Considering that the EX’s overseas stablemates the SA and QA have MAWS systems, the EX should get one too if Gaijin was consistent.
1 Like
EPAWSS is separate from those MAW systems. Also the USAF has explicitly chosen not to bother with mounting the sensors for those MAWS.
Gaijin could add it of course, since the EX’s contemporaries have it. But we’ll have to wait and see.
It’s a similar issue with inner-wing MRML racks. In service, the F-15EX only ever mounted up to 12x AMRAAMs. But one of the earlier Advanced Eagles mounted MRML racks under the inner wing pylons like we have with the F-15C GE, making for a total of 16x AMRAAMs. Gaijin could go ahead and add MAWS and 16x AMRAAMs, but those are questionable.
Again, we’ll have to wait and see. I’m personally expecting 12x AAMs and no MAWS to start with, and then the MAWS and/or extra MRML racks will make an appearance if the EX struggles. (Like Gaijin did with the F-15C GE)
No nation other than the US has fielded CIRCM on the AH-64E, yet everyone got it.
Since Gaijin created this standard, I will have fun weaponizing it for my own purposes. :)
And yeah, Gaijin has kind of painted themselves into a corner with the MRML racks.
Also, what do you think the chances are of the 120D being a good upgrade vs being yet another anemic “upgrade” like the C5?
5 Likes
I know I’m not blanchboi, but I think it’ll depend on what mood they wake up during the devserver week. A cointoss on either becoming the next meta missile or just another upgrade in range and speed but being basically a rigid missile at close range.
3 Likes
It depends on whether they want to adapt regular 120Ds or 120D-3s.
We know for sure the 120D will have GNSS and removed launch limits for HOBS shots. What we don’t know is whether it will have increased fin AOA, a better seeker, and a better lofting profile.
And then on top of those, the 120D-3 should absolutely have better fin AOA, a much better lofting profile, and most importantly a larger booster.
For all intents and purposes, I expect the regular 120D to simply be a 120C-5 with GNSS and removed firing angle limits. Those upgrades alone will make it better than the 120C-5, and I’ll personally enjoy that in ASB. But the 120D-3 would be guaranteed to be much better, so I’m hoping for that. Not to mention it could very well be argued that the PL-12A is more of a 120D-3 equivalent.
1 Like
Yeah I want it to the best possible version as well, but this statement by Smin kinda dampened my hopes.
Though I wouldn’t be surprised if the Super Hornet is one of the other aircraft though, because it suffers bad right now.
1 Like
F15 EX wont be after the F15CGE its a F15E
Even if you’re technically right, it is excessively likely they will end up placing an F-15E Late W/AESA (AKA F-15E RMP) behind the F-15E, and they’ll place the F-15EX as the last F-15 series iteration before the F-22 on that branch.
That assuming they’ll add both eventually, and gut feeling, obviously.
Imagine expecting gaijin to be accurate.
3 Likes
Then it wouldn’t matter either way if it gets added.
I hope no one gets offended by this, but why isn’t anyone talking about the contradiction of F-18C Late getting AIM-120C and Super Hornet/F-15C GE Late potentially getting AIM-120D?
The contradiction being that in the past, they would refrain from adding missiles to planes with the justification that the airframe/flight model was not on the same level as that of the missiles.
But now they’re okay with the mismatch of the abysmal F-15C and Hornet airframes having the AIM-120C and AIM-120D?
i highly doubt theyll do it that way its same thing people said about F18 being in the attacker line the F15 CGE will be last plane before the F22
it doesnt make sense its like adding a F14D in the bomber line when its not a bomber
1 Like
Sorry, “rules” are only applied when they align with what Gaijin already wants to do.
5 Likes
MiG-29S*
It’s acutually not that bad, when you have 5-6 good missiles instead of just 2 AIM-7s.
-15CMs in a BR for a grand total of 45, where even an F-4F ICE has more CMs than the ADF. Hell, the F-5TH TCU has the same ammount of CMs while being 13.0 and a 3rd gen jet with only two ARH lol
Running away from missiles is a lot easier than it seems, and the F-4F ICE is not a better plane just because it has more CMs.
What is this example meant to do?
F16 adf is one of the stronger 13.3s. even with limited counter measures you can get a lot done with proper positioning.
I mean it should receive them, due to the fact that we as a community want the most “realistic and close to life version of vehicles,” gate keeping the missile just to hold it back from other BRS sounds counter to what so many people push for in this game.
Of course, its better because it carries an F/A-18 radar, which is better than an F-16s.
That giving better ordnance does not equal to a plane becoming objectively better suited for the a higher BR if it gets historical ordnance. The F-5TH TCU is TERRIBLE at 13.0 and you don’t need to play it to know that’s true.
That applies to any plane? Like is this really a point? Bump the level of argumentation.
6 aim120s at 13.3 is nothing to scoff at. its not the su30’s that should be 13.7, but its still quite potent. couple that with one of the best fm in the game and you have a very good option despite limited cm.