Yeah, this is from DCS. Why google gives all this trash if you want to find some photos…
I expect AAM-4 on the latest block/version of F-15J that way the AAM-5s/Bs don’t overwelm the AARHs too much in disparity.
AAM-4B is too good.
AAM-4 is likely fine.
AJ is already completely fictional. If you want to add plane according to paper - add it according to paper, without cutting unique features. 2 extra sparrows can’t make it OP, but can make it different from other F-16As
1 Like
you mean this F-16AJ? the proposal with the AIM-7 at the landing gear door?
or the original YF-16. because i don’t think the current F-16AJ in the game is not even the same as both of them.
2 Likes
What is your source?
so you are telling me the US showcasing an unknown F-16 that is not the same as the YF-16, but similar to the F-16 block 15 that they can upgrade? but since the japan never went with the proposal it automaticaly default to the current loadout because it is showcased?
oh the japanese never flew the F-16 “reportedly”
so we are back to. you said, i said. and all the F-16AJ is fictional
Right, it didn’t have two more
Spoiler
It was six more (though only images mounting 4 at a time were in the brochure, or even the internet for that matter)
Yes and no. The original F-16 proposal was F-16J, essentially an F-16A Block 10. This was supposed to be presented to Japan through two YF-16A prototypes, one flown by a Japanese pilot and another by an American. Due to one of them being unavailable the Japanese had to fly in an F-4 Phantom while the American pilot showed off the aircraft.
This proposed aircraft did not incorporate any radar homing missiles and was rehected in favor of the F-14J and F-15J that were still competing at the time.
The F-16AJ comes from a later proposal also named F-16J. However to avoid confusion I’ll call it F-16AJ proposal, which is a name never used for the original F-16J. This proposal was the brochure we know, which took previously experimental capabilites tested on the YF-16A and offered Japan a slightly modified version of that airframe, not an F-16A Block 10.
It is unknown what happed to this proposal afterwards, but it likely came too late to really make an impact.
Well, no. The one in game is an F-16A Block 10 with the ADFs Sparrow mounts, something that never existed. The real aircraft was the YF-16A prototype which was more different from what we have in game than it was different from the F-16AJ proposed in the brochure.
So in short, the F-16J Block 10 got rejected, so the F-16AJ proposal was rushed based on the Experimantal YF-16A Sparrow testbed. The two proposals are not the same, and neither is what we have in game.
4 Likes
You know I’m curious how AESA affects SARH functionality compared to ARHs in general.
Could it by hypothesized that maybe Sparrows guided by AESA would function already like ARHs? For example, multi launching using TWS and the radar doing the illumination under the hood, so to speak. So form a user perspective, you just ripple fire your sparrows at multiple targets, they’d get the radar lock like normal as if they were locked on by an ARH that goes pitbull.
I guess the biggest drawback is that it’s not true ARH in that you can’t turn away still so you’d be disadvantaged. Just spitballing ideas into if an F-2 early is viable in an ARH meta.
F-2’s use the CRL. If Gaijin wanted to be wild we could have an F-2 with ASRAAMs and Skyflashes since it’s compatible. No changes need to be made for use besides maybe an SMS update.
https://web.archive.org/web/20090106012059/http://www.flight-refuelling.com/products/ame/crl.htm
AIM-120 and AAM-4s use identical umbilical plugs.
The 2nd pic is also an F-15J, so I don’t know why you have this idea that F-15Js can’t load AIM-120s. Why else would they have the umbilical connector for them?
6 Likes
It’s quite likely even if never fited they can use Aim120s, just because in an extended war it was assumed japan would rely on US ordinance. Most of their weapons ar cross compatable
1 Like
I was specifically talking about pre MSIP (my fault as I misread what I was replying too, ups) and not the lacking capability to load but actually fire them. Again my bad should have been clearer.
My hypothesis is that an AESA would make SARHs stronger.
Granted, it hasn’t been tested IRL, so it’s all hypothesis.
It’s basically in the realm of whatever Gaijin wants to do. If they model AESA as a simple fast sweeping PD (lot of mods do this, I believe), then you can still notch and be susceptible to multipathing. In which case, maybe they can just give the F-2 AIM-120Bs too.
With respect to SARHs, giving them the ability to be pseudo ARHs as long as you’re pointing at the target might be an interesting compromise. Realistically though, they probably won’t give it any special treatment just because it’s AESA. We already have AESA on Pantsir and ASRAD, though idk if you can notch ground SPAA radars in general.
the very simple way most likely just use the normal radar mode, disable the ground interference, make them resistance against chaff, make them very fast, and probably multi lock.
not really need to over complicate since the normal radar work like the aesa up high, but asea work at every altitude and much resistance to chaff
Possibly only if it’s through TWS and not like true multi lock. More like you can fire a SARH using TWS and then it’ll turn into a hard lock on the UI but still let you use TWS to find other targets. Some jank way of doing it with the existing game code.
I do agree, no point in making it super complex. Just unique and different, but not necessarily stronger/better.
What about possibility of ground scanning tho? I’d like to see ground radar.
They could probably add a ground mode, like how helis and some aircraft have them already.
Most aircraft should have ground scan. Even the basic f4 has ground scan. Aesa just makes it so the radar can scan the ground and air without needing to switch modes
Yes the top one is pre-MSIP with LAU-106A while the bottom is MSIP with LAU-106A/A.
1 Like