Yes, but 2H can be used as 2G it is in game, and names would be Tornado F.3 CSP/AOP or Tornado FSP. FSP stands for F3 Sustainment Programme. I will make you a list in a while, i have to finnish the game.
On Tornado F.2
GEC-Marconi Avionics AI.24 Foxhunter Type B
On Tornado F.3
GEC-Marconi Avionics AI.24 Foxhunter Type W
GEC-Marconi Avionics AI.24 Foxhunter Type Z
GEC-Marconi Avionics AI.24 Foxhunter Type Z Stage 1
GEC-Marconi Avionics AI.24 Foxhunter Type AA Stage 1+
GEC-Marconi Avionics AI.24 Foxhunter Type AA Stage 2
GEC-Marconi Avionics AI.24 Foxhunter Type AB Stage 2G
GEC-Marconi Avionics AI.24 Foxhunter Type AB Stage 2G*
GEC-Marconi Avionics AI.24 Foxhunter Type AB Stage 2H
On Tornado F.3 CSP
GEC-Marconi Avionics AI.24 Foxhunter Type AB CSP
On Tornado F.3 AOP
GEC-Marconi Avionics AI.24 Foxhunter Type AB AOP
On Tornado FSP
GEC-Marconi Avionics AI.24 Foxhunter Type AB FSP
To be precise naming F.3 FSP is simly FSP, as it stands for F3 Sustainment Programme, but adding F.3 at the front should not make a big difference, just watch out somone might get mad at you if you do so (internet is a weird place).
Tornado F.3 FSP strikes me as the most correct name in game, because you still need to identify the aircraft as a Tornado F.3. In real life though the official designation would have just been “Tornado F.3”, regardless of which upgrade programme it had been through.
Yes. In game F.3 FSP would be the best. F.3 is the name used to all versions, as even EF.3 is a unofficail desigantion, but plane variant would be FSP.
I’m fairly certain that me losing lock caused the missile to follow it’s path of inertia and managed to hit the target by a combination of pure chance, and that the target made no course corrections.
Normally when you try and track a low flying target, the missile veers off at the last second when it gets blinded by the ground clutter, by losing the lock the missile successfully intercepted the target by pure chance.
Multipath is less effective the higher the angle of impact. If your missile is coming in at a very steep angle the lower apparent target is less of an issue as it will pass through the fighters actual location in a bid to hit the false MP target.
THough how long does it guide interially? I’ve heard it should keep going for about 60 seconds, but i’ve seen them self destruct within seconds of losing radar lock
@MiG_23M moving over here to stay on topic. I could talk about the ground mapping and terrain following radars on the Tornado (both absent from the Phantom). Or the navigation and attack system, which was far in advance of that fitted to British Phantoms (which was more advanced than that fitted to the US Phantoms). But your argument basically amounts to “if you stripped a Phantom back to bare metal and put everything which made the Tornado good into it then it would be a good aircraft”, so I can tell where that would go: “just put all that stuff on the Phantom instead”.
One thing you can’t get around though is that the Tornado IDS airframe provided a far more stable and comfortable weapons platform for sustained high speed low altitude penetration than the F-4 airframe can provide (the main requirement of Tornado):
Also point is that all phantom airplanes at that time were second hand because the production ended. So the airframes had to endure a pretty extensive rebuild look at the F-4J(UK) for that.
Secondly the upgradability with an old platform is way worse than a new one. Just compare a modern phantom with an Tornado GR 4. It’s no where near equal.
And don’t let me get started on weapons integration
