The F-16 in br 14.0+ , should have more than 6 missiles.
Double or triple pylons are theoretical loadouts, never seen in practice, but they would be amazing to have in the game.
2 Likes
“Erm, skill issue. I constantly bring my G.98 premium with 4 AIM 9Bs to top tier and I consistently get multiple elms. Sounds like a skill issue!”
This is sarcasm, because I know there’s going to be some weirdo like that in here. Source? Had a dude on Facebook say the Su-30 is food for MiG 21 Bison because, “close muh gap, Su-30 can’t dogfight because missiles!”
5 Likes
funny how that is only an issue when they add the F-16V to china
2 Likes
No, it’s been an issue for a while. People saying the Pobit shouldn’t be 14.0+ because six missiles
1 Like
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
I don’t know his activity on here, nor do I care. Doesn’t matter how someone got to the light, all that matters is he did.
2 Likes
It literally has a PW-220 also, not even a PW-229 😂man what are we doing?
2 Likes
and they forgot to make it heavier like it should be
rn its only 100kg heavier than ADF
and is over 1000kg less than PoBIT
its empty mass should be ~1200kg heavier than it currently is
1 Like
1 Like
tbf its the same level of realism as EFTs dual amraams, or Su30 with dual R77, or J15 with dual Pl12
arguably even more realistic as there have been renders of F16s with those unlike some of the loadout options in game
4 Likes
F-21s, proposed upgraded F-16 for India. A digital render for an aircraft variant that never came to fruition.
The EFT’s MFRL are capable of dual AIM-120, so that’s more proof than the F-16
The Su-30’s proof is dual rack on the Su-35, its part of the Flanker family so its not crazy to assume the Su-30SM can use it
The J-15 w/ dual PL-12 is in the same boat as the Su-35, it uses the same pylon as the J-16 does which has been seen w/ 2x PL-12s, so its also not something crazy to imagine (iirc)
1 Like
according to what sources? are they rated for the weight?
again it has never been seen or shown on renders
so a completely different airframe that has received both physical/structural and avionics upgrades
so again a completely different airframe, and this time not even closely related
they have also been shown in other places including US DoD presentations about future capabilities
and included in a Turkish F16 purchase although the order was later canceled
it has not
that is a simulator/emulator not a real cockpit
2 Likes
so the simulator used for training EF pilots is not good enough
could have been set to show projected capabilities or something similar
or maybe that icon is used for multiple things not just AMRAAMs and it is showing two of a different weapon there
I mean, that’s completely valid for him to care now only because China is getting it. He’s just interested in what’s available to him and what he’s grinding. It would be hypocritical if he was arguing against it previously and then switched stances once China got it.
1 Like
its also a ton lighter so…
It’s a dookie engine for 14.3
The devs consider the flanker series to be compatible with all similar pylons, hence why the Su-35’s dual rack proof is used for Su-27SM and Su-30SM + SM2 (?) dual racks. I’m pretty sure all of the Flankers (beside Su-34, which is just a variant of the Su-27 (?))) are considered variants of eachother.
Except if the pylon is rated for it, then its possible, no? EG the AIM-9 for the MiG-29N report was accepted since the MiG-29N was seen with a Hawk 208 pylon integrated w/ AIM-9.
But was it proven to have existed? All of these exist and therefore there’s some plausibility, but what of the triple rack F-16 pylons that’s been seen only on a render or mentioned in a presentation, or a deal that was never delivered?
1 Like