Wasted potential if that were the case.
2 Likes
Iran could not be a subtree for any nation at all, specially russia or usa (simply because they do NOT need a sub tree)
If Iran ever comes, it has to be an independent tech
4 Likes
- I think we need to stop steering towards sub-trees because all it will do is inhibit the nations full potential like India in the UK-tree for example. Sub-trees should be for nations that only have a small handful of unique vehicles, not full potential nations. Another method is if they’re part of a close-knit group of nations like Visegrad Group or have a historical connection like a United Korea tree or like how the PRC and ROC are. Granted this context is extremely situational, it should be considered per nation and the capacity of its potential host nation if it’s necessary. Also the capabilities and history of the nation’s defense industry. Finland and Sweden (and smaller Nordic country’s) for example, are a very good match because they’ve maintained defense industries/close relations, and have a good balance of vehicles to add. Finland helps fill gaps in Sweden’s core tree since Sweden is a smaller nation tree-wise but has potent vehicles. India does nothing for UK as the UK still has several other indigenous vehicles to be added and has 5 pretty full lines. South Africa should’ve been the extent of it with some vehicles from Canada, New Zealand, and maybe Australia (due to it using the M1A1 AIM, and M1A2 SEPv3, too much of a disparity when the Leopard’s from Canada could’ve been just added after the Vickers Mk. 7. Though, the ADF’s AIM would’ve been a better squadron vehicle than the Bhishma for the UK imo.)
- We also must accept a lot of new nations are going to have a China-like start (Rank I-IV) with a copy of many vehicles from existing nations until later Ranks when they blossom with their unique creations. It’s just the fact of the matter whether it’s Poland, the Korea’s, Yugoslavia, Ukraine, or Turkey. Copy and Paste is inevitable.
- Anyways my point, Iran is a nation with potential, like India, and should be implemented on its own in some fashion and not a sub-tree like how India is. They continuously produce new equipment that varies in capability that allows it to enhance gameplay and keeps the tree evolving. They could’ve even been supplemented by Syrian equipment if needed like the T-72AV (TURMS-T), T-90A, T-62MV, etc. Also, now that the F-14A is coming to the USA, it strips away a vital aircraft for any possible Iran air tree. Disappointing.
6 Likes
if iran tt release they will give f-14a to iran tt from usa tt like what they did to some israeli units
1 Like
They haven’t though. The Merkava 1/2B’s are different from one another and there’s no Merkava IIID in the Israeli Tree beyond the prototype.
1 Like
ye thats correct sadly i cant say if gaijin will release iran as a tt or sub-tree but we have so many unique and copy paste units we have that potential to be an independent TT also we can have north korea as our sub-tree or syria since both of them were our allies .
2 Likes
Zulfiqar 2 MBT
1 Like
Brother I’d be happy to have your telegram id. There’re friends who can help you to complete this tt with their knowledge about Iranian weaponry.
If this is done, could give another F-14A to a future Iran tree. Word.
Also, an F-14A with AL-31FN’s would be trippy
1 Like
A tomcat that can actually guide the R-27
1 Like
At that rate, slap an R-77 on it too 🤙
There’s already technically a few different variations of the Iranian tomcat.
1: The Standard F-14A Iran received: with the Aim-9J (or Aim-9P), Aim-7E-4 (Aim-7E-2 with Aim-7F seekerhead), Aim-54A, and the standard F-14A radar and RWR to boot.
2: Later modified F-14A: Has an upgraded and updated Radar, outer pylons were strengthened/enhanced to carry the Sedjil missile (Sedjil is found on the F-14A IRIAF ingame, and is quite heavy (why the pylons were strengthened)). From what I can find this proposed F-14 variant and the next one should both be capable of also using the Yasser unguided rocket (found on the F-14A IRIAF ingame)
About the Radar improvement:
In 1982 or 1984 at best, an F-14 defected to Iraq and the CIA and the USAF personnel were sent to Iraq to bring the aircraft home for inspection. When the aircraft was taken apart, they noticed domestic parts in the F-14 as well as it’s AWG-9 radar. They noticed that the Iranians had made it 12 pounds lighter and added a few features such as to reduce radio clutter. This would make for quite an interesting upgrade.
3: F-14AM: (I have a feeling the M stands for modern or modernized). Compared to the earlier counterparts, the F-14AM features the Fakour 90 ARH (or SARH lol) missile, according to Iran. It should also feature the R-73E (if the supposed upgrade attempts were successful), however it shouldn’t feature the R-27, as the attempts to upgrade/integrate it failed. The R-73 has been adapted by Iran to both their F-4 and F-5 platforms, so I see no reason as to why they wouldn’t be able to adapt them to this platform as well
It should also receive the “Fater/Fatter(lmao)/Fattir” missile (can’t seem to find the real name lmao, wiki and multiple other sites say it’s called the Fatter, but the image shows Fater, and I’ve also seen Fattir thrown around), which is essentially an upgraded Aim-9P with a claimed 40km of range (highly doubt it lmao).
7 Likes
your friends can simply share their knowledge in here
lol someone found USA ISIS sub tree :)
2 Likes
The “motherfucker” looks interesting i must admit…
1 Like
3: F-14AM
Apparently the F-14AM is only a testbed and only one exists, the rest should be referred to IIAF/IRIAF F-14A or IIAF/IRIAF F-14A Early and IRIAF F-14A Late.
In 1982 or 1984 at best, an F-14 defected to Iraq and the CIA and the USAF personnel were sent to Iraq to bring the aircraft home for inspection. When the aircraft was taken apart, they noticed domestic parts in the F-14 as well as it’s AWG-9 radar. They noticed that the Iranians had made it 12 pounds lighter and added a few features such as to reduce radio clutter. This would make for quite an interesting upgrade
A new radar upgrade was installed allegedly called the National Radar by Iranian officials with a minimum detection range upgrade of 50% and maximum 100% - all of this can be found in the F-14AM thread.
Later Iranian upgraded AWG-9 should be referred to the AWG-9 National Radar.
National Radar seems to be a series name for different vehicles like the F-5 and F-4
1 Like
Iran’s F-14 fleet don’t have any avionic upgrades by recent images provided by media, the upgrades would be internal and specifically on hard points and the radar detection range & reliability.
The image you’ve provided seems to just be a proposal, Iran favours indigenous upgrades and equipment like the Fakour-90/B and Fater 1/2.
Still a variant, still has a place in an Air TT (unless gaijin makes another event tomcat… lmao). I mean given the extremely low amount of vehicles already that would be in the Iran air TT, it would kind of be necessary to add it as an end of the line vehicle (otherwise the Tree would be without a “Top Tier vehicle” and quite behind technologically compared to other trees, even if it happens to be that way IRL).
Up to Gaijin on how they want to label it honestly, as it’s either add the IRIAF/IIAF tags to the F-14 name or just a roundel next to it like some other aircraft have ingame. But yes, as I suggested in the first 2 proposed variants, and Early and Late designation should be applied imo to better distinguish them based on their time period variations. But returning to the topic of differentiating the American and Iranian F-14s, if they add the IRIAF/IIAF tags or Roundel to the name, I’ll be fine with either way honestly (not like it’s the end of the world because of some text lmao) but I’d still prefer the roundel :))).
Thanks for elaborating on it, the info I could find on it was scarce and short. Would be quite the nice upgrade for a later variant (or variants) of the Iranian F-14s. I would really appreciate a link to that F-14AM thread :)))
What the heck is this missile actually called, the image I have and the wiki both state differently, one says “Fatter” and the other says “Fater”. But when I look up “fater” or “Fattir/Fatir” I’m met with documentation of SAMs and other weaponry, heck I even stumbled across the “indigenous” R-27T and R-77 lmao.
Given the image shows Fater, this is likely the correct one, but I’m interested in why every documentation of it online says “Fatter”
1 Like