Hot Take: I don’t really want the AMRAAM seekerhead if it means losing the tightest notch gate in the game. I’d rather they just make it the best ARH seeker in the game as balance for it still being very easy to avoid by the advanced fighters it’ll be facing.
1 Like
Well, short answer, Congress said no, so no AIM-120 on F-14D to me
F-14D with AIM-120 might be a cool idea, and has technical documents that proving ‘they were planning to install it, and they almost had the capability of it, and if Congress said yes, then it could easily be integrated.’
But Congress said no, and it didn’t finalise. so…
Still, I won’t mind if we have two individual versions of F-14D
one with AIM-120, and one without AIM-120.
Just like F/A-18C Early/late.
F-14D fans who want to have AIM-120 on their F-14D can have it
While I or other fans who don’t want it have one without AIM-120 and have a lower BR.
1 Like
Won’t that also include a ton of other missiles including the f-90,r73,r27er,iris-T,mica,amraam etc…?
1 Like
I voted on that option already, but thanks for reminding me
1 Like
Its a no for me as well as much as i love the Tomcat, but the F14D never got equiped with Amraams it was tested on an F14A Testbed with the new avionics it was never fitted on a F14D production model
That is definitely a hot take. Because it doesn’t have any form of angle gating/chaff rejection, it gets one chaffed the moment you get into the notch instead of going into iog and following last known path.
While the AMRAAMs seekerhead may have a larger angle for the notch , because it actually has angle rejection, in practice it’s harder to defeat
2 Likes
well the f14 is a very hard to play plane right now cause of the way that aim7s are terrible and aim9Ls were okayish and 9m’s are not much better plus the phoenix is a okay missile at best so i was thinking they should make the F14D(Early) for the ptt and F14D(Late) w aim120s for the tt
and for the people that say “well a tech tree varient would slow down sales of the f14D prem” they added the f4s as a copy and paste version of the f4J with the same capabilities as it they dont care about the prem version plus there will A L W A Y S be wallet warriors that are going to buy vehicles plus most of the people that were going to order the f14d (at this time) preorder already ordered it and for people that say “its not realistic” then say bye to r27 on iriaf any weapons on the yak141 and the yak141 itself and all kinds of other planes and tanks that are in the game the f14D was closer to having amramms then most if not all these vehicles were to having the weapons they have that arent 100% realistic this game is supposed to be somewhat fun and usa tree needs a good contender at this br anyways this game is a SEMIrealistic combat sim so the tech tree version in my opinion should have amramms if a tech tree version ever gets added
2 Likes
I agree but the only thing stopping us from getting AMRAAMs on the f14D is that supposedly it has to be a prototype vehicle like the yak141 to get tested weapons even tho kh38mt situation exists
Like the f18C early and f18C late
I also think they should add a f14D w/aim120 at 13.3 and one without at 13.0
2 Likes
Hi everyone,
I’ve been following this discussion closely. The argument that the F-14D lacked the final software integration (the OFP - Operational Flight Program) for the AIM-120 in reality because funding was cut midway through is historically 100% correct. However, we are playing War Thunder—a game that constantly balances historical accuracy with healthy gameplay and matchmaking balance.
Gaijin has proven multiple times that sheer hardware compatibility is enough to make an aircraft competitive in-game, even if the modification was only planned, tested, or mock-up in real life (prime examples being the Yak-141, the Mirage 2000D RMV with Hammer bombs, or the F-16AJ). The F-14D possessed the entire physical hardware architecture required for it, including the powerful AN/APG-71 radar and the digital MIL-STD-1553B databus. Furthermore, AMRAAMs were successfully separated and fired from a modified F-14A testbed precisely to evaluate this technology for the Tomcat platform.
To make the F-14D viable in the current Fox-3 meta without completely throwing realism out the window, Gaijin could implement one of three logical solutions:
- Two Separate Versions (Shoutout to
@911wasainsidejobfor the inspiration): We could structure it like this: Give the upcoming Premium F-14D the AIM-120A right out of the gate. This would make it highly attractive and fully competitive in the current top-tier meta. Then, in the near future, Gaijin can introduce a separate Tech Tree or Event version that represents the strictly historical fleet variant—completely without AMRAAMs—and position it at a lower, well-balanced BR (e.g., 13.0) where it relies on AIM-54C+ and Sparrows. - Researchable Module with Dynamic BR: Gaijin could introduce the AIM-120A as a late-tier modification. If a player equips AMRAAMs in their loadout, the aircraft’s BR automatically increases (e.g., from 13.0 to 13.3). This gives players the ultimate choice between the historical fleet loadout and the technically feasible top-tier scenario.
- The Classic “Prototype/Precedent” Rule: Simply give the F-14D the AIM-120A based on proven hardware compatibility to keep the iconic jet competitive against Su-30s and modern F-16s, and adjust its BR upward accordingly.
Leaving the F-14D as just a sluggish missile bus for Phoenixes—which are highly situational in the current meta—doesn’t do justice to the pinnacle of the Tomcat line. Utilizing technical compatibility to secure balance would be completely in line with how Gaijin handles other nations.
What are your thoughts on these approaches?
9 Likes
exactly phoenix might as well defeat themselves
You mean currently it doesn’t have any of that stuff right? The new Aim-54C would get chaff rejection. Also I’m not sure if angle gating is a real term that is used for missiles or something Gaijin came up with, but the ECCM the C+ already uses angles as a method to stay on target.
1 Like
Everything on the 54s is wrong. Well , the model is ok. Everything else though…
2 Likes
Aim 54 is better than amraams anyway, for anything not close range
1 Like
I would not mind it having Aim-120, people paid 80 bucks for it. They should get value for money for it. Instead of doing the same old tactic of climbing to 6km alt. and launching the AIm-54Cs, the aim 120 would open up a slightly different play style.
3 Likes
they knew what they were buying didn’t they?
1 Like
Another tiger tank 1 classic
1 Like
I… uuh… ok dude…
1 Like