I don’t think the F-18A received the AIM-7P block 2, even if it did, I am fairly certain that the datalink feature would only be available to aircraft also already compatible with AMRAAM.
i mean even if they don’t add AMRAAMS to F/A-18A… AIM-7Q and AIM-7R 💀
still tryina find a source on what apg-65 can use amraam
You just need to scroll up.
1 Like
surprising, i asked chat GPT this and it was actually right for once…
Disappointingly it’s also the most likely
EFT and Rafale fans upset about this btw. They’re not longer kings of BVR in regards to 4.5+ gen fighters.
1 Like
nah they’re still better. Super hornet with that loadout is a brick and the 174 won’t be as good against fighters as meteor… It’ll do better than r-37m though
There’s a reason why aim-260 and LREW haven’t been canceled
7 Likes
Welcome back AIM-54 ))))
The phoenix never truly dies :p
1 Like
If this was an F-18C, yeah sure, F-18E, no.
1 Like
F/A-18C early from USN before 1993 equipped avionics, engine and armament like CF-18A (RCAF), F/A-18A (RAAF) and domestic USN F/A-18A ?
I doubt this
Why would it not be as useful against fighters? It has a much larger warhead, great maneuvering load limit, extremely high energy, two way datalink, more powerful seeker, etc. ??
Those missiles are not cancelled for a reason, yes, but not why you suggest. The AIM-174 is tailored for a specific set of jobs and the NAVY is going to utilize it as it sees fit for those jobs. Since it is quite a multi-role weapon, the fact that it is large is of little consequence.
Even launching one in a point blank head-on would be equally as useful, possibly more useful depending on range than an AIM-120 and certainly more so than Meteor.
Interestingly, the developers have explained why datalink reconnect is currently not possible within their missile model. It means that two-way datalinks and other features of the Meteor will NOT be plausible in the game for some time. This means that the Meteor’s medium range performance will be extremely MID. That is because the time to target is longer after a certain range, missiles with dual pulse or boost-sustain configurations will reach targets sooner and require less time on datalink. These ordnances will be less likely to lose datalink connection and more likely to hit defensive targets than the Meteor for those reasons.
Anyhow, having the range advantage against literally everything is a pretty big bonus if you ask me. Especially for a fighter that would be heavily hindered otherwise by drag and acceleration. Pretty funny for an aircraft with such good EW capabilities and low altitude performance to just bum rush the enemy within the MAR and then spam some nigh-undodge-able 1500 pound telephone poles at people just to turn around and escape free of charge.
4 Likes
The whole point of the missile being throttleable is so this isnt the case.
2 Likes
I love how you put this
what are we classing as “such good low altitude performance”?
If we ever get the F/A-18A, this could make for a decent GE/unlockable camouflage:
(It should be mentioned that this is not an Adversary Hornet, this was used by on deployments)
4 Likes
AIM-260 is made to be mounted on the F-35 and F-22. In the weapon bays basically. A telephone pole would not be able to fit. I could see it tho on the EX
AIM-260 is first supposed to equip F-18’s, and serves as an AMRAAM replacement in AMRAAM form factor.
It’s just a modernized AMRAAM, possibly wingless with improved seeker, proximity sensor, warhead and booster.
1 Like
what?
i’m not doubting that. AIM-174A still does not replace aim-260 though
5 Likes