This is true, but looking at Gaijin’s track record for doing so, it’s all up in the air at the whims of the devs. Knowing that, I think it’ll be fine and would give Japan a bit of longevity for their end of the tree line.
I think this is the point at which one can argue that Japan did consider upgrading the F-2A (iirc) with said features, they instead opted to purchase the F-35 instead. But from what’s being posted, it definitely seems like they had a working HMD/HMCS, just not issued much like the Gripen A. (I actually didn’t know the Gripen A never shipped with HMD, that’s a neat tidbit)
Now if they added a ADTW F-2A (Late?) where we know that aircraft was tested with HMD, that might fulfill your criteria for maintaining historic consistency.
That being said though, Japan isn’t getting anything for awhile after this, and if the F-2A ships to the live update as-is, they’ll be stuck in 13.7 purgatory as more advanced aircraft added will powercreep whatever they have now. Thinking about not just meta but also longevity-wise, I personally think that the F-2A should probably get a bit more bells and whistles to keep it relevant.
I might be misrembering but wasn’t the standard AAM-4 comparable to the AIM-120C-5 in capability? The AAM-4 ingame as we know was artificially nerfed to keep it in line with the AIM-120A and B last I heard.
On one hand, they could add the AAM-4B without HMD which would be kinda interesting - like give it no HMD but a cracked out ARH missile.
Yes, though it’s hard to know if Gaijin will prefer just adding a new missile for BR reasons or edit the current one. In theory the only aircraft this affects is the F-15J(M) and F-2A, both aircraft that could afford to be raised in BR without issue.
The biggest difference I’d imagine that the AAM-4B would offer is better chaff resistance and notch angles, but also in the world of War Thunder, maybe even better kinematic performance
The 4b model should be unnotchable because of AESA seeker due to instantaneous radar updates and no airplane is capable of flying perfectly 90 degrees vs AESA
You can notch the J/APG-2 current just fine (and same could presumably said for Rafale’s AESA radar). In other words, AESA is not unnotchable. All that would be different is the sensitivity to chaff and better angle gating
unfortunately i dont think gaijin will do anything about the F-2 , they should have added it with the F15C/F16C , now its just a sidegrade to the F15J. 4 fox3s are not even enough in air sim , its even worse in air rb.
An ‘ungimped’ AAM-4 would just be the current AAM-4 with the same range and less maneuverability. It already matches its range specifications, while exceeding it’s maneuvering performance.
An AAM-4B would have worse time to target in exchange for slightly greater range due to lofting, and a better seeker.
I’ve always seen that source floating around with the STA-3/9 sub-pylons with the “possible” △ x6~8 AAM4/B configuration, what exactly is that and where did that info come from?
Does the JASDF has some double MRM pylon sitting around or is that just some fantasy?
