The Yak-141 saw a limited production run of Four Airframes, so it’s not actually paper. Though the configuration portrayed in game absolutely is.
The SAC sheet was linked in a prior post, wasn’t the issue of how the 8-10 AMRAAM figure was arrived at, which should at least be self evident.
Let me guess evidence of carriage / release by the F-14A &-14B don’t count, for the F-14D do they considering we can’t prove that they successfully guided to the target, or that the AWG-9 can guide the AIM-120.
F-14A-65-GR #158625
Note Specifically the AIM-120’s compatibility with FM-CW guidance methods is directly mentioned, and that F-16A-15ADF’s in Italian service did mount them, so it is likely that an unmodified AWG-9 could provide a suitable guidance signal.
@tripod2008
Yak-141 is not a paper aircraft in-game.
The configuration in-game is a historical loadout for the prototype.
It’s an unfinished prototype, not paper, not production.
The Marines use a number of completely bespoke configurations (from the USN), and two seater hornets still exist as options, so they wouldn’t be a complete mirror of one another.
To me it looks like the f/a 18 will be true successor to the F5e
Given it looks very similar overall and main wings Having very similar narrow sweep angle
But lower wing Loading maybe it’s even more maneuver able despite Being heavier
So it’s going to be an ufo at low to medium speed while lacking in top speed
Seems like the hint in the update prologue pretty much confirmed a Hornet of some sort is coming. Hopefully in the naval line because I’m dumb and didn’t buy the A-10C and AV-8B+ during the New Years sale.
The implementation of the Legacy Hornets as replacements for the A-6s and A-7s seems like those should be in the attacker line. Super Hornets being the F-14D and Legacy Hornet replacements should put them in the naval “fighter” line.
the hornets still serve the marines while the navy replaced them with superhornets, so hornets belong better under the marines Harrier II
the hornets were intended to be cheaper, lighter and more importantly, more multirole fleet aircraft compared to f-14s, and so to be complements to them rather than successors. On the other hand superhornets were heavier aircraft intended to replace the tomcats. On this aspect hornets belong better in a parallele line to tomcats and superhornets belong better under the tomcats
As bakabueno highlighted it the hornets were replacement to attackers of the navy so they belong very well in the attack line
F-18C is peak hornet. F-18E is the worst as a fighter despite being a better multirole on paper.
Either way F-18Cs are F-14 replacements IRL and definitely in-game.
@AydanL44100
Except the F-18C is a successor. Superhornets weren’t meant to replace F-14s, and for WT’s air to air they’re going to be the worst due to weighing more than a Phantom.
F-18C is not an attacker, it’s a fighter. The only arguable attacker is the F-18E due to its intended roles.
Putting F-18C in any attacker line would be putting F-14B into the attacker line just cause it can also do multi-role.
I don’t think their real performance really matters, what matters most to me is their intended role… hornets were NOT intended to replace the tomcats, that’s like saying the f-16 was made to replace the f-15. They were way lighter and highly multirole, and supposed to replace the A6 and A7 while the tomcats were focused on fleet defense.
Later they decided to make the superhornets which were much bigger and heavier and were intended to replace the tomcats although remaining just as multirole
And this, is all facts
