If the Yak-141 gets R-77, then the F-20 absolutely deserves Aim-120A. I doubt gaijin really wants their top paying premium players to suffer in an ARH meta with only semi-actives to protect themselves…
1 Like
it was a mockup not real missile
1 Like
not first gen aim-120 but its mockup
1 Like
also if we really want to go this way f-20 was unable to use aim 7’s and 9l’s only 9j/p
What do you mean “F-20 was unable to use AIM-7”? This is straight up false.
Here’s a picture of the F-20 firing an AIM-7F Sparrow:
As for AIM-9:s however, it seems it was indeed only ever tested with AIM-9J.
3 Likes
Yes and?
I take it you have not read anything I’ve actually posted up to this point.
Yeah, if it was historical, so I say yes, but the people who want “balance” or it to be at a less competitive BR where it’s just better, would say no.
And, the YAK-141 was never fielded, which is fine, but it’s “what if” armament is what throws me off about it. The F-20 could use AMRAAMs, the YaK-141 didn’t even have a gun, let alone missiles.
This is an objectively gray area. But the fact is, the YaK-141 was developed in 1975, and the R-77R didn’t even see service untill 1990, and developed in the 1980s.
1 Like
The F-20 couldn’t use AMRAAMs, they were planned, but that’s it.
Also a 13.0 F-20 wouldn’t be fun.
Then that’s fine.
I mean, you could say the same for the Yak141s IRST. It was planned and ready, but never got implemented. And yet, it’s present on the in game model.
There’s got to be more consistency with how vehicles are implemented. If it could have it, it should have it.
3 Likes
That’s consistent.
IRST doesn’t increase lethality of Yak-141 either.
It’s there for variety.
I don’t want a 13.0 F-20.
1 Like
So I would like to point out that although the F-20 program did stop and document showed the AIM-120 was a priority for development some F-5s were later produced with the “Shark Nose” (the F-20’s nose and radar package) and are able to carry the AIM-120 and could be theorized it could have had the ability to operate them. However its unknown because the missile was also still in development at the time and probably why they never were actually tested with live missiles. I’m decently ok with getting the jet either way, would love for 120s but will settle for the 7m, it will be outclassed in every way but just happy to see it be represented in WT and for the most part this is me just talking i don’t know if the shark nosed F-5s had better radars then the planned F-20s or what other upgrades were preformed
1 Like
Its completely irrelevant.
Its not in the game you dum dum
So how hard do you guys think the F-20 buyers are going to die at the start of this patch given it is arguably a flat out worse F-4S at a higher br?
It’s much better than the F-4S, it’s an F-16 with 80% of the capabilities (should have a lower BR imo as well unless spamraams)
Has 2/6th the 7F loadout, no HMD, 15 less countermeasures, a maximum of 4 missiles vs 8, vastly inferior bomb load, inferior cannons.
Thats not 80% of the capabilities my dude, thats more like 40% of it, the only saving grace of the F-20 is it’s TWR and ability to turn which do not make up for a full .7 BR increase where you will always be pulled into top tier.
Less missiles - yes it’s a downgrade, but the better platform more than makes up for it
Less countermeasures - yep, 15 less can make a difference. Tis a downgrade indeed. (Not sarcasm, being legit, just one countermeasure can be life saving in my experience)
Worse cannon - No not really, they’re very potent, the only downside being the lower firerate if I’m not mistaken, but the F-5’s cannons have less spread from what I’ve seen.
HMD - with IR missiles it hardly ever gets used since you’re using a rear aspect missile set along with 18Gs, meaning you’ll have to pull in and lead more often than not depending on range. Useful for radar locking though. I’d say this advantage gets outweighed by the All-Aspect missile capability the F-20 gains over the F-4S.
40% capability - No.
it beats the Fulcrum, Flanker, possibly eagle at low speeds but haven’t tested, and other aircraft with similar performance at dogfights, holds its own in matches against top tier jets when you keep your speed high (except gripens ofc), has the same armament options as the F-16, besides the option of carrying a 30mm gun pod. The only thing worse about it compared to the 16 is its low speed rate fight, and total armament capabilities. Its a highly capable platform, but being at the same BR as the F-16 doesn’t make sense imo.
Bomb load - It’s not a bomb truck like the phantom, that’s a given. But for a grinder lots of bombing could be nice,
however it should have absolutely nothing to do with its BR.
You cant improve the platform enough to make up for having less missiles my guy, the missile bus will always have the upper hand.
The Mk11 has superior ballistic qualities by a fair margin and 190 less total rounds, the spread is also beneficial in A2A engagements as it negates offset issues, the only reason you would need precision is if you are striking ground targets, and if you are using M39s to strafe you are doing it wrong.
HMDs allow you to force a seeker capture without a radar lock which is paramount in when deploying heaters, it also allows you to offbore people with the AIM-7 which is also a large requirement at top tier.
The Flanker and Fulcrum will beat it in a two circle as it bleeds speed like crazy, you either win the one circle or die in the F-20, the F-16 will just flat out beat it period, gripens, as you stated, are self explanatory.
Combine this performance with it’s lackluster CM amount compared to everything else at 12.0, and you will easily become R-73 bait or, well, any missile bait very quickly.
Due to this lack it means you cant grind with it, along with this it does not have the ability to be that relevant in GRB either as, like the F-5E, 4 AGM-65Bs is just sad, and you have to trade away half your A2A ability to carry even that, the 30mm pod is a joke sadly due to it’s small ammo load and the 4th nerf 30mm PGU has received. If the PGUs still had 100+mm of pen I would have a different stance on this, but they do not, seriously, they murdered my poor boy by turning it into HVAP, from 110+mm of pen to 79mm of pen.
Had the F-20 gotten 4 AGM-65Ds, now that is a worthy 12.0 option, after all, the GR.7 and AV-8B plus exist at 11.7 with TGPs as well + AGM-65Ds, while the F-20 would just have the, questionable seeker quality of the missiles themselves.