Yeah AESA should withstand jamming better, and allowing better burn through but I’ll have to double check this.
Further, if they do add datalink, F-2A would be a better support to teammates since AESA maintains track on targets and also provides much better tracking. High quality datalink can make or break a team, so now that I think more about it the F-2A is more future proof than the F-15JM.
Yea, while the lack of HMD and arguably 2 less ARH missiles is a minus, I think after using the AESA radar of the F-2, the APG-63 is a painful downgrade in every way.
If the F-2 had better radar missiles, that made it deadly at closer ranges, it would be well suited to current meta and beyond.
I’d also argue it’s possible they will give the F-2 HMD in the future anyway for balance reasons (similar to how the Thai F-16A has it when it shouldn’t).
I would say the F-2A is already really strong in WVR even if it lacks HMD, but an edge in BVR missiles with the AAM-4B should make it much better overall I would assume. My assumption is that the F-2A is lacking more in BVR (>30km) than WVR (<20km) from my experience fighting against it, let me know if I’m wrong or not.
AAM-4B with AESA seeker should give it an edge in BVR with each missile having a normally higher kill rate than other missiles even if there’s only 4 on the F-2A.
Yea the biggest issue (and really the only issue imo) is that the F-2 has only 4 radar missiles so you will lose in a war of attrition against most opponents. This can be mitigated by not being the center of attention, but having any attention means you have to play defensive and give away advantage. However, one can argue that’s good because once they get into WVR, you win.
From my limited time in ARB, as long as the team doesn’t crumble and you have some terrain or just go into the battle later, you can perform well.
Yup and would make it at least something to fear in typical ARB gameplay.