer to reality. If it was at 12.0, it would be at a BR where comparable aircraft with comparable weapons already exist (MIG29, F16). I frankly dont give a damn how much it gets downtiered. It could be at 20.0 for all i care as long as it doesnt face enemies with R-27ERs and its sparrows actually worked below low earth orbit.

That wasn’t spaced at all,…

[Sergeantpwn]

my fault you can’t read more than 5 sentences at once… sometimes you need more than 5 words to convey a point.

[Cpt_Bel_V]

Anyway,… explain to me why people are in average 4.5 times better than you ? (And that’s the average! Not even the best players).

My point is : you don’t use your weapons correctly.
(Oh that’s 6 words,… you were right! But was i only using 5 word until now? No,… )

You’re complainning of aircraft which is currently working pretty good/well, behave better than all 12.0/12.3.

And certainly is at it’s place today in game.

[Sergeantpwn]

We’re not talking about me or my skill. We’re talking about how the F15A’s role in this game is fundamentally wrong and should be fixed.

If you can bring me documentation saying that the F-15 was meant to shoot infrared missiles in a furball and that its radar missiles were a secondary armament, then I will concede the argument.

Good luck finding that though. Cause that was not the F-15C’s purpose.

[Cpt_Bel_V]

I’m saying that you’re in game PoV is rigged to your Results, and that i have no problem with the aircraft currently in-game and so does 99% of the players,…

That the current discussion is also vain, do to average results, making Gaijin to believe that no change is required.

And so you can take your F-15 to custom games against 1.0 AI/Bots if all you wanted was to better than anything around.

[Sergeantpwn]

Your whole line of argument is really weak. I clearly am not going to influence you, so I’m going to stop trying.

[Cpt_Bel_V]

You’re not going to influence me, because you’re bringing in argumentation that is inappropriate either for:

• Game balance after your propositions (inane to see F-15A fighting the likes of F-104S)

• Current situation of the aircraft (you take your experience and not average one)

• Reduction of weaponnary quality (which will end up by having your fellow US players “thanking you”[the hard way], for having doing that)

• inane “historical” argument to not having to fight R-27ER or R-27ET because you have not the best missile in comparison, and that both missiles are contemporary to F-15A:
  R-27ER was in service in 1990
  R-27ET was in service in 1990
  F-15A was service from 1976 to 2009:
  → USAF 1976 to 1990 then slowly phased out to ANG
  → ANG January 1990 to 2007 then slowly being phased out up to september 2009, and replaced by F-15C/D coming from USAF.

ANG - Air National Guard basically being second line fighters, air police mission over the USA.
USAF - United States Air Force

• unwilling to go through the bug report process to make your AIM-7F/AIM-7M to track as it should (that’s one of your PoV argument that might be the must flawed, as it is not backed up with any ounces of Technical documentation,… and from now, all documentation i’ve seen on my side is suggesting that AIM-7M tracking ability is already too high)

Also, You try to force your PoV onto other and do not considerate their arguments.

[tripod2008]

@Cpt_Bel_V

unwilling to go through the bug report process to make your AIM-7F/AIM-7M to track as it should

Sufficient sources have been presented and actioned, the missile dev just refused to actually implement the Sparrow’s features for example;

*The AIM-7E has a Speedgate of +/-150kts [~280m/s]

• It Should completely ignore Chaff (Para. 16. of below excerpt)
  

  

• Have better Rear aspect performance
  

  

• Is completely missing the English Bias maneuver, even though the Igla has a similar post launch correction maneuver modeled.

• The -7E should also be near impossible to cause the missile to retarget due to how conical scan works and the seeker’s gain making the HPBW meaning that the new target would need to; be within the +/- 7 degree cone from the Shooter’s antenna pointing angle in order to be illuminated, be within the +/- 150kts of the true target to bypass the missile’s Speed gate, and then be closer than 86% the distance to the true target (assuming they had the same RCS and were perfectly positioned at + or - 7 degrees off the antenna), and be within the missile seeker’s FoV (the effective aperture of a 6" parabolic reflector is ~ +/-12 degrees,) which nutates.

And a few other things I’m sure I could find if I really tried.

@Cpt_Bel_V

and from now, all documentation i’ve seen on my side is suggesting that AIM-7M tracking ability is already too high

And what are you basing this claim off?