Give F-111A AIM-9E

Would you like to see this in-game?
  • AIM-9E
  • AIM-9J and higher BR
  • No

0 voters

The F-111A entered service in 1967, the same year as the AIM-9E. It could carry said AIM-9E. It could even carry AIM-9Js, which entered service in 1972 while F-111As were still running sorties in Cambodia. However, in the dev server it only gets 9Bs. At 10.3 this will be a huge disadvantage especially when the Su-17M2 at the same BR gets R-60s.

A couple images of F-111As with AIM-9Es, evidenced by the narrowed nose rather than the blunt one of the AIM-9B.

I am suggesting that at least AIM-9Es are added to the F-111A’s suspended armament. If 9Js are also added, the 111A could go up in BR to 10.7.


The missiles in the both of the images appear to be aim-9js. Is this just me not looking at them properly?


Both of your pictures are of AIM-9J, I will add them too my bug report


I have no personal stake in this, this is not a jet I will be using nor do I think Aim-9E or Js would be “OP” at either 10.3 or 10.7. But I do play a lot of strike aircraft in and around that BR, like the Jaguar Gr1A, so just passing along some… words of caution

Just bare in mind… Better AAMs = Higher BR

At the moment, the F-111 is probably the fastest thing at its current BR, maybe by quite a lot. start upgrading those AAMs and you may start moving up. Considering that you really really shouldnt be thinking about trying to Dogfight in the F-111, especially with only rear-aspect missiles. Then i’d say doing anything to risk current BR placement for what would be a very minimal buff for the aircraft’s performance might not be worth it.

Now if you can get both, better AAMs and stay in the same BR placement, then great. go for it. But being able to hit ground targets with near impunity at that BR, might be worth more for the aircraft in the long run


I am well aware that armament changes BR, the AIM-9J on pylons 3A and 6A is not game breaking in any way.

In my opinion going to 10.7/11.0 is fine for the F-111A, it wont suffer against top jets, but it will not completely bully 9.3.


Yeah, might be necessary anyway, and yeah, probably would do “fine” interdicting against higher BR jets, but there is a balancing act to strike.

Especially for a ground attacker you also need to consider GRB and what it might face in that as well, especially with limited guided weapons right?

Might be better to almost nerf its A2A to keep it at a BR where it can be fully used in A2G, than to buffs its A2A and risk its A2G.

(10.7 means it “could” face 11.7 SPAA like Pantsir and Tor-M1)

10.7 is just fine for a supersonic strike aircraft that has guided weapons and as meany bombs as a B-52.

“striking a balance” means that the 9.3 jets like Yak-38/F-100/Su-7 dont have to face the F-111.

The F-111 will still be very strong up too 11.0


Prehaps, I dont necessarily think any of those 9.3s would actually have to worry too much about from an F-111, 9Bs are limited in performance and pure speed alone doesnt make an aircraft a super threat.

But again… Dont just think about Air gamemodes. think about the ground modes. As much as I’d love to be able to just delete GRB from the equation for many many aircraft, it is part of that equation. 10.7 and especially 11.0 would mean not only facing higher tier jets, (11.0 would mean it would probably find itself facing all-aspect IR and PD BVR jets like Tornado F3, F-16, Mig-29 quite often) but also now almost guaranteed to be facing high tier Helis and SPAA systems in GRB.

Just make sure to include those into your equation. Could the F-111 reliably get onto target and deploy AGM-12s or unguided bombs whilst being fired at by a Pantsir? I doubt it to be honest.

1 Like

F-111 has CMs, no IR missile is a threat

low alt makes SARH useless

GRB is fine, still have bullpups and bombs, US is not hurting for OP CAS xD

Prehaps, just… I reserve the right to say “I told you so” if this gets better AAMs, moves up in BR and it becomes a useless jet/people moan about it being a really hard jet to use.


Oh you’re right. My bad.
Regardless, AIM-9Es for a Vietnam War jet isn’t a stretch.


9Es are not even pictured on 111As

the only thing in the thousands of 111A pics I have found is 9J, the 111F funnily enough has a few pics with 9E

1 Like

I don’t think that AIM-9Es would improve the A2A capabilities of the F-111 enough to warrant an increase in BR. 9Es are pretty common and unimpressive at 10.3, being relatively easy to dodge even without flares. At 10.3, most vehicles have flares so it’s not like they would make the 111 a capable fighter in any sense.

9Es would just allow the 111 to ambush unaware opponents far better than 9Bs, which can be avoided by accident. It’d allow the 111 to be more than simply a hit 'n run bomber who can only run away from fighters.

9Js on the other hand would 100% require a higher BR.


x2 9Js would not necessarily be enough for a BR increase on their own. But given the 111As FM it already should be higher, 9Js justify that.


9Es were used on 111Fs for training
Unfortunately the 111A was historically used as basically a pure bomber since by the time it entered service there was not really any fighter presence in Vietnam or Cambodia. So there are few pictures of it with missiles at all.

Yeah, I agree with that assessment (and having used 9Es on the Hunter FGA9, I know Id not worry about them being strong) but its always worth just thinking things through and making sure the negatives dont outwiegh the positives

I’ve spent the last year and a bit, in pretty much nothing but strike aircraft and for some I wish I could ditch some bits of it for a lower BR and others I wish I could get some more fire power. So I wanted to pass along my point of view


Yeah, at 10.3 br it could definitely have AIM-9Es.

1 Like

Im not sure, i really don’t know if it should get better AAMs because that’s going to cause the BR to go higher.

This is a strange one, tbh.


Yep, the same thought I had, and why I thought I had better say something. Need to very carefully weigh the pros and cons

1 Like