Resolution and zoom are the problem.
Angles are irrelevant if you need to get closer to gain a workable picture
End of the day this is a 90s TGP for a jet projected for 2030, utterly unreasonable when newer and compatible TGPs exist
your right the zoom of sniper is a problem
it doesnt have a wide enough field of view to effectively scan for targets
and the resolution of lantrn is still easily good enough to identify targets at the ranges you should engage from
1 Like
Are you going to be salty this entire thread 🥱
Sounds like you’re getting your MAWs so there is no need to be sour when this is a blatantly idiotic situation
40 year difference of tech here, the LANTIRN is not justifiable for the IA
44x zoom and gen 1 thermals vs 127x zoom and gen 2/2.5, zooming shouldn’t be an issue if it’s on your scroll wheel which is fully adjustable
MAWS isn’t integrated on US F-15EXs, MRMLs aren’t integrated on F-15EXs
4 Likes
Doesn’t matter, if they kick and scream loud enough gaijin will throw them a bone
2 Likes
or maybe the problem is that gaijin seems to forget its technical compatibility rule whenever its time to add stuff to a new US top tier
2 Likes
What dual racks does the EX use on its outer pylons if it isn’t MRML?
And please enlighten me as to when other countries integrated and fielded CIRCM on their AH-64E
F-15IA is a totally nonexistent vehicle and this is what your speaking out about?
4 Likes
Well it doesn’t tend to go both ways, in order to get 229s of our I we had to sacrifice getting F&F missiles for two whole patches, making the Ra’am signifigantly worse than the F-15E for CAS, while the US one got it’s 229s in the end anyway.
Israel will make a special purchase requirement, and when it suits US mains they’ll beg for it on their one, however when it goes the other way (eg LANTIRN vs Sniper) suddenly we should go hungry
KH-38MT/ML is not integrated into any foreign SU-30s, if it even exists.
Foreign AH-64s never got any JAGM variant, neither did most of them integrate CIRCM.
F-15IA currently does not exist.
MAWS have been specifically removed from the F-15EX, the first one still having them on while in production. MAWS will be integrated into future lots.
MRML is very integrated into the F-15EX, on stations 1 and 9, they just need to add one more rack on stations 2 and 8, being very compatible with the platform.
I suppose you already have the images with what i’ve said, so i won’t bother sharing them the gazillionth time
8 Likes
If someone can have something because it is theoretically compatible with it, i want it too
1 Like
wow there is so much wrong here
F15E were ordered and delivered with -229 engines years before F-15I was even a concept
so how exactly is something that was already in US service a “special purchase requirement”
4 Likes
Ive already said in this thread that both aircraft should be identical besides for spice 250 and stormbreaker, i don’t see a need to have one be different or better when theyre virtually identical platforms
You mean there wasn’t anything on the F-15I carrying mavericks but due to more lenient weapon additions rules later, they added it in?
And if you could please point out where on Israel’s FMS request the AAR-57 CMWS is mentioned i would appreciate it
If they tested the Sniper or integrated it, they should get it, no one should “go hungry”
Well in this case there is a nice LITENING 3 or 5 waiting for the IA when it enters service
I didn’t see what you said earlier in the thread.
I wasn’t referring to the IA, as it’s pretty much the same as the EX, therefore, it should get most of the buffs the EX gets.
I was talking about the Su-30 situation
What?
R-77 twin racks aren’t integrated on the Su-30SM, Su-30SM2 or Su-27SM, AL-41FS isn’t integrated on the Su-30SM2, N035E isn’t integrated on the Su-30SM2, I could go on for a while
9 Likes
cool, good for it, don’t see why not
When each and every Su-30 got the KH-38s because it was “theoretically compatible” with it
1 Like