Still though, you suggested a BR of 10.7… the same as the FRS.1. You honestly think the F3 is only as capable as the FRS.1?
Ok 10.7 is a stretch, 11.0 at best, unless BR’s are further decompressed.
and yet, its still has worse AAMs, BVR AAMs, radar, and cockpit visibility than anything else at 11.7/12. and is more comparible to 11/11.3s in SB at least. I consider the Tornado F3s rival the Mig-23MLD and not mig-29s and F-16s which are superior in all the areas outlined. At least in SB.
Now BR allocations for SB are totally random, with no logic. FGR2 is 10.7, F4J(UK) is 11.3 and dont even mention the Tonrado IDS, which range from 11-11.7 for no apparent reason. Hopefully thats all getting fixed next BR update. but we’ll have to wait and see.
So its worse than all MIG-23 and all the Phantoms? I completely disagree. It is the best 11.3 in my opinion. Its verging on 11.7 but not quite there.
I can understand its objectively not better than some of the 11.7’s or 12.0’s which is why its not at those rating.
3 Likes
I believe gaijin consider add AIM-9L/i on Harrier GR.7 it enough, but might increase to 12.0 ?
I don’t agree, the Tornado certainly at the moment is better than a few 11.7s.
We’ve discussed this before and talked it to death. We don’t need to talk about this again.
Suppose, I’d rate it higher than the Viggen which has to get by with less missiles and only Skyflash DF while having more favourable flight performance.
ARB or SB though?
What of the Kfir C.7, J-8F? IMO about the only 11.7 better than it is the F-14A and even then there are some 11.3 aircraft that should move up to 11.7 (Like the MLD, at least do it when they give it R-73s)… etc.
Yeah now I took a look at the other 11.7’s its better than all except the F-14A.
Ah, you guess gaijin consider upgraded extra countermeasures on Tornado GR.1 3rd quarter ?
And Tornado F3 basic could get AIM-9M this year ?
If its not quite there at those BR’s, why does it almost always face aircraft of those BR’s?
I still think the root of the issue is BR compression.
Unless it gets AMRAAM, its not direct match for the likes of the MiG29 or F14s that it faces more often than not.
Speed, radar & the likes are nothing when the enemy can out stick you.
The Sea Harrier FA.2 almost always beat the F3 in DACT because AMRAAM out-ranged the SkyFlash…Like how most SARH missiles the F3 faces in the game currently.
This is true but that doesn’t mean throw the aircraft down to 10.7/11.0 so it can out stick everything else.
It doesn’t seem to be implemented in-game? Is there any other HUD symbology missing?
It is missing yes, there is still quite a bit of HUD symbology missing.
Yeah BR Decompression is definetly a big part of it, also doesnt help the F3 was added so much later than the Mig-29, F-16 and F-14. Now we’ll just have to cross our fingers and hope the F3 gets AMRAAM or hope the SHar FA2 isnt at some stupidly high BR
2 Likes
Pantsir guides missiles by “tracking” radar
I’m linking a server replay.
2x teamkills from bizarre missile behaviour, not going for the locked target. Admittedly I don’t have the greatest situational awareness, but equally, I IFF’d by the radar and made the sure the missile reticle was over the target before launching. Also 2x missed kills from missiles just… spazzing out.
End result… kicked from the session and -70’000 SL.
I believe there’s an open bug report on bizarre missile behaviour in sim?
So, regardless of the origin of the track, the radar would need to emit to provide guidance commands to the missile(s), yes?
If those commands could be detected (and its not as if the emission bands are secret and there have been years, to account for such a high frequency system(work started in the mid -90’s), so detecting it would be seen as a priority for active units that may have to face them so is likely possible at least with modern systems), they can now take out the TEL itself, not just particular elements of the system.
The issue is that if it uses a combined tracking / datalink waveform, it can’t be optimized for either, and as a PESA array you further need to put aside some of T/R modules / duty cycles for each of the tasks(let alone zoning things to acquire proper beam shaping), this includes;
- Track Target (up to 20)
- Track Missile (2 or 4)
- Command uplink(2 or 4)
- Scan(dedicated array)
And further simultaneous launches would further cause issues, and split the time given to any one task, and unless it is limiting its overall performance to allow for further launches, it would either be able to achieve better performance, by allowing full usage of the modules at all times, or see massively reduced performance as the number of tasks it needed to perform simultaneously increases.
1 Like