A friend of mine did, didnt had any issues and could bomb and kill incoming planes. Js say skill issue dawg
I guess your friend has been fortunate enough to only fight people that can’t figure out how to launch an attack any way but an extended tail chase, like you say, skill issue, but for the people trying to kill him.
1 Like
Has it been eating good? I keep meaning to jump back in it.
wohhhhhhhhhhh, you forgot the F106, this bad boy completly shreeds tu95s
2 Likes
Its gets higher br now
it was.
however everyone figured out they can sit at 10.0 to sealclub them again.
I was getting 5 kill matches consistently but now its a miracle to get two before eating a magic 1
no, in arcade its now 9.0, in realitic its stays the same
I’ve noticed some B-52’s/TU-95’s will take off from the airfield and then go around the edge of the map at low altitude, usually through mountains. And they’re the ones that live longer.
Back to the Sea Vixen I go.
1 Like
You can get 5.5km side aspect hits on the B52 and TU95 with red tops, when they are throwing out flares. Its wild honestly
It seems that they still have some insane ir signature which makes missiles (even 9b) ignore flares sometimes. As if their engines are based on harrier ones.
Yes they are big strong engines made to let those giants fly. But if they are so hot they that even flares are useless even vs 9b then why would US and USSR military even bother installing flare dispencers?
Something must be done about this because currently everything with 9b can delete bombers from safe range. Even from side aspect.
2 Likes
things like red top have very tiger seekers so the flares are literally not even seen by the missile a lot of the time. it is a problem when 9B and the soviet/chinese clones are able to perform similar.
all four of harriers nossles acting like hot engines really does screw it over, the front two are cold exhausts too, no combustion happened that far forward. high IR signature planes are horrible to fly no matter
2 Likes
Its not that, the Harriers have a lot of thrust that increases as air speed decreases, so when you jink or turn, you gain more thrust which in turn makes you hotter. Most aircraft lose thrust as air speed decreases which makes flaring easier.
The Harriers arent actually that unreasoanble to flare a missile when cruising at top speed, but when you slow down, even by a 100-150 kts… it becomes almost impossible to flare.
Me and Matrix tested this, at top speed, an R-60M fired at 3km in rear-aspect was instantly defeated by the first flare. At 420kts (not an unreasonable speed ot end up at after a few defensive maneuvers) 8x flares werent enough to defeat an R-60M fired at 3km in rear-aspect.
1 Like
tell that to the poor sods i was lobbing red tops at while using the lightning for the past two weeks. was having AV8-A/matador players getting smacked side aspect when flaring at an appropriate rate
the lightning is such a cool aircraft
I know it’s been over for a little while now, but I have some opinions. Only played one game, was a very cool concept, loved the big maps and play style, however, the lack of a ground aspect kinda sucked and is why I only played one game. I had absolutely no idea what I was doing. I have about a thousand hours on record, and like 997 of those hours were spent on ground. I would love to see something similar (maybe not with nukes, but the large maps and general play style) for ground. Arma or Battlefield style matches are my favorite type (evolving battlefield, coordinating with teammates to attack objectives), and I think it would be a fairly liked mode overall. They had convoys, top of the line SAM systems, didn’t they even have MLRS? Yet none of it was controllable by player? Could have done the ground aspect with rewards being the MLRS (M270 and TOS was it?). We all know these systems wouldn’t be TT anyways. Overall though, amazing change of pace, might actually consider learning planes for the next time it returns.
1 Like
Are you saying nah don’t buff them because you can use 2 fab 5000s?
So, in order to “buff” a single “9,000” type bomb for the Tu-95, it would have to be a different bomb. The FAB-9000 that it currently has is historically accurate. Its “weakness” is not an issue with the bomb itself, it is due to how “small” its explosive mass is in comparison. Because it is a “bunker buster”, not an “High Explosive” bomb (whatever the correct term is for “normal” bombs). This FAB-9000 has a thick casing, which leaves less room for explosive filler.
The other “option” would be for Gaijin to undo/revert the changes they made to the destructive radius of armored vehicles a while ago. But that would affect all bombs not just the FAB-9000.
I am not arguing against the Tu-95 getting a better single “block buster” bomb, but you/we would need to advocate for a DIFFERENT bomb. Trying to change its current FAB-9000 is a dead end; it will NOT be changed. Again, because its stats are correct.
3 Likes
It could get the thin-walled FAB-9000 GP bomb with like 8000kg of TNT equivalent, but I’m PRETTY sure that gaijin gave us the FAB-9000 bunker buster on purpose(as a balancing decision)
5 Likes
Or changing how bases fundamentally work
1 Like