Yep, fairly certain it did, I mean I have no idea what AMRAAM, I guess Bs
There is no reason for JA37D to not get amraam, right now the JA37D is exactly what the JA37C should be, the JA37C carried Aim9L’s.
JA37D should get RB99, and JA37C should get aim9L
That’s what I think Gaijin’s plan is at least
1 Like
There is:
Ultimately this stems from the JA 37C being what the originally-planned JA 37 couldn’t be - equipped w/ countermeasures. And moreover, there 's no other aircraft SWE can field at the Viggen 's level of capability to allow them to receive better weapons than what they carry, w/o leaving even bigger gaps between the Draken and Gripen.
The lack of certain armaments is intentional, and there 's no reason to believe the causes for that intent will cease to apply in future.
Irbis is nice, and is a decent PESA, but AN/APG-83 is an AESA radar for crying out loud, and the 63 if it’s the (v)2 is going to be AESA as well. Gaijin needs to overhaul target selection with their automatic acquisition for radar, or else anyone without AESA is going to struggle.
If you’re telling me that F-15C with the (v)1 and only AIM-120A’s is the next F-15, then fine. Gaijin can give us another dogcrap MiG-29.
F-15C with (v)2 AESA and AIM-120C’s would be what I’d expect to come, so if that were the case, given the F-15C can still do a2g, then yes, Su-30SM or the Su-27M (later redesignated to Su-35, an early model of it, which wouldn’t likely have Irbis, which doesn’t make a huge difference anyways), or Su-27SM3.
All three in one patch? No. All three this year? Unless they match with other releases, no. One of them this year? So long as it keeps things balanced with other releases. First block Eurofighter seems to be a more maneuverable Gripen, without necessarily adding Fox-3’s, so it could likely just come as is. Anything after that, as well as the Rafael and at least one TVC Flanker will be necessary.
Yes, yes, absolutely yes. In my quote I mentioned the Su-30M not SM. Su-30M is basically a small batch of Su-30’s with multirole capability, something the original Su-30 was not capable of. There’s no reason to hamper the USSR in the multirole capacity when the F-15A and C can drop guided bombs while maintaining a modest A2A loadout.
I didn’t mention the SM in that quote, but you mentioned it’s potential R-74M loadout. I hate to break it to you, but the SM wouldn’t be the only plane capable of using the R-74M, Su-27SM and Su-30MK would be able to too. We aren’t going to get the R-74M on either plane, and no one is asking for them. I haven’t even heard a peep yet about R-73M, or R-73E, or even R-74. So the entire discussion of R-74M is premature. With the way they gimped the 9.13, we probably won’t even see an Su-30SM with R-74/47M.
Hence why Su-30M is perfect if no one else is going super-maneuverable and we get Fox-3’s for all nations. Otherwise we may just need to add the R-73M at that point if everyone else gets supermaneuverable except for USSR/Russia.
2 Likes
The difference is much more negligible than most think. I’ll agree that it’s better than a PESA in most ways, though it does very little more than a PESA does to begin with.
We already have one of the best MiG-29s in-game, I don’t see where else we can go with MiG aircraft.
At the point of the F-15C, I’d rather go with an Su-33 or Su-27SM. I see no place for the Su-35 against an aircraft like the F-15C, nor any legacy F-16.
Absolutely not the Su-30SM. As I’ve said, this can and will crush quite literally any other aircraft in a close range engagement. The Su-27M would be a great compromise, but something like the Su-30SM with its general payload and maneuverable is way too much for the F-15C.
Again, no thrust vectoring aircraft. It is by no means fair to any adversary, seeing as even currently the base model Su-27 is one of the best dogfighters out there.
A thrust vectoring aircraft wouldn’t stay balanced with other releases, at least with the point that we’re at. As I’ve said, the current base model Su-27 without vectoring already outdoes some of the best dogfighters in the game, and that has lower outputting engines with static exhaust. To give it even better lower speed performance would be abhorrent.
What variant of Eurofighter do you propose?
Ok, I must have misread. I was under the impression that you or somebody else said Su-30SM, which would be a huge no.
I find this quite surprising seeing as there is the potential of AIM-9Xs in the coming years. The R-73 alone is in a limbo of being better than the AIM-9M, though worse than the AIM-9X.
(We already have the R-73E, it’s effectively the same)
A DA (development aircraft) version of the Eurofighter could come with only AIM-9L(i) properly made to be AIM-9Ms and AMRAAMS
These have worse radar and engines to the Eurofighter and believe the engines in these preproduction ones are from the tornado
1 Like
Yep, RB199s from the Tornado F3. Though they apparently worked surprisingly well, was still able to reach Mach 2.
I can’t even believe we’re at the F-15C mark. F-15A was a MONTH ago. I’m out here saying Su-30M just because you don’t have to give it R-77’s and it’s basically a slower Su-27, but with guidable ground ordinance, and now the sentiment is give the F-15C shine for a quarter or two before anyone else achieves parity? It better be AIM-120A/B’s, and chaff/jamming better be coming with it.
Eesh, yeah, that’d be painfull
While I do agree that F&F radar missiles will be useful and strong, I think they’re a bit overhyped and overrated when it comes to air RB. People already dive and stick to the deck to avoid SARHs that unless ARHs comes with multipathing fixed, they’ll just hit the ground and miss targets just like current SARH + AIM-54s.
The real benefit of ARHs will be in ground RB, where as CAP, you can launch them at high flying CAS, either take them out, or force them low to be met with smokeless IRCCM IR missiles, all while avoiding enemy SPAA preventing you from doing your anti-CAS job. Currently, using SARHs, you can launch them at range while flying low to avoid SPAA but give the target enough time to bail and give away your position, or you fly towards them into higher altitude and give enemy SPAA a chance to take you down.
In addition, ARHs will be useful against helicopters that are not hugging the ground, letting you take them out at range, assuming they don’t react in time to chaff and descend into safe multipathing altitudes.
All that is to say, the game is ready for Fox 3s many updates ago, but we didn’t have enough Fox 3 slingers to make it an important update.
2 Likes
While the game is ready for early ARH missiles, they won’t be balanced at all in small maps. In EC sized maps, however, they will be fine.
1 Like
With both sides flinging them, they’re going to be as balanced as they can get (unlike the asymmetry and imbalance between AIM-7F/Ms and R-27ERs).
3 Likes
Or Even Skyflash DFs vs R-27ERs
(god that is painful)
2 Likes
Yes, Italian one carry them as well.
I meant that, in small maps, it’d be impossible a lot of the time to avoid them when fighting someone else due to the much shorter ranges of those maps, whereas in EC sized maps, you will more often have enough time to either get behind cover or notch.
Right, but that’s the same ARHs or not. Getting 3rd partied is a symptom of bigger match player counts. It could have been an AIM-9M for all intents and purposes instead of an AIM-120A/B.
1 Like
ARH missiles have much longer ranges than the AIM-9M. Being third-partied is not the problem. Being third-partied from the other side of the map is.
What’s the difference between the two? If you’re RWR is pinged and you’re still not hugging the deck after that, it’s on you. Meanwhile IR missiles won’t give you a warning and are more dangerous when you’re in a dogfight as you need to actually see the launch to defend against it (unless we start getting MAWs).
- Longer range, as I said, and 2. if you are preoccupied with another enemy, chances are that you aren’t going to be able to hug the ground for more than a couple seconds.
And you’d get an RWR alert for quite some time letting you know not to leave the deck and engage in a dogfight, but to keep running and evade that ARH first, which is the same protocol if it was a SARH heading your way. Being 3rd partied, it wouldn’t matter if it’s an ARH or SARH, it’s a 3rd person that’s going to lock you and stay on you till you deal with them, which is my point. At the end of the day there’s no difference between the two functionally in air RB meta.