So give them a reason to never add F-14D… and never fix 13.0’s compression.
I’d much prefer F-14D so that they can see the compression staring them in the face.
Ever saw the state of the jas39e ? Also yeah the f14b should get the 9m
The reason to add the F-14D would be AIM-9X, the A2G modes of the APG-71, and actually modeling the EOTS/IRST AXX-1 & AAS-42, which would be a first for The Teen series and a change to have it revised for the others too.
Oh, and asorted trialed ordnance too.
Basically it would serve as an intermediary step between the F-16C-50 & F-15E
3 Likes
Yes we do know that the aim9x is capable on the f14 but you do not want the f14 to come with aim9X because aim9X would be a 14.3+ missile
Eeeehehh
But F-14D with AIM-9X wouldn’t be DOA?
since F-14D didn’t used AIM-120s, so AIM-54 would be remain niche choice.
And AIM-9X would send them straight up to hell since it is IIR.
For me, it’s time gajin add AIM-9M-8 on F-14B in the dev server
I think theirs a misconception about the amraam not being compatible with the F14D it is compatible with it should be know that a f14A successfully tested AMRAAMs with F-14D tech as It did drop testing as well as firing them in the air and their no difference in the F14A Airframe to the F14D in terms of mounting weapons other then one was analog and the other was digital so their was no need to waste money re testing them as for the guidance I do believe the Anapg71 is capable of guiding them because it already fires a type of arh missile is also as capable as the apg70 in terms of air to air (obviously except the aim120c) and also the apg71 upgrades focused more air to air than the apg70 that focused on air to ground. Also when it came to purchasing the modification for the F14D the amraam it was in the same stage as the lantirn modification before the funding got reallocated for the lantirn modification
So, technically, it can
But cannot IRL. (because fund gone elsewhere)
Then sounds [it shouldn’t] to me
Giving AIM-120 to F-14D is the same theory which Gaijin gave F-5C CM and AIM-9E
Completely ahistorical.
But plausible.
Then I disagree with the addition of AMRAAM on 14D.
And the same that lets the Yak-141 have weaponry, and the same that lets the German F-4 have 9Js, and so on and so forth.
It’s a different story when more than one vehicle benefits from this, especially when those vehicles come from more than one nation. Saying no to this technical means that all of these, and many others, should also be removed. And at this rate, you can’t really do that, can you?
1 Like
would you rather have them give it 9Ls they gave it 9Js to balance it
IF AIM120A was given to the F14D it would be faced against monsters like SM2 id rather them not give it that. Instead slip it in at 13.0 with 9M and 7P F14D would be a good equal to the F15A at 13.0 with APG 71 and 7P and 9M
If those damn technical compatibility issues are really a problem, and we already passed the point of no return
Gaijin needs to add two F-14D then
I don’t want to face overtiered rubbish filled with ahistorical modifications
But I am well aware that there are many Tomcatters who want AIM-120 on F-14D.
And if we keep F-14D’s loadout as AIM-9M/AIM-7P/AIM-54C+ it probably ends up as a sidegrade of F-14B which has better radar.
As long as I can have AMRAAM-less F-14D
I would never gonna care about others who enjoy F-14D with AIM-120
I probably just spade F-14D(Late.) and let it rot in the garage then.
Anyway, back to the main topic, about AIM-9M on F-14B… I wonder why it cannot happen fr.
I think the point here is being missed.
I’m not saying I would rather them have 9Ls. I’m saying exactly what you just said; some things are done for the sake of balance, whether or not they actually happened. If it works, has good logic and theory, why stop it? It’s more fun to have a balanced game anyway.
yeah fighting things like SM2/rafale/EFT wouldnt be very fun the F15C struggles in full uptiers what you think the F14 is gonna do ?
Im afraid Gaijin will make it premuim just like Su-30 premuim, If F-14D get AIM-120.
Its same situation as YAK-141 and funny F-16AJ (but AJ have a only plan not a real test)
Would be better and would make more sense than giving it aim9x that weren’t even tested on the f14 unlike the amraam
Each their own choice I would think it would make it popular and a more lethal with aim20A than aim7p especially since it doesn’t get access to hmd plus it being a 13.3 plane it’ll fight 14.0 aircraft not to mention theirs already a good amount of irccm and arh planes in 13.3 like the su30mkk/su30mk2/tornado late/jf17 and some others I do think the F14D with AMRAAMs and aim9m is comparable to the su30mk2
Pretty much if it got more time and then the funding to complete it but it did had the provisions for it and tech tho
Idk don’t know much about the f-5c but probably in like the lines yak 141 ho229 and some other vehicles
Even with AMRAAMs/aim9m I don’t think the f14D would be 13.7 it’s comparable to the su30mkk/su30mk2 plus in top tier now the f14B fights against 14.0 already
The F-14D doesn’t have a HMD, so can’t make best use of the gimbal and improved kinematics up close, also it’s only the Baseline AIM-9X not the Block II’s(EOC circa 2012; IOC, 2015) so has no datalink so is much constrained.
Basically everything changed, from the mission computer to the wiring runs there’s a whole lot of work and a thesis of what had been undertaken to permit the F-14D to carry PGMs.
https://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=11072&context=utk_gradthes#page=28
Was that particular F-14A similarly provisioned, yes. But to a baseline Block 65 or Block 135 F-14A. Yes there were significant differences. otherwise there would be no need to be able to Specify F-14D(R)'s in the fleet, which were remanufactured using F-14A airframes, not newly built ones.
No, the APG-71 is there basically to provide SAR ground mapping modes allowing for Self-designation of PGMs in conditions are not amenable to the use of SALH (e.g. fog, low cloud cover, etc.) guidance.
Because the extra money being invested allowed the NAVY to also provision the pod to the F-14A & -14B as well, which was more suited to its new role as a FAC(A). in support of other assets (at the time F/A-18A’s had no integrated Laser Designator(AAS-38), and US Harriers weren’t doctrinally permitted to self- designate targets).
Also due to the peace dividend at the time there was no pacing air threat that existing stocks of AIM-54’s weren’t able to deal with, that the AMRAAM would have provided the edge over.
It’s less Cannot, but more so did not, the hardware was there on All F-14D’s, the software was not though did exist. The money would need to be spent on certifying the carriage limits of the F-14D.
Personally dislike either 9X or 120 since both of those eventually end up with DOA
Sad point of compression as always
I generally don’t want to see either 14D with 120 or 14d with 9X but oh well
Gaijin probably will shove F-14D on 13.3 no matter 120 or not since 14B with 9L stuck at 13.0
If Gaijin don’t decompress
Prob F-14D would end up with DOA.
I really want to see F-14D in 140% historical loadout with no compatible weapons, but it seems this cannot happen at all.
Sad, darkest day to me.
About this part, F-5C on USAF has an extremely short duration of service time, and had no chance to get countermeasure pods, and AIM-9E afaik.
In the meantime, F-5A on ROCAF had capablity of getting CM pods since Taiwan modernised those
If F-5C had a longer service duration, F-5C in the USAF would probably end up with better missiles and countermeasure pods. But DoD and Congress didn’t want to.
Technically can, because nothrop proved it.
Just like the AIM-120 capability of F-14D
It could if we had infinite time and money.
But failed because we aren’t
But Gaijin will. Because they want to.
Just like how Gaijin don’t give AIM-9M on F-14B.
Because they want to
Let’s be real, the F-14D will most likely be added as an event jet