No tbh i have a feeling next update they will add 15c
4 Likes
In my opinion, F-14D could be 12.3 or 12.7 BR located after F-14B
F-14A late great fighter aircraft 12.0 at rank 8 and would be in the folder with F-14A Early
But currently I have no idea next premium pre-order pack aircraft at rank 8 for USA in the future
1 Like
F-14D has the potential to be extremely good. apparently it had AMRAAM capable pylons and radar (although likely never fitted or used)
5 Likes
Still it is very prone to IR missiles due to its hot engine hahaha
F-14D uses some of the F-15’s radar technology if i remember correctly, this means it should have MPRF and improved other models (simple explanation tho Tomcat D radar was much more sophisticated then i explained).
Although F-14A was the testbed for Amraam i believe Gaijin will add Tomcat D with Amraams.
I dont think the F-14A late is ever coming realistically…
Theres no real reason to add an F-14A Late, this whole “early” and “late” thing is just an excuse for gaijin to hold a jet back in weaponry, as that is almost always the only thing that ends up being particularly different by WT standards between the “early” and “late” variants. Maybe it’ll get added at a much later date as filler material, but its a massive waste of time imo.
F-14D will come eventually, but the real question is how horridly will it be modelled? The F-14B in-game is already a bit of a travesty of a plane imo;
- The TCS it has, a novel optoelectronic sensor that is an integral part of the weapons control system and has extensive documentation and bug reports explaining EXACTLY how it works, is modelled as a bad TGP in WT, and does nothing of what it does IRL in-game. It doesn’t help with enemy jet identification at range because of spotting range, it doesn’t slave the radar during notches, it doesn’t allow for boresight AIM-54 missile shots, etc…
- The AIM-54C is nerfed hard in many ways. Missing a reduced smoke motor, having excessive drag, having a BAD loft profile (minor modifications to the loft profile by a player has shown that the missile could have vastly improved performance with just a minor change to the code), lack of directional warhead, no new seeker, no energy management code, missing 8g of max overload (gaijin mods themselves have posted the sources for 25g, but it wont ever be fixed cuz of “reasons”). As it currently stands, the AIM-54C is outright worse than the AIM-54A in effectively all scenarios in-game.
- BOL got nerfed hard because the Gripen was overperforming, so the F-14’s, which need it a lot more due to their size and heat signature got caught in the crossfire. This is despite the fact that a tech mod submitted a bug report proving BOL should be more effective than it is, as its a newer type of pyrotechnical decoy mechanism, and judging it purely based on size/weight doesn’t tell the full story.
- 2 seat jets in general get the short end of the stick in WT, as they are meant to be operated by 2 people, but WT doesn’t allow this, nor implement any advantages to them to account for this. The F-14’s therefore have notably terrible ACM ranges for example at 9km vs the standard ~19km seen in-game because at any further ranges, the RIO would manually acquire targets. This is one of the reasons why I made this suggestion.
The F-14D would suffer from all these same issues, as well as the fact that at the moment, its a complete guess as to if it will receive AIM-120A’s or will stick to Sparrows only like the AIM-7M or AIM-7P. Technically speaking, the F-14’s could fire the AIM-120, it was one of the aircrafts used for testing it, and the 120A’s can be seen on the F-14D’s SAC sheet, but budget cuts and politics lead to the F-14D never getting it in service. There’s also the problem that even more so than the current F-14’s, the F-14D includes still classified systems. The AN/APG-71, likely the largest “upgrade” to the F-14D, is afaik just about completely classified, which means gaijin will have free-reign to butcher it however they like, as nobody will be able to argue with their “creative interpretation” of the system. I think the AN/AAS-42 IRST will also suffer a similar fate to gaijins “creative interpretations”.
As it stands, I think when we see the F-14D is completely up in the air, as they could add it next patch and butchered, or later in a better state, but I have no trust in gaijins track record with the F-14’s and its weapons/systems.
5 Likes
AN/APG-71 has around 75% commonality with the F-15E’s AN/APG-70 radar. It should be a MUCH better radar than anything currently seen in-game. I’ve heard F-15E pilots and WSO’s describe the AN/APG-70 (and likely by extension 71) as “nearly un-notchable”. I dont know the exact differences between both radars though, and my best guess would be that the 71 is optimized for air combat and long range detection/identification through NCTR, while the 70 is more for mixed/ground attack use.
1 Like
Well, there is a quite valid addition for an F-14 Late based on the F-14s in Iranian service. Almost guaranteed to be a hot seller as a premium.
I can’t really agree with this opinion. While the bug reports should be actioned, the F-14B isn’t “bad” as a 12.0 aircraft. The F-14D would give it all-aspect capability and 9Ms. If improvements are made to the Pheonix to make it more usable as a mid-match weapon, it can reasonably stay competitive with other ARH carriers.
1 Like
F-14’s in Iranian service aren’t F-14A Lates though… Most recent pics of them still have AIM-7-E2/4’s and AIM-9J/P’s… They are unique in that they can fire MIM-23 Hawk’s, though afaik those are just bad AIM-54’s air combat-wise.
F-14A with Hawk missile:
There’s been some claims they’d “integrated” some russian weapons like the R-73/R-27’s, and a domestically made AIM-54/MIM-23 replacement called the Fakour-90, but thats also never been seen on the aircraft in flight afaik, the R-27E’s have been seen on one sitting on the ground, but not exactly proof of anything more than maybe testing…
A particularly important point to note is that there are no new pictures of F-14’s with any russian missiles, or indigenously produced missiles, which imo kills the idea that they’ve managed to integrate them. The fact F-14’s are still seen using AIM-9J/P’s, AIM-7-E2/4’s, and AIM-54A’s as late as 2020 is pretty damning.
They could be a neat premium aircraft in the future, but they’d be even worse than the F-14A early already seen in-game.
1 Like
Note I didn’t say its “bad”, I said its a travesty.
Its not bad, and is quite frankly my fav plane to fly, because its unique and has a very high skill ceiling and punishes mistakes. But its held back artificially to a rather extreme degree, and nobody particularly cares because its a particularly hated plane, simply due to its popularity and sometimes perceived “brokenness” by subpar players.
There’s no reason for it to be sitting at the BR it currently sits at beyond the fact that gaijin refuses to model it properly, and quite frankly, the only reason its likely in-game atm is because gaijin didnt want to put the work into adding something like the F/A-18’s in-game. Its important to note the stated reason gaijin added the F-14B was because the US “needed a strike fighter capable of dropping LGB’s”. The F-14 is not a strike fighter. Its a fleet defense interceptor/fighter that got shoehorned into the role of dropping bombs cuz there was nothing else to really shoot down when it was in service. The F/A-18 on the other hand, is an actual strike fighter/attacker, hence the designation.
1 Like
Apologies, my interpretation of what you meant is different to what you said. See below:
Are you saying it’s sitting too high? Even with its limitations I wouldn’t put it lower. Currently, the AIM-54C is quite dominant as an early game missile. This is in spite of the current limitations for it. If and when those bug reports are actioned upon, Pheonixes can become a mid-game threat as well as improve early game performance.
Side rant: I hate this designation with a burning passion considering the US uses F designations for strike roles anyway. Even the F-15E, a dedicated multirole, does not use “A”. I accuse it of being a marketing name, nothing more.
I’m aware of the purpose of the F-14, Gaijin adding the B varient was more likely to capitalize on the popularity of a then-meta and popular aircraft. Still a better strike fighter than the A-10, frankly.
As long as it was in theory capable, as is the standard now thanks to the Yak-141
Their was intention and integration on the F14A and i believe also on the F14D had integration as well
Its better reasoning then R27ER on the Mig29G
My point exactly. It could 10000% receive them because of standards that are currently in place.
1 Like
Well at least the F14D as it would make it a clear upgrade over the F14B
No, I meant it should have been introduced later/properly modelled and stuck at a higher BR. Atm it feels like theyre either holding it back out of spite, or because they want to “fill” the BR brackets, and so aritficially limit it so that the US doesnt have a bunch of 12.7 planes and “holes” in the tech tree. Its BR atm is fine, but it should be modelled properly and set to the appropriate BR.
I am vehemently opposed to mismodelling vehicles, sensors and weapons to make them “fit” in a BR instead of properly modeling them and putting them at the appropriate BR. That’s literally the entire point of a BR system.
It was originally 2 variants of the F/A-18 that had separate roles, but they squished them together leading to the F/A-18 designation. It was also primarily meant to replace the A-6, A-7, and remaining F-4’s, not to replace the F-14, So I think it made sense for them to have the “A” designation moreso than the F one.
I think its a lot more likely they added it because they were being lazy and didnt want/have a full new model ready yet for something else to fit the bill.
They could’ve also just stopped limiting the F-4E (its missing a ton of its ordinance and TGP options), but they seem to be vehemently against that idea, likely because they have plans for an F-4E “late” variant, which would basically just be a copy paste of the Kurnass airframe for the US TT with more guided weapons and maybe newer air to air missiles (its been passed to the devs for a while now).
There was realistically no other reason to add the “Bombcat” to the game as a “strike” aircraft for the US, but it became the US’ “best” multirole aircraft until the F-16’s finally got added. Its likely just a gap filler using a slightly redesigned model. They effectively copy paste the AIM-54A’s to make the C’s as well. Good chance they also used the F-14B because it was controversial as an addition at the time and would deflect from the fact they did a terrible job making it.
I hope it would be on the D and not the B/A, I should make clear. I think it would be foolish to add it to the early tomcats as it is a HUGE advantage compared to everything else and also require crazy and quite frankly inconvenient and odd Uptiering. (I also suck at the Tomcat so… yeah ig)
1 Like
I would love it for the D as i don’t think their is any better AIM54 to add and without it AMRAAMS it would be just another 12.3
Its a bit of an interesting discussion tbh.
The F-14D would historically get the AIM-7P iirc, which would be a great missile to compete with the R-27ER that’s been in the game for over a year now since it includes (afaik) a datalink and trajectory shaping (for better range and energy retention), but gaijins not adding it yet, which means its likely gonna be on the F-14D, and not the AMRAAM.
On the other hand, the F-14D has a good claim to getting the AIM-120 in WT, and will likely need it to compete due to the mix of the hypercrutch that is excessive multipath, since gaijin doesnt think it would be “fair” for players to have to learn to fight BVR missiles properly, and therefore makes flight performance king, and the fact that it will get placed at a BR where everyone else gets AMRAAM, MICA RF, R-77, etc…
Could go either way. My bet is gaijin gives it the 7P and tells everyone to shut up and kick rocks, cuz that’s their usual go-to.
2 Likes
Well with AMRAAMS next update i see it getting AMRAAMS