Ohhhh okay that’s why I’ve never heard of them lol, thanks. Sounds like it would be a good squadron vehicle.
Shameless French enjoyer plug
Maybe France could get a squadron vehicle first tho
Mirage G-8?
Though maybe TT for that one.
3 Likes
That, or maybe F-8P but that would probs be better foldered with the FN
Mirage III NG should be TT
F-111K has been hard denied. Probably why we got the F-111C instead
TSR2 is probably the best supersonic BR about equal to the F111A we can get
2 Likes
F-8P is good choice - with Magic-2, no Flares/chaffs, but RWR,…
and 3 NG never been used in armies, nor by DGA 7-10 years long (alike Mirage 4000 or Mirage G program, last of which started in 1967 and ended in 1974) - the Mirage 3NG and it’s second prototype the 3EX both got less than 3 years and were unwelcomed by both French and Export market.
1 Like
a plane despised, already looking out-dated to the upcoming Mirage 2000, and then it’s successor the 3EX, out-dated by the Rafale ^^"
i mean, playing Magic-1 only is fun,… but Squadron vehicules (apart that freshly called JF-17) are all made to not affect the game balance wise, and i guess having F-8P would be less impactful for the game since it only have 2x Magic-2 and 4(2? i don’t remember) guns and nothing else apart RWR to defend itself.
so it could easily be the 11.0/11.3 that France is missing.
1 Like
no reason for it to not get 9Ms, it will be facing exclusively IRCCM in GRB, and can justify a 12.3 BR with 9Ms
No it won’t. It’ll be in the 11.7 lineup.
Ruining its ground BR just sounds like America hatred.
Non 🇫🇷 everyone loves the NG
1 Like
Just did a test flight of F-111F with lower fuel [as I do with all aircraft].
It retains energy well and turns really well for the fuel load.
The best TF-30 engines really pushing it forward.
Yeah, I see no reason for it to ever get 9Ms unless you want it at a significantly higher BR.
When the cockpits are added I’ll be able to get accurate numbers.
You do know they added Split BRs right?
Thats why something like the Sea Harrier FA2 with AMRAAM is 11.7 in GRB.
The addition of Aim-9Ms wouldnt increase its GRB BR. Wouldnt even touch it slightly.
Now whether or not 11.7 Tornado IDSs and possible the F-111C/F should have IRCCM missiles for ARB considering their BRs and the BRs of other aircraft nearby with IRCCM like the Mirage F1C-200 or Jaguar IS. I personally think 11.7 for 2x Aim-9M on a low performance Super-sonic is not that unreasonable.
9Ms would increase its ground BR as 9Ms don’t have a higher SP cost.
On top of that, 9Ms would make it ~13.0.
Tornado IDS is a brick, F-111F is not.
I’ll be getting to F-111C shortly.
Mirage F1C is less maneuverable and carries less short-range IR missiles than F-111F.
Jag is the worst example as that’s F-5C equivalent in flight performance.
You act as if people are begging for F-111A to get 9Ms when they aren’t.
Uhhh idk abt that one but yeah most of your post is right otherwise
2 Likes
We need hard data when it comes to F-111C.
F-111F on its static facts: Best TF-30 engine ever produced, and only marginally heavier than F-14A.
Its performance might easily be better than Mig-23ML, MAYBE on par with MLD. Emphasis on maybe due to its high drag.
And F-111C will require hard data regardless since its static facts are hard to find and do the math for.
Both require cockpits to be in-game for WTRTI to work tho.
1 Like
Still gonna be a low low low speed chonker
You’d be surprised, F-111F’s engines are already producing 2000+kgf more thrust static than F-14A’s engines stock.
Stock static thrust:
F-14A: 7700kgf.
F-111F: 9870kgf.
F-111C: 7130kgf.
F-111C bodes the least well.
1 Like
The F-111F is in the ballpark of 2x heavier than the F-14 though, it may be good at higher speeds but it will be an absolute bus if it even thinks about getting bellow 500 IAS
Not really.
F-14A is 18350.0 empty.
F-111F is 21863.0 empty.
Add ~1000kg of fuel for the extra thrust of F-111F’s engines and that’s still only ~4513 difference before weapons.
Take in the fact that stock static is ~4300kgf difference… it’s more similar at zero speed than we think.
We’ll need cockpits to get the at-speed thrust as well as turn time.
1 Like
Idrk too much about F-111 weight characteristics, but I do believe the F-111F minimum fuel load is a lot heavier and its pylons are pretty draggy.
We’re getting kinda pedantic here though so it can go both ways
On a slightly different note I’m going to be mad if we don’t have the dump and burn for the F-111C
