The Soviet Ar-2/SB 2 folder and the German S.M.79 folder both contain 5 planes.
Iirc I asked Smin and he said it was solely for event/premium vehicles and there were no current plans to increase folder size sadly.
(On that topic why haven’t the removed AR-2 and Sm.79 variants returned, they fit with the limit size and HMS Churchill returned recently)
except it’s a far better F-14B, so it will be 13.3, because F-14B is already 13.0?
1 Like
Su33 is a far better SU27 but isnt higher br ideally
F15A
SU27
SU33
Jas39A would all get raised to 13.3 but due to new premiums SU30MK2 it cant
and its only better in weapon load out like AIM-7P and improved radar at cost of worse FM
Most of them are at “Top tier” for non fox-3 Carriers,…
they’re basically blocked at 13.0 because they don’t have fox-3’s (and not because of new premiums,…)
i have for exemple the BR bump of every F-16A Blk15/20 that went up from 12.7/13.0 BR to 13.3 because of AIM-120A.
F-14D is a fox-3 Carrier,… with a numerical radar (basically as good if not better than F-15A one)
it will carry AIM-54C ECCM/sealed, AIM-7P & M and AIM-9M, which makes it able to adjust it’s use at every range in game.
despite having a slightly worse Flight model, the F-14D could be one of the earliest aircraft in the game (BR wise) to use a multi-platform (multiple aircrafts) datalink.(if this is ever introduced, i agree)
and as said earlier F-14B is already 13.0 (and i don’t see it dropping down anytime soon)
So in every scenario possible, the F-14D will be introduced at 13.3 (if not higher), if it’s ever coming in-game (because i do think it will be a Premium for Rank 8)
the communitity will crash out if its premium
and im pretty sure the F14D with aim120s could only carry 2 aim120As on wing pylons from what photos show so it be very few
with the “tested” rule, it might be possible - but i won’t expect it because the modification required for such use was greater than simply adding a connector to the aircraft.
1 Like
2 aim 120s at 13.3 wouild be horrible
note : “Pre-Service” on the upper right corner ^^"
cough double amram launcher cough
7 Likes
Okay? the aim120 was only successfully tested on the f14 and not entered service that photo still proves it can and that a aim120 can fit on belly where aim7 go as that was a requirement for the aim120 to fit in the missile launch rail like the f4 or even the tornado
2 Likes
Having entered service has never been a requirement. Take the Rafale C F3’s 8 MICAS, MiG-29A’s ERs, Su-30’s double belly racks, JAS-39’s Skyflash, Kfir C.10’s Python 3, the entire Yak-141, etc. etc. etc. for example.
5 Likes
I would like to see they add the aim-54 sealed with the same seeker they use on all fox 3s in game right now tbh
Yes it’s unhistorical/fictional but so are all the seekers of the current fox 3s we have in game anyway since they are all copy and paste of each other (except mica for some reason) +AIM-9Ms on the F-14D would make it a pretty unique jet
what about you read whole conversation? you and @Knuckles7080-live
because 2 post above, i said:
the fact that i’m precising the “Pre-Service” thingy is to avoid US fanboys thinking that the F-14D was introduced with such functionnality (as it wasn’t).
but maybe i’m too stupid to expect people to read the whole conversation before jumping on the one guy trying to get a precise conversation?
or maybe i’m also as stupid to think that people will understand me without requiring the need for a 5 paragraph essay on how they have to read that exact and lone intervention?
So please guys,… please!!! READ any conversation before answering!
while visually astonishing,… nothing proves it was ever used outside of musuem expositions.
do you have more information on those?
from what ive seen its only been test fired on A F14A with TF30s and D model hardware
the F14D in service only had aim-9M and AIM-7P with ECCM AIM-54
so it would be 13.0 if added now due to current BR compression and 13.3 when they add more brs which probably wont happen for a long time
It all depends on one thing. Will they fix AIM-54s?
They never had AIM-120… and the test plane in the pictures was F-14A with 14D radar.
In fact if AIM-54 gets fixed you won’t really need 120A/B … problem is 54 underperforms across the board.Both in speed and maneuverabilty. It should be closer to how F90 behaves (at the very least).
9X , there was a pilot that said openly he used it… and it is backwards compatible so , yes , it’s not that unbelievable. However in the game 9M is the limit and you don’t even want the BR raise a 9X would give.
But 120, well, the radar had the capability… but it wasn’t integrated. That means it needed software upgrades that never took place.
However the VX-4 ones had that capability because …they were testing it (and no they didn’t de-upgrade them). So , they may ^cook^ an event vehicle…as the vehicles existed (14A and 14Ds) …but they were not in combat units.
What i’d do?
Keep F-14A as is, at 12,7 … fix AIM-54A speed only .
F-14B at 13,0 …fix AIM-54A speed , 54C with mk 60 engine both speed and maneuverability. I don’t say 9M because they will raise BR .
F-14D at 13,3 , with 9M , 7P and 54C+ .
VX-4 F-14D 14.0 with 9X, 120A/B , 54C+ and whatever they tested in A-G - It even tested HARMs- as an event plane.
Also about 54C ECCM/Sealed and 54C+ , because i understand that C+ was an upgrade in C ECCM…
NAVAIR says this :
https://www.navair.navy.mil/node/12701
I don’t know whow to explain what… maybe it was an upgrade kit.
2 Likes
True but it was planned and integration was very nearly finished before it was cancelled so it should be in a similar situation as other planned but not used equipment like IRST on the Yak-141 or guns on the XP-50.
3 Likes