Well-
Their take is also partially right, sadly.
Of course, it isn’t the full draw of the problem.
Perhaps a dark side to Gaijin’s balancing?
F-15A really seems like a strange plane
It shouldn’t be current 12.7 without removing 9M, it might be better than the current MiG-29 with R-60M…
But also, it seems it doesn’t fits current 13.0 meta.
Too good for 12.7, but quite bad at 13.0
Quite strange. Feels a bit like F-14A syndrome 2.0.
If radar becomes fully repaired after a few months have passed.
Can it go back to 13.0 (of course, further decomp would be a prerequisite. No ARH Sukhoi at 13.3)…?
Anyway,
Even if I dislike F-15A coming down to 12.7, and worry about the slippery slope of buffing some 12.7BR jets
(Example: MiG-29 might really need R-73 badly if this situation has become stagnated just like how F-86 and MiG-15 nailed the coffin of early jets…)
Still, it seems all I can do is get used to it.
Naah… how could F-15 be the plane version of satan.
If Gaijin offers a Hornet-like radar illumination which doesn’t fall apart on a target moving diagonally, sure. Bump it to 13.0, no questions asked, even without touching the compression above.
In my humble opinion, the biggest current drawback the F-15A has is its radar being paired with the AIM-7M, first when it was at 13.0, and still kind of is at 12.7. If it had for instance a similar radar performance of the Hornet’s radar at 13.0, it would definitely be no argument here and this compression would’ve been totally unfair by any metric.
Honestly, I think the skill level of the pilots flying the American F-15As has at least some impact on the results.
The F-15A’s K/D being worse than the F-15J’s… well, that’s probably not too surprising given the performance gap between the AAM-3 and AIM-9M.
But what’s up with this K/D difference between the F-15A and Baz?
Sure, the number of matches is overwhelmingly lower compared to others. (There just aren’t that many users on the Israeli tree to begin with.) But even so, I think there’s a difference that can’t be ignored.
That said, my current assessment of the F-15A is that it’s an aircraft with performance between 12.7 and 13.0.
If asked if it’s 12.7, I’d deny it, but if asked if it’s 13.0, that’s also a tough call. Its current BR range is simply too narrow.
Admittedly, since there are few 11.7-rated aircraft facing off against the 12.7 F-15A, it probably isn’t worth worrying about.
Besides, the MiG-29 and F/A-18 can still hold their own. They at least have features that are superior in certain areas.
But even if they were originally within the matching range, how are Netz or F-16A supposed to shoot down F-15As flying at 6,000-7,000 meters when the probability of matching against F-16AJs, EJ-mods, or Kurunass 2000s has increased?
Nevertheless, I firmly believe the BR for the F/A-18A, F/A-18C (Early), Su-33, and Su-30Mk2/MKK – which hold overwhelming superiority against peers or inferior opponents – should definitely be raised. I also believe these are the root cause of this controversy.
I honestly think the performance difference is overstated. It’s maybe a kilometer more range, and a little bit more pull. Most shots you take with an AAM-3, you could just as easily get with an AIM-9M by just… waiting a few more seconds, getting a little closer, pulling a bit more lead.
This is also the weapon that impacts matches the least. This isn’t the old, pre-ARH days, where you could just take an F-15 up to 7km and rain AIM-9Ms down on the enemy furball.
I’d take the borderline identical KD stats between the F-15J and the Baz as proof of this.
Imo the F-15A should get AIM-7P to have something Merely “good” to fight 13.0 aircrafts.
It’s a Sparrow, but at least a better one.
The main thing we need is decompression (and no, 14.7 is not enough, should be 15.3/16.7 as minimum). Now i’m not a programmer nerd, but i think it’s not THAT HARD to increase a number in the matchmaker and chance some planes’ BRs.
Sorry, I’ve been translating and speaking at the same time. What I meant to say wasn’t “That’s probably not too surprising given the performance gap between the AAM-3 and AIM-9M.” but rather “The performance gap between the AAM-3 and AIM-9M might be one reason.”
I should have double-checked. My apologies.
All good. It’s just a talking point I’ve seen a lot recently, people freaking out at AAM-3s as though they’re some super weapon when they’re a pretty marginal upgrade over AIM-9Ms. I’ve even see people saying that it’s a reason to put the F-15J 0.3 BR over the F-15A.
Honestly, until recently I thought it was okay for the F-15A and F-15J to have differences in their BR.
But that wasn’t because the AAM-3 was superior; it was for other reasons, and I don’t think that now.
over 15% less drag clearly doesnt cause a significant range difference
having a 1/10th of the rejection threshold and an infinitely better reaction time (literally 0.02 seconds vs 0 seconds) is clearly identical IRCCM
“If just adding Python3 to the F-16A boosts BR, shouldn’t the F-15J get the same treatment?” That might be a kind of jealousy. But Netz’s BR has dropped now. So I don’t think that now.
I know you do not currently think that the F-15J should be higher, but can you repeat back to me the complaint as to why people think the F-15 cannot perform at 13.0?
