kinda weird to check on a MiG-15 (1948) for modern missiles such as Magic-2 (1986).
despite having 45x MiG-15(of various variants) still in service within KPAF (North Korea), it is clearly outdated,…
1 Like
It was like this ever since supersonic jets + AAM Missiles were added.
At the time (December 2018) it was just AIM-9B’s and R-3S’ mounted on the F-100 and MiG-19 respectively. So it made more sense.
(This was before afterburners actually had an effect on the aircraft’s heat signatures, this feature was added around when the MiG-21MF/SMT were added)
I suppose they just didn’t decide to change it after more than half a decade.
I guess thats the baseline of which they chose to compare and measure the performance of the seekers ever since.
Just remembering this makes me feel old.
Edit: Upon further contemplation, they could’ve chosen the MiG-17, F-86, Hunter, CL-13 or any other jet at the time. I guess they spun a wheel or for some reason, chose the MiG-15 in those specific flight conditions.
They still model the missiles based on known detection ranges of various targets, but the stat card is displayed for MiG-15 type as that is still used for test flight targets.
The R-23/24T for example was fixed when F-16s were added to be able to lock them at the correct ranges.
What’s there not to hate about that horrendous aircraft tho
It’s not chinese.
TO THE GUILLOTINE lmao
1 Like
This amount of heresy might just require Mirage IV to deliver a ‘‘strategic’’ loadout.
Assuming the delinquent does not convert rather quickly.
Glorious Typhoon
Spoiler
oops sorry : )
14 Likes
Also very glorious even if you got the name wrong. ;)
Maybe Rafale would take the place of Mirage IV in defending the good name of Eurofighter, hm?
2 Likes
Ah yes, the new F.4.1 ^^
Amen :P
1 Like
You can’t tell me this is a glorious aircraft. Look at this :
It’s just awful, especially from the front
1 Like
1 Like
I mean I personally like the functional design of it.
Everything seems to be placed exactly where it needs to be without any consideration of aesthetics.
But I can see why others don’t like that. I personally think the Eurofighter looks more menacing than the Rafale. But that’s just my personal opinion and I can see why others like the Rafale design more. It looks more refined and more blended in together as a whole.
1 Like
Rafale looks beautifully dangerous where Eurofighter looks beautifully aggressive.
5 Likes
Well just a quick reminder chihuahua are agressive but don’t deal any damage. Pitbulls are dangerous and lethal.
So EF = Lot of barking no action
Rafale = Quiet yet deadly
Meh.
Eurofighter is a honey badger. Eurofighter don’t give a sh*t.
1 Like
Honey badgers are dangerous and agressive so it’s the depiction of an F22 not an EF nor a Rafale.
F-22 is to shy to be a honey badger. It’s more of a snake, scorpion or spider.
Eurofighter would be flown much more aggressively as well.