I mean - it’s not hard, all they have to do is literally copy and paste whatever finally comes out, or at least maybe weapons, I can’t remember if there are any visual differences - and call it F-14D(R) in the tech tree, boom, problem solved. Or - just add the (R) to this and make the tech tree the new build F-14D so the only thing that’s different is the G-limits in Realistic and Sim - us arcade players won’t have any difference.
And if they’d stop their nonsensical arguments, because the F-15C GE exists in game, the Yak-141 exists in game, they literally gave us the XF5U last year for an event, and about a dozen other examples that can fit any variation of the situation - they can just add the same thing, but with AMRAAM’s since the AMRAAM was literally designed to just slot in where AIM-7’s were on F-4’s and later planes (no, not a typo, that’s why the German F-4 has them), they funded the software upgrade for the AMRAAM use but shifted the funding elsewhere - which is more than some planes in game ever got, and there is even documents showing when the AIM-120A was coming out where they would go - which is where the Sparrows would go and was cleared for them (pending the proper upgrading of the software). In fact - they could add 2 versions with AMRAAM, the initial production run of the D and AMRAAM that both started in 1991 where it’d have 6x 120A’s, based on all of the above, and could even do a later run - in which there is not just technical data but even a photo to two to back this up as an option, to run with the idea of pre-retirement it having gotten the 120C-5 (unless they wanna add the C-7 to the game) but give it the dual racks for AMRAAM’s (this is the part that actually has technical and photo evidence of capability) so that it could carry an additional 2x AMRAAM’s at minimum, albeit I’ve seen chatter in the past of an ability to carry more where the AIM-54 stations are under the fuselage, however I can’t find the pictures mentioned of that would take it in to F-15EX levels of carrying at 12-16 total, but even going from 6-8 of a newer model would be a solid improvement on that.
Yeah - until it goes Mach 5, and I see footage in game of it tracking and hitting as well as the Fakour-90 does, preferably in Arcade where A: I play and B: the Iranian F-14A is still at 12.7 with the F-14B, I’m not rejoicing.
“The previous variant was removed from the options, the new version will be functionally identical in performance to the existing C model, just with different cooling methods.”
Because in game the missile gets cooled…
And like everything else than the engine and the chasis was the same missile…
The clown energy is real deal with them.
As it should. They have very similar performance and without ECM features in game would be identical. That being said it does not exclude the C and C+ from receiving buffs.
Aim54C and C+ with their mk60 rocket motor would be a very nice change since they are supposed to be smokeless. Idk how much the mk60 would impact actual missile performance though.
Repeat for the 11000th time.
The 54s are wrong ANYWAY.
54C and 54C+ are 5 mach missiles …and about their behaviour Mk60 engines should be overtaken by Mk47 the time they hit 10-30km distance depending on altitude. The flight pattern is wrong. In 54Cs in general.
The 17G single plane overload is 25G dual.
For R27 they made it from 35G dual, 35G single , they didn’t make it 25 single plane.
But Phoenix stays nerfed… and my card stays in the wallet as well.
