That’s what I think as well.
After all “evaluated” doesn’t mean “implemented”, and “tested” doesn’t mean “tested successfully”, and even “tested successfully” doesn’t mean “implemented” or “standardized”… ;-)
Huh?
XL wasn’t even tested with any amraam configuration from the beginning so why not add best possible loadout.
6 Aim-120+2 Aim-9L or 4 Aim-120+2 Aim-9M would be best choice.
I can almost guarantee that the Arjun is gonna be an event vehicle
Gaijins decision to give Britain even more subtrees is making it nearly impossible for India’s unique stuff to be placed in the regular TT
As good as f16a I assume. 6 agm65b, 0.9M, heat warhead, 5km lock on moving targets, no thermals, excessive zoom. Faces pantsir s1 (free ones in uptiers), sm sv, other top tier aa. Also su30mk2/mkk. And top tier jets like su30sm2 in uptiers.
There is no 12.0 GRB anymore, it’s all 12.7
1 Like
time to bust out the AV-8B NA and farm airfield AA
Lmao Premium Su30’s 13.3 in Air and 12.3 in Ground is the biggest joke of this game, make all other vehicles within the BR use them as the standard.
Inconveniently, the book did not specify the HMD model; however, I did further research and made an educated guess. It’s likely they tested with a so-called “Falcon Eye HMD.”
https://rochesteravionicarchives.co.uk/items/helmet-mounted-display-model
What we know is that the F-16XL-2 tested with an HMD and FLIR pod on 14 and 16 December 1983.
Here’s a picture of the F-16XL-2 with the FLIR pod on the same day:
According to the Rochester Avionic Archives, the Falcon Eye HMD was tested as early as July 1982 on the AFTI F-16, and the FLIR pod and radar were automatically slaved to the pilot’s head movement with the Falcon Eye HMD. It’s also noted that the Falcon Eye HMD was used for the first off-boresight missile firing in 1991.
Remember, this HMD was still in the experimental stage at that time, so the final Falcon Eye HMD and its design may have been different in the 1990s, as it was later renamed Nighthelm. I concluded that this was the likely HMD they were lent to test on the F-16XL-2, given that the timeline aligned with the AFTI F-16 and F-16XL testing.
Edit: found this footage thanks to my friend on Discord.
Demonstration of the F-16’s Falcon Eye helmet-slewed nose FLIR. (Rochester archives)
9 Likes
Eh if this is how its to be then Aim-9M+ Aim-120’s will be better option considering you are hard limitied to two sidewinders.
the 9L is fine for its current BR
it is at 13.0 after all, with amraams and way better flight performance than any other 13.0 amraam carrier
1 Like
If you have a premium plane at rank 7 or more, just play with no worrys at all. You will make around 70k per game easy.
But sim is pretty much mid with no premium and premium plane
Should the AV-8B Plus be considered a standard of what a 13.0 120 carrier should be ?
13.0?
Though it was going to be 13.3, if that is the case then its fine with 9L’s.
there is also the Viggen or the F-4F ICE
F4F ICE should be considered as standart I believe.
2 Likes
Nah, the Viggen and the Harriers should be the baseline for 13.0
Those are by far the weakest ARH platforms right now
even if we were to compare the F-16XL to the F-4F ICE, it would still easily beat it
the F-16XL is going to be the best 13.0 AMRAAM slinger
and a really good contender for 13.0 as a whole
1 Like
It’s moreso in the conceptual idea that the plane has a massive downside that is to be exploited in order to curb it’s potential.
In the case of the Plus, it being a flying trashcan, and I can’t really speak for the other since I never touched the platforms.
But in the XL’s case I don’t really see what that downside really is. Granted it shouldn’t be the same BR as the MKK and MK2 either, but the dead horse has been thoroughly pulped at this point…