F-15JM, C, Mashupar, E, and I all share the same weapons.
The ONLY notable difference between the three is E and I accelerate faster in a straight line while giving up energy retention due to heavier masses. Both in empty mass, and requiring more fuel to feed the hungrier engines.
Like an F-104S vs F-4E.
It’s getting an AESA radar which is funny because it also gets HMD (something it seems the F-2 will lack unless Gaijin fudges some things, which is possible) and similar flight performance to the F-2.
Funny how nobody has an issue with an AESA fighter that’s superior to the F-2 being added all of a sudden. Reminds me of the Type 10 fearmongerers that went quiet when it was finally added out of the blue.
4 Likes
That’s the thing, I’m concerned about F-16E/V, Rafale F3R, and F-2 equally. All are about equal to each other and all have potent radars that can augment the ARH missile in STT methods.
It’s what I do when I don’t need to fire multiple so I can separate from the missile and the ARH is being guided by 2 radars at once from different angles; they notch one only for the other to function for guidance.
I don’t think that will be modeled because making STT for multiple targets will be a nightmare for keybinds and adds little to no gameplay benefit. Also remember that with AESA the more beams you use to track the less range you have overall. So to even use multi-track the targets have to be close and at that point the ARH will be pitbull. This brings to another point, STT does not matter once ARH missiles locks on as it ignores the aircraft’s radar from then on, even if it loses lock, as it will then rely on IOG till it finds something.
In other words, AESA doesn’t matter to ARH missiles currently.
In addition, there’s really no advantage the F-2 will have in air or ground as it has the same loadout as the F-15J(M) except on a lighter frame (thus will be a missile boat fully armed). Has no HMD so inferior to F-15J(M) already. CAS wise it would perform similarly to the newly added Gripen and F-16A.
Unless F-2 is coming with HMD and AAM-5 or AAM-4B it will just be a sidegrade at best and DoA at worst.
2 Likes
I’ve been using that method since AMRAHMs were added, it’s been part of the game since the first dev server test near the beginning of the year.
It’s lock, fire, launch, and that’s it. It’s exactly like firing a SARH[M] but far less defeatable.
Also the AMRAAM doesn’t “ignore” the aircraft’s radar, it prioritizes its own radar, and if that radar loses lock it calls home for a datalink signal… which has been part of the game since AMRAAMs were introduced.
AAM-5s aren’t possible until MICA IR, IRIS-T, etc are available to be added for all tech trees.
I am not and have never said it would perform well above F-15JM, all I’ve stated are concerns.
1 Like
This is false. I’ve tested this myself and have confirmation from a dev that what you claim does not happen:
Link to my test:
3 Likes
Weird.
Maybe I’m just doing psychological warfare against the enemy then. XD
Yea I was hoping it’d work the way you described but it does not unfortunately. Modern ARHs do have that 2 way datalink but for gameplay reasons it’s not used.
Again knowing this, we can also conclude aircraft AESA doesn’t matter for ARH missile because ARH missile uses its own non-AESA radar first and inertial guidance if it loses the target. This is healthier for game balance and also means the newly added Rafale (and hopefully soon F-2) won’t affect the game balance negatively.
All AESA will give is better TWS tracking, which is useful but it’s only information and does not affect missile performance in any way.
Also you can imagine if the devs find it hard to implement manually reconnecting the missile to your locked target, then multi target as well is hard and too complex to implement, which is also why I don’t expect it.
On top of all this, clearly they’re not finished developing F-2, even though we know they’re developing the aircraft; so we have to wait until it’s finished.
We know they’re working on AESA and started after working on PESA.
AESA simulation should be the easiest.
Huge “allegedly” here: Allegedly AESA has the same PD flaws of standard radars.
Will it have filtering to prevent the notching effect? Maybe… but I still haven’t found great documentation on AESA radar “methods” for lack of a better term.
We know that AESA will be a step. We know that stealth will be a step.
Whether those steps warrant new BRs compared to other vehicles when weapons are equal time will tell.
Given how early the Type 10 was finished (6 months in advance in a datamine before being added) early, I expect the F-2 assets are complete, but it’d be too much work to do right now as they’re already running late to get this update out before holidays.
It should. The technology is fundamentally the same.
I know there are stuff about taking advantage of multiple frequencies digitally to re-acquire the target but that might not be foolproof.
Regardless, even if you can’t notch and are fully targeted on radar, doesn’t mean the ARH missiles will be unaffected so notching will still be valid and effective strategy to defeat them.
Take a look at what happens to the Rafale and you’ll have your answer. I think AESA won’t affect its BR. It will just go up in BR like normal to matchup with the EFT.
We shall see, with PESA I was calling Rafale a slightly better Mirage 2000-5F.
I can’t call AESA, partially cause Rafale has NEITHER radar on dev server right now, it’s still the F-16’s placeholder radar.
Fair.
However it is confirmed as the F3-R which should have AESA and while Mike could have mispoke, BvvD also said AESA and he’s a developer so I think it’s 99% chance going to be AESA. Since we also just discussed how AESA won’t matter, it also seems highly plausible that it gets added with no issues.
For what it’s worth I do hope they get the AESA radar as well. One step closer and no excuse left to deny F-2 once that happens. As for all intents and purposes an F-2 would be similar or inferior to this Rafale depending on what you value in an aircraft.
Well for MICA EM, HMD gameplay is my preference.
For everything else: ACM mode & narrow TWS.
It’s why F-16AM is my ideal F-16 right now, and what I would give to “unequip” the HMD from my character in some aircraft cause “lock” triggers HMD and not ACM when radar starts from the off position… FOR SOME REASON.
I think F-2 will be good in 1 circle and good at low speed dogfights just like it’s name sake “zero”. For me it’ll be comparable and as long as it has the vertical lock ACM mode, I can make it work in a dogfight. However thanks to its higher drag and lower T/W ratio compared to comparable fighters. It won’t outrun or catch-up to fleeing fighters (also similar to low tier zero’s experience).
Regardless, as long as I get something like the F-16AJ with AAM-3s, I’ll be happy. So a better F-16AJ with AAM-3s + AAM-4s + drogue chute, etc will be nice to have
Regardless of the existence of ARH at the time, it’s dependent entirely on radar technology. The F-2’s radar is simply bad.
It’s good, yes, and will absolutely be analog to newer PESA standards in-game. If it were added right now and were compared to the APG-70 and N004, it would be quite fine as an addition and have its main attribute be scan speed and multi-target capability.
I wouldn’t say it would get the same performance from the missile, as it can VERY easily engage multiple targets and continuously lock them.
You would be right!
Except… They aren’t AESA fighters. Current dev has the very first AESA radar on a Chinese SPAA x3
1 Like
Define bad, especially with some source to back it up :o
Which doesn’t matter. TWS or STT lock you’ll get the same performance from current ARH missiles.
Soon very first AESA aircraft with the Rafale
1 Like
Better than 68v5, equivalent to 68v7.
A source for something that’s effectively fiction? Sure… Let me get right on that xD
If you can find a source for its effective range against a target of ANY size, by all means, share it. Its only set information for the J/APG-1 is that it ranges from 6-18ghz.
If you can prove it’s good to begin with, and not equivalent to a mediocre radar that it was based upon, then by all means… Go ahead.
Yeah… No. TWS isn’t even functional in WT when compared to basic interfaceability of IRL TWS systems. It’s a struggle to follow 1 target in TWS in WT across most radars, let alone select and soft-lock MULTIPLE TARGETS while giving continuous guidance to multiple missiles… Not just see a certain amount of self-launched missiles on your scope.
Are you unable to read? The Rafale F3.3 most definitely does NOT have an AESA
We are getting F.3R, not F.3.3.
4 Likes
There was only one source I read that compared the prototype J/APG-1 as slightly worse than APG-63(V)1 and APG-68(V)7, F-15C and F-16C respectively. We already know the production J/APG-1 is better and of course the J/APG-2 is better than J/APG-1.
Real life doesn’t matter here? Not sure what you’re trying to get at lol. For game purposes AESA doesn’t matter so its features modeled or not won’t matter at all in the current ARH meta. Only thing that would change it is 2 way datalink (which was confirmed as being intentionally disabled for gameplay) and ARH missiles with AESA seekers like AAM-4B.
It would appear you are the one who needs to read and catch-up to the current news…
4 Likes
10 Likes