Document’S as in multiple witch both don’t mention aim7p 2 only the aim7p and the other one has miss information
The rim7p-1 and rim7p-2 are both called sea sparrows
Yet it still going over your head I already told you they’re not talking about the aim7p 2 their talking about the aim7p1 as I already mentioned before they would have listed it specifically like the aim7m and h model as for even the aim7mh model says it got a update gcs not too mention theirs a reason why it’s called aim7p-1 and aim7p-2 so no I don’t think their talking about both models of the missile unlike the aim7m/h we’re they specifically mentioned them
Dude seriously not even the 3.22.5 from the 2000 list aim7p-2 they would have SPECIFICALLY mentioned the block 2 version saying both block 1 and 2 missiles behave like the aim7mh. it’s not listed in the missile variant list they would have listed it in their especially if their talking about it
A single photo was enough to give the Iranian F-14A a working R-27R1 in-game, completely ignoring that the AWG-9 radar couldn’t even talk to Soviet SARH missiles. But when it comes to the US F-14D, where we have actual technical logs, manuals, and software upgrades showing it was literally built for the AIM-7P, the devs suddenly get hyper-picky about datalink logic. Even the F-14B(U) had the digital backbone to run it, and since we already have proof of an AIM-120 live-fire test on an F-14A, it’s not like there isn’t a testing precedent.
At the end of the day, it’s a game and it needs balance. Look at the Su-33, it proves you don’t even need active-radar Fox-3s to do well at top tier if you have heavy, reliable SARH missiles like the R-27ER. Meanwhile, Phoenixes are basically dead weight in uptiers. Giving late Tomcats their historically accurate AIM-7Ps would give them that exact missing tool, make the plane actually viable in the current meta, and honestly drive way more people to buy the F-14D pack.
Once 5th-gen jets drop, everything is gonna be classified anyway and the devs will literally have to make stuff up for balance. Holding back a fully documented, unclassified missile right now over minor technicalities is a wild double standard that makes zero sense.
Lack of disproving evidence. You need an Iran offical document stated that the R-27R1 test failed to debunk that picture, which is currently the case of AIM-7P datalink on F-14. There is an US offical document stated that there is no AIM-7P datalink on F-14.
There is another report stated that the F-14A was fired as Fox 1 in that test, and another congress report stated that plan AIM 120 test would continue when APG-71 was ready in 1988 or 1989.
US just released too much non propaganda document to the public. It is both a bless and curse.
They have different GCS. The AIM-7MH have WGU-23D/B on AIM-7P Block II and the AIM-7P Block I have WGU-6D/B on AIM-7M. Are you suggesting AIM-7MH and AIM-7M are functionally identical?
Basically 7P Block I (the only one that the F-14B&D can carry) doesn’t have DL, but does have IOG.
It also has LOFT capability, which is shared with the MH.
I’m saying Block 1 retrofit the AIM-7M Guidance an Control Sections and the block 2 retrofits aim7mh each variant performing better than last in eccm capability/low altitude performance both missiles share lofting capability iirc from the aim7mh since it had a enhanced trajectory logic specifically an automated Loft Mode witch is what I think that statement is trying say about the aim7p especially since it says The functionality in the weapon is identical between the AIM-7MH build and AIM-7p meaning it should also retains upgrades/capabilities of the aim7p. And note that it never says it can’t do anything either or even imply it or even say it would need upgrades to be able to use the full capability of the aim7p like some aim120 document do about the f14D needing a (iirc) software update