It would be the same exact loadout as F-15JM which itself is under-BR’d as its equals are 14.0.
AAM-3s and AAM-4s.
AAM-4Bs would make it better than all 14.0s, same with AAM-5s.
I of course believe XF-2 is the ideal premium; with only AIM-7s and 9Ls would be interesting, it’s also more plausible as it’s inherently a harder aircraft to research compared to the F-2 itself.
@Crusher_28
Dunno, it only has 6 heavy pylons, and 4 light pylons for IR AAMs.
I don’t recall any evidence showing ARHs are usable on more than 4 of the heavy pylons.
and ya all are saying that ooo we need AAM-4B, but the non B version is still underperforming in terms of thrust so what’s the point of adding even something more obscure that Gaijin won’t be able to model correctly
That would still go to the F-2 because it would be more maneuverable and capable of 1 vs 1 dogfighting everything it sees with ease.
F-15J(M)'s strength is being able to carry more missile and countermeasures to fight multiple targets and contest areas without having to RTB for fuel/ammo.
They had cracks issue connected to these outer AIM-7, but they claimed that they fixed it. IMO, it’s still able to carry 6 AIM-7/AAM-4, but they decided to not use this loadout to increase operating time. That why I think 6+2 loadout is possible.
Yeah from my understanding it was planned but it didnt make it to production tho i believe it can count as a theoretical loadout since it seems possible just doesnt happen in current service. Of course i can be completely wrong.
All ASMs use the same umbilical and attachment connector, so in theory any of them is technically possible. Although characteristics like weight loading and exhaust damage on the tailplane, the reasons they’re not actually mounted there, would determine which one is the most likely to actually be mounted.
IMO, if they were to mount a missile on it, it would most likely be the ASM-2/B, it doesn’t use a SRB like the ASM-1, so much less worries about the motor’s exhaust damaging the tailplane, and it’s significantly lighter then the ASM-3 (also the ASM-3 has to jettison intake covers before launch, which, when stored on the inner pylons, could potentially damage the tailplane). Tangentially, I presume this to be why ASM-3s are only really seen on the outer most heavy pylon.
It’s only unknown if they can be used from stations 5 and 7, where even if ASM-2s can be carried there is a chance they didn’t bother integrating ASM-3 since it’s a loadout that so far is unused.
We know that it can be mounted on all pylons, but we didn’t see F-2 carrying 4 ASM-3. Maybe it’s due to low amount of them, but maybe it can’t carry more than 2 because they’re too heavy or smth. We have some documents tho
While it is possible to carry 4 ASM-3 + 2 AAM-3 + 2 600 gal drop tank. It is already very close to MTOW and way exceed the MLW. And ASM-3A/Kai are expected heavier. I don’t think they will actually Carrying 4.
I mean, from what im aware they wouldnt have to integrate anything, all the ASMs use the same targeting modes IIRC (or well, from the 2B onwards they have one more), and have the same umbilical. From the sound of it they literally use the exact same protocols for communication.
There is, however, one more thing holding back 6x ASMs. The computer simply might not have enough RAM for it. The F-2’s FCS has extremely low RAM, like, it was considered outdated by the late 90s levels of low. This has caused a cap on the maximum number of guided weapons which can be programmed at a time. While the limit isnt publicacly known, it could be part of the reason they dont cram 6x ASM loadouts on it.
