tbh Im more then willing to drop the LDIRCM that way its more balanced but im also not gonna say no if everyone gets them
1 Like
Dang update tomorrow!
1 Like
While i agree the issue i have with US domestic equivalents is that one of them (AIM-174) has only ever been put on Super hornet and the other (aim-260) has never been seen publicly afaik and basically nothing is known about it.
Then again gaijin did give the Eurofighters all the same weapons fits so they very well could pull the same stunt with the F-35.
Though i guess Australia is buying some now so that might change soon?
Arent there like AIM-120D or even E models available that have some Meteor like range?
D is longer ranged then C but its not really a meteor equivalent and i dont think E exists yet.
120 only goes to D no E’s yet
Clearly somebody should go back in time and convince the US to keep developing AIM-152.
Nah, they needed to keep developing the CATTB. Someone needs to go back in time and tell the US to adopt the XM8.
On the other hand, with how tiny our maps are the range advantage METEOR has over 120D doesn’t really come to play. It’ll have time to target advantage at long range, but it’ll have that against almost every missile.
If we get bigger maps where the range advantage matters I’d say it’s fair play to give it to every F-35 user, but as it stands I’d like to keep it limited to European platforms, to give them something unique to stand out.
Speaking of US mains asking for things, can we please just get another IFV in the TT? It’s been 4 years since the last one has been added, and we have plenty that can be added. May we also get a missile carrier in the TT? The M901 (which isn’t TT) was added 6 years ago, and since then we have seen no other missile carriers (despite having many easy options).
i think u are underestimating the meteor/overestimating aim120d.
We do? I know M2A4 is a thing or Bradley with APS but what else is there
No, they were saying that ONLY the US F-35 should get METEORs.
3 Likes
Meteor would have significantly greater ranges. In theory.
The issue is War Thunder. Unless we get double or ideally even larger than that map sizes. The extra range on the Meteor only really translates into them not being defeatable kinematically and not necessarily having the ability to physically outrange “equivalents” used by other nations.
if the current BVR “meta” stands, where shorter range but much higher kinematic performance MRAAMs are generally better, then Aim-120D vs Meteor actually seems reasonably fair to me actually. Meteor would hold the advantage in BVR, but wouldnt necessarily “outrange” Aim-120D overly much at typical current BVR ranges in-game but the 120D would hold the advantage at shorter ranges. Not that Meteor is bad, but Im fairly certain 120D is better in WVR/Short-range BVR
2 Likes
Gimme my ramjet r77s if nato gets meteors
By the time you’re at speed and altitude to fire, will you ever be more than 50-60km away from your target? In my experience no, and unless Gaijin fucks up the 120D like they did the C-5 (tbf, could happen), the range advantage won’t matter
Well, they (Lockheed Martin) are currently developing/producing the AIM-260 JATM. No idea what its capabilites are though. There aren’t even fotographs of it.
So guys, we’re now one day away from the next update so… what do yall expect for the march update?
Spoiler
Other than new bugs I mean
1 Like
Fixes of december update
2 Likes