Previously the kurnass 2000 had Aim-7f, making it a good fighter as the F-4EJ Kai. But since the Aim-7f is removed, I’m sure the Kurnass 2000 has lost the ability to cope with target in high altitude. The All-aspect IR missiles it carrriy, which are the only effienct AA weapon it has, lack irccm and is vulnerable against flares in its BR. And its flight performance is not good enough for its current competitor. So generally the Kurnass 2000’s BR should be rated in 11.3-11.7 but not 12.3.
12 Likes
One of the only overtiered Rank VIIIs. But 12.0 material, not 11.7, and sure as hell not 11.0 where the F-104G and F-4F are.
2 Likes
So it is equal to the F-4S? Yeah I don’t think so
2 Likes
F-4S should be 12.3.
1 Like
You know may be the F-4F is also overrated since F-4EJ is 11.0 too with 4 extra Aim-7E missiles. But I don’t think the python3 or 9L makes up the lack of a SARH missle, even tho 11.0 is too far, I think 11.7 is enough for kurnass 2000, it has the same engine as kurnass in 11.3 but have much less choice in air RB. A better PD radar won’t gain much advantages with those worse-in-rank all-aspects ir
1 Like
Still the BR is not good enough since F-18A will be 12.3. It will break a lot of things.
Agreed, this is a 12.0 vehicle through and through. It’s a great vehicle at that, but it would be far too effective at 11.7, or god forbid 11.3… jeez…
1 Like
The Kurnass 2000 is by far one of my favorite vehicles in the game and i partially agree. I think 12.0-12.3 is a perfectly fine br for it, but unfortunately it suffers from compression from my experience. especially since the lowering of the F-16A its in a rough spot. the Python 3’s are amazing though. if your target is rear aspect full burner and is only flaring its almost a guaranteed kill (on a good few aircraft it fights), i find alot of F-4’s and F-14’s dont realize they need to cut their afterburner to dodge the thing.
its so handsome :)
1 Like
Python 3‘s have irccm, or am I wrong?
Python 3’s do not have IRCCM. they do however have better flare resistance compared to the 9L despite having the same seeker due to its overall speed being higher and its acceleration being faster compared to the 9L (being they get closer to the target quicker making it harder to flare)
2 Likes
Sorry I was wrong python 3‘s don’t have irccm
I don’t think that having no irccm is a tragedy I use aim9ls on some 13.3 planes and they are very usable
1 Like
Given the relative performance with airframes like the Phantom FGR2 (or the even work F4JUNK) currently stuck at 12.0 and probably needing to be 11.7. 12.0 is a minimum. But when compared with the F-16A, definetly pretty clear the Kurnass 2000 probably shouldnt be the same BR with the same weapons fit.
But this is just a compression issue and the US mains being bad at the game forcing a lower than needed BR on their airframe
I found smth for it in my desk lol
1 Like
How so?
All you need is a flare to evade the missiles
1 Like
The Kurnass 2000 is the prime example of what a 12.3 jet should be.
Kurnass 2000 already went down in BR when its AIM-7 was correctly removed.
EJ Kai is under-BR’d.
The fact you think F-20A, Kurnass 2000, etc should be 11.0 - 11.7 is wild…
It’s a great platform with amazing defensive capabilities and the addition of the Python 3 which has capabilities the Aim-9L lacks.
I really dont know why people think the python 3 is this insane very cracked missile while in reality is basicaly a 9L that pulls slightly more, they have about the same range unless on space bc of the increased drag of the python and have about the same seeker
1 Like
It really is just a faster 9L
Their turn circle is similar because the 9L is slower so it can turn harder while pulling less G
4 Likes
Having a really fast missile is a pretty big buff.
That’s part of why Magic II is considered better than R-73, and why R-27ER and Fakour 90 are considered strong for their class. High speed for a missile is a huge increase in capability.
1 Like