I know it wouldnt be that effective but the MW1/ JP223 with its 50 bomblets and 200 odd anti personell mines, but it would be fun to carpet bomb a ground map in track destroying mines.
MW-1 I think would actually have some anti-tank capability so would be effective but would leave you vulnerable
JP233 would be pretty useless without the HEAT mines but would be incredibly fun in ASB for attacking AFs with following some proper SEAD
but why, you already get a billion chaff from bol pods. plus you would have to give up a sidewinder
In its current artificially nerfed state, BOL is pretty ineffective. If they dont want to fix BOL. then Phimat would at least give us proper chaff.
Phimat can be mounted in 3 places on the ADV
- In place of an Aim-9
- In place of the fuel tanks (allowing for 2 to be taken)
- On the normally usused additional wing hardpoints (where the BOZ pod is on the IDS)
Gunjob has images here: Panavia Tornado (UK versions) - Technical data and discussion - #3661 by Gunjob
So it doesnt necessarily mean giving up an Aim-9 and even then. The primary weapon is the SARH or ARH. Giving up 1x Aim-9 for 216 large chaff is a worthwhile trade. In ASB I usually consider myself Winchester when im out of Skyflash STs
The Tornado ADVs trade FM performance for a very good defensive suite. Phimat pods are part of that suite. Sure full strength BOL and Phimat would result in a BR increase to 12.3. But I would rather be at 12.3 with 352 large flares and 216-432 large chaff than being at 12.0 with 32 large flares and 320 micro CMs for Flares and chaff
Im fairly certain the last we heard is that Phimat was planned at some point (about a year ago I think) and so far its not been a balancing concern for anything (Mirage F1 wasnt exactly lacking in CMs either) so I cant really see the issue with adding a Phimat pod.
It could be limited on the F3/ADV at 12.0 to only the Aim-9 one for the sake of some balance. But the F3 Late… It needs every chaff it can get
1 Like
• finally fixing the drag
Yeah… unfortunately probably wont ever happen. Devs dont care enough to put the effort in.
Combat thrust is the best hope we have I think
AI Mk. 24 Foxhunter Stage 2G (Tornado F. Mk. 3, Tornado F. Mk. 3 [ITA]), AI Mk. 24 Foxhunter Stage 3G (Tornado F. Mk. 3 (AOP): narrow search, medium search, wide search, narrow TWS, medium TWS, BVR lock search, BVR lock TWS patterns: roll stabilisation limit: 70° → 120°
19 Likes
Nice. Its good to see the Tonka hasnt been forgotten
Ah cool we got a new thing
1 Like
If the early tonka got aim-7f’s instead of skyflash’s i think it would be the best 12.0 in game… The radar is pure brilliance.
I like SuperTemps more, because they are faster at the relevant ranges. You don’t want to fire too early or too late.
What ranges are those? Ill agree that up close the skyflash is better as its not so heavy and can actually manoeuvre for those sub 4km shots. But anything further than that and i would much rather have 7f which is where i want to be firing in a tonka. I prefer to fly high and launch 25km missiles against targets who are not paying attention.
I’ve had quite good success firing at about 15km-20km. But if the target is ignoring me. then i’ll wait till more like 10km.
Yeah, but at those ranges the 7m would get their much quicker and have alot more energy. Its why i still prefer flying out my ej kai than my tornado. The 7ms are just that good, especially coming from the skyflash.
If I can, I’ll fire under 12 km. I don’t play that much Tornado ADV nowadays, but that is how I played it (and the Italian variant).
haha, no… not even close.
To use current BRs as a comparison.
The Tornado F3 on arrival was at most 11.3. Its radar barely worked, it was buggy, it barely flew and would fall apart at the slightest turn and the MP meta just prevented you from really doing much.
After it got a massive radar buff, and the airframe could actually do things like turn and the game breaking bugs were fixed (took about 3-6 months for most of that ) it was an okay 11.7.
(then we had the BOL nerf at the start of 2024 which hobbled it greatly)
But due to the IR + Multipathing meta, you were DOA the moment and F-16 or Mig-29 decided to kill you.
In July 2024, with the crap FM finally being partially overhauled and the MP reduced to 60m, we finally got match presence and now its a decent 12.0. Though still not the 12.3/12.7 equivalent to any of the F-16s.
To claim that the Tornado F3 was the equal to the F-16 is just insane. Especially for its entire first year
Otherwise I can just say the US doesnt need anything stronger at top tier because the F-16 is the equal to the Typhoon.
4 Likes
it was the real life counterpart to the F-16A ADF, more missiles but worse FM. for this im not counting bugs, when they released youd be right
asking for stuff 20 years newer to deal with the F-15C but against US receiving its contemporaries?
Tornado F3 at max strength (which we dont even really have in game yet) vs an F-16A might… and I mean… might be a semi-fair fight.
but to claim that “britain didnt need anything to stronger to fight the F-16 and Mig-29 in 2023 because they had the Torando F3” is nonsense
It was the US Mains that said the Typhoon can only be added when the US got the F-15C MSIP II.
they made that claim constantly…
So…
1 Like
maybe an AESA F-15C, they were wrong if they were referring to an 80’s MSIP II which is effectively what we have except for HMD which doesnt even pair well with its missiles
They said F-15C MSIP II and given no one was expecting AESA as early as we got… I doubt they meant anything other than M-Scan.
Though When they got the F-15C MSIP II, they changed it to the F-15E. When they got the F-15E they changed it to the F-18E. probably would have been F-22 after that if it hadnt come