F-20, the best plane that never entered production

It all depends on which version Gaijin decides to implement: They could do it based on the 2nd or 3rd prototype, with only rear-aspect AIM-9J/P and AIM-7F, YF404 (16,000 lbf) F404-GE-100 (17,000 lbf), and standard/pre-production APG-67 (as well as proposed CM dispensers for the 4th prototype).
Or, they could do it based on the hypothetical production aircraft, namely the 4th prototype: uprated F404 at 18,000 pounds of thrust, slightly more powerful APG-67, possible AIM-9L/AIM-7M (doubtful, seeing as there’s no definitive proof on if it would’ve carried either, seeing as it wasn’t tested with them), and maybe even a GE camo based on a hypothetical US Air National Guard livery.
Also, expanded fuel capacity (not by much) and definitely AN/ALE-40 CM dispensers (as mentioned in one of the sales films)

Another major thing: the F-20 was likely intended (or at least proposed) to be AMRAAM-capable.
A better F-5E with better turn rate, acceleration/top speed, avionics, semi-FBW controls (more responsive), and AMRAAMs sounds like too good of an opportunity to pass up as an event vehicle…

1 Like

In my mind it will end up premium only ^^"

1 Like

Part of me wants it to be a premium, since then it’d have premium benefits as well as being cheaper (total cost) than an event vehicle.

Some neat stuff I found regarding the Tigershark, namely in regards to weapon options, potential add-ons, plans, etc









image


2 Likes

There is no need for the F-20A, the F-5E in-game already outperforms it.
When I bug reported it, the Devs quoted a Russian manual for the performance of the aircraft;
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/hIzLAh45I9sD

Overperformance compared to the known US data at 15,000 feet;

Spoiler

https://i.imgur.com/XYw6EFQ.png
11.25 deg/s at 0.5 mach (should be ~9)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jdld1a8jrs

11.3 deg/s at 0.7 mach (should be ~10)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9iIa-99fx0

11.5 deg/s at 0.87 mach (should be ~9.5-10)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xJ2_WeB3oo

11.0 deg/s at 0.95 mach (should be ~9)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0APMHNMpKI

Overperformance compared to the known US data at 5,000 feet;

Spoiler

15.5 deg/s at 0.5 mach (should be 11 deg/s).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fUAI2GnqdE

14.2 deg/s at 0.8 mach (should be 13 deg/s)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njXKdqbZ2dI

Sources:
T.O. 1F-5E-1 (1990)
Fighter Weapons Symposium

Unpopular Opinion here it could also be added to Germany or Taiwan/China

2 Likes

I don’t recall the F-5E carrying sparrows. There is more than enough room for an F-20 in game

4 Likes

On top of the F-20 having modern avionics and radar in the AN/APG-67.

3 Likes

Irrelevant - if having nothing outperform a vehicle was the criteria for being in WT there would only be 1 vehicle in every tree.

IMO this should be a gift/even vehicle - to be worked for not purchased by new players.

4 Likes

Add a vote?

2 Likes

Obviously anything is welcome - even if there is no reason to add it. It’s just me making the point that the F-5E currently outperforms the F-20A in sustained turn rate in-game for some reason and the devs decided they aren’t going to change it.

^

Why?

All for it.

Kind of a weird way to make a point. The F-5E may be over performing, but it’s like saying the F-16A blk 10 is over performing so there is no reason to add the F-16XL. Both might be similar, but are completely different in capability. There are better ways about getting that error corrected, and who knows maybe fiddling with the F-20s flight model makes them take a second look at the F-5E>

6 Likes

I didn’t even know people were still interested in this topic lol. But yeah, I guess ai could see it as a premium rank VIII. But even still, I agree that the F-20 would still be cool if it was added even if the F-5E outperforms it. Like someone said previously. Plane being added because of different capabilities makes the variants cool and adds variety to the game. The blueprints of the F-20 shared previously prove that it can carry 9Ls and unfortunately with it being a prototype and never being tested after the F-16 was adopted it never got the chance to be tested with more advanced missiles. This would be an aircraft that Gaijin would have to assume it capabilities or force it to only have tested weapons and be at a lower BR than what it could have been. I still think the F-20 would be an incredible plane to add to this game.

2 Likes

So, I recently acquired a very new book on the F-20, written by Paul Metz, a former Tigershark test pilot.
Lots of interesting stuff in there, which also provides more than enough info to know what this thing DEFINITELY would get in-game, depending on the incarnation

Will try and post pictures when possible

(Edit: did not mean to reply, my apologies lol)

2 Likes

Apologies for the poorer quality of photos, I intend on finding a way of getting this book scanned in the near-ish future, so that it can be used in a re-done suggestion





























11 Likes

That’s pretty cool, two sources showing almost identical sustained turn charts for the F-20A Tigershark.
Fighter Weapons Symposium maximum sustained G loading chart

2 Likes

No idea if you’re being genuine about me finding another source that matches yours or what (apologies lol)

2 Likes

I am being genuine, I was hoping to find a second source somewhere for the sustained turn rate. This means that we have two secondary sources for bug reporting purposes (that match). If they add it to the game and it doesn’t perform according to these charts it’s an easy fix.

It also pretty much guarantees the F-5A/E in-game are both overperforming. They shouldn’t perform on par with the F-20 in sustained turn rate.

2 Likes

Oh dang, awesome! And yeah, there’s more stuff in this book I may post as well (I just need to get more and better pictures)

Also, that doesn’t surprise me too much lol

2 Likes

Also, interestingly, this book ended up proving the idea of the F-20 having the M39s removed to fit the longer-range radar false. Turns out Northrop had already produced the larger nose meant for the APG-67(V), and designed it as to fit both M39s (albeit with reduced ammo count)

Most interesting thing to me though are those LERX-pylons, which could carry Pave Penny, LANTIRN, Sparrows, and AMRAAMs supposedly

2 Likes