my man you can take ~100mins with the drop tanks
and you have the same engine as in the F-16C
you cant produce 11 tons of thrust without burning alot of fuel
if you think the fuel consumption on the F-2 is bad i wouldnt recoment you playing the F-14A
or the Mig-29
F-2 max AB time: ~15min
Mig-29 max AB time: ~6.5min
F-14 max AB time: ~9min
scrap this, I realized you can just take minimum fuel
then just learn how to manage your afterburner usage
unlike to popular belive you dont need to permanently afterburn at full throttle
and in ARB, atleast in my experience; it is not the smartest idea to be the first in the middle of the map anyways
“you can’t produce 11 tons of thrust without burning a lot of fuel”
and yeah this is the 90s we are talking about, okay fair enough
I just don’t like the trade-offs, sure you get a good dogfighter but that’s about it
is the F-2 we received the last one btw?
depends on what gaijin has planned
they might add a “F-2A Late” with better missiles, which they could just add to the current one if they wanted
mm makes sense, and with gaijin logic the AAM-4B wont even be an improvement but will look like the difference between AIM-120A and AIM-120B (the difference is nothing)
because there is no difference between the A and B
the Aim-120B has different software from the A which makes it easier to integrate on non US jets
and that dosent affect their performance in the slightest
What we have is F-2A late since it has J/APG-2 only thing left is AAM-5A/B and AAM-4B
But we can get F-2A ADTW “late” with the radar for testbed for F-X research better then J/APG-2 But wont make a huge difference.
that’s just confusing, why call it a B as a step-up/upgrade then
anyway my irony is that 4B has AESA radar as an upgrade from 4A + some tuning done on the lofting of the missile which could maybe translate to it being slightly more resistant to notching and slightly better range but Gaijin got AESA radars wrong anyway because they shouldn’t be defeated by notching or multipathing whatsoever, I get it game balance blah blah but what’s the point in keeping it realistic then
To be fair, for F-15J’s TV guided munitions to be useful it’d have to be around 9.7, however it can’t due to its AAM capability.
Also ron’s posts being correct as usual.
iirc someone here said that the AAM-5 was only tested on some F-2s but don’t use them. JASDF only use them on F-15s.
Honestly could’ve come on the F-2 we have now, if they modeled the seeker to be more resistant to chaff and multipathing, it would be just fine since you only get 4x ARH. The reported increase in range is also only software (better lofting, guidance logic etc.), I believe the rocket motor is the same.
I would like to add the Tornado to that list
Yeah only F-2 ADTWs have been seen with AAM-5 but i dont really think that matters at all in my opinion. As long as a F-2 has been equipped with it they will see it as a technical possibility for other F-2s specifically for the TT one.
If thats the case then the current F-2 should get sniper pod removed since it has so far (at least far as im concerned) been seen only on ADTW aircraft
So im certain F-2 will get AAM-5 as an option if needed in the future.
Yup i doubt the seeker is gonna be anything special probably will just be harder to evade but considering how they model AESA i dont expect much.
AESAs aren’t even more notch resistant then non-AESAs in WT, the J/APG-2 is easier to notch then a AN/APG-66 (100 m/s notch gate width versus 60 for search modes).
And no this isn’t some anti-JP bias, russia’s PESAs in game also have a 100m/s search notch gate (Although they do have a 3.0 max elevation notch distance for tracking, which is slightly lower then the 3.5 used by most other radars)
Now, why are AESAs easier to notch in WT then non-AESAs? I don’t know, but they are.
I mean, if we take the proposed performance for it from the F-X radome design papers, it could be looking at over 250km of range.
Now, if it actually got that performance is, unclear, but its the only thing even resembling a figure for it. Also don’t forget that was testing out the whole advanced sensor system package. It also had an IRST and all the lovely ESM systems for datalink IR guided AAM-4s.
True but the IRST if anything will be a downside as you sacrifice one fox 3 for a ASM-2 IRST pod tho i guess that’s up to the user to decide.
By the time gaijin officially adds aam-4bs, I don’t think irst datalink will be special, as I don’t see why 2 way datalink missiles won’t have that capability - so aim 120d, r-77m, mica-em ng, etc. Pretty sure IRL based r-77 can be launched using irst, not sure about datalinking
Little bit of truth to that, but since the AESA radar is providing constant updates it also has better target extrapolation, and since it updates so quickly you need to stay in the notch much longer than compared to notching a mech radar. With AESA the instant you’re out of the notch its back to tracking you with millisecond updates, with mech you could be out of scan volume by the time you’re leaving the notch.
Cause dubstep radar it sees everything
The F-2 with the number 540 was transferred to an operational unit after testing at ADTW.
https://x.com/CN_x10/status/1726073235614425490
