Some sub systems from the F-14D could still be in use today which is why some of the docs are classified
Secret documents are like patents. A patent can be public and can be officially copied by changing a few details. It’s just a patent in the world of military technology. To prevent anyone from officially copying your technology.
This discussion has gone completely off the Rails. lol.
We are not asking for classified docs. We are using public sources. The narrow claim is that AIM-54C with ECP-82 / ECCM-Sealed is documented in connection with F-14D sealed/dry employment. If Gaijin says that still counts only as “planned,” then they need to explain what source standard separates that from accepted prototype/test-fit weapons on other aircraft.
4 Likes
I believe I have seen other non-US websites with a similar timeline. Never mind about that.
My point is, you cited a rudimentary fact sheet (timeline). They don’t have to be very specific about it, so it’s not a good source for me, and the volunteers made it clear they would reject such sources like that.
Where did you find a source that claims there was a version with better radar? Show and back up YOUR claim.
You are wrong again. AIM-54C ECCM/Sealed was part of the latest incrementation of AIM-54C+ used by the F-14D. Therefore, it is logically factual to say AIM-54C ECCM/Sealed is AIM-54C+, and AIM-54C+ is AIM-54C ECCM/Sealed.
The FY 1988 Annual Report of the Director, Operational Test and Evaluation has more authority than the timeline on the .mil website because it went into technical details.
2 Likes
I curious about the response.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/F76Q6BfdhzeJ
1 Like
The Yak-141 was a prototype that was planned to go into service with the weapons it has ingame. Therefore, its treated as a prototype with planned equipment.
The F-14D is a service aircraft, therefore its treated as such with compatible armament.
Please do not make spam reports.
Later sources are more reliable. The chronology from the NAVY(dot)Mil website says (was i provide) the first launch was 1990. This means it’s a different version.
So the yak-141 should have never came at all
1 Like
Except Gaijin thinks differently. There’s many prototype vehicles in game that got the same treatment as the Yak-141.
The F-14D is a service aircraft, and AIM-54C ECCM/Sealed / ECP-82 is part of its compatible Phoenix family, with documentation specifically connecting it to F-14D sealed/dry employment. I know they have previously stated that they want it the same as teh F14B, but that isnt at all historically accurate so thats why everyone is so upset.
5 Likes
Yes and many have been removed cause they break the rules. So we bend the knee for certain ones but others no?
Why can’t the HSTV-L have it’s upgraded gun? It didn’t enter service and was planned to be added.
Oh right different rules on a choice and a whim.
2 Likes
The removed vehicles aren’t unfinished prototypes, they simply didn’t exist.
The R2Y2s in game were fictional. The Tiger 10.5 was literally impossible because of the turret. The Panther II and Coelian were wooden mockups.
Not sure. I don’t think there’s been an official response on that. I assume its because the upgraded gun would replace the gun it has, while the Yak-141’s equipment in game doesn’t replace equipment it had IRL.
Either way, we’re getting off topic. If you can prove the AIM-54C+ is compatible, you can report it.
1 Like
The AIM54 thing has already been accepted we are kinda waiting for a response of some sort.
1 Like
You will be surprised to find out the number of times the documents and websites often got very wrong on such simple things.
Again, no. As far as the historical documents I have with me, all have referred to the AIM-54C+ as the latest Phoenix used by the F-14D, which was the one that has ECCM/Sealed.
Besides, I have sources beyond 2004, the year the chronology was published by the navy(dot)mil, that said the same thing. The AIM-54C+ is the AIM-54C ECCM/Sealed used by the F-14D. Simple as.
You have not provided reliable sources.
1 Like
Another thing to point out is that armament is a balancing choice based on reality. If it is missing armament, even if you can prove it, it is passed as an internal suggestion rather than a bug/historical report. This can be seen in game on the MiG-29s that didn’t receive R-73s since it would push up its BR, hence why there was a seperate MiG-29 added.
yeah that makes sense, I think this one has everyone tilted because it is almost a copy and paste B and if its the same BR with its better systems it seems pay to win.
4 Likes
I didn’t know the F-16AJ was real. Let me go back and rewrite history.
The reports have been made multiple times and they get denied you can see them all in the F-14D weapons topic.
1 Like
I understand the frustration, don’t worry.
1 Like
You understand what we mean when we accuse gaijin of ‘goalpost moving’ right?
4 Likes
The 16AJ was real it was a demo to try and sell 16s to Japan