I find is useless on F-4S (and i imagine its not gonna be much different on F-4J) due to fact that
its IRs are rear-aspect only + have low peak G pull; these need to be lead as much as possible and as such theres no feasible scenario where HMS would make any significant difference to hitting the target
sparrows are not gonna hit anyway in any scenario where they are launched at close range because the target will sooner break the lock before the missile can intercept it
Not to mention that if you find yourself in situation where you need to use HMS on Phantom in dogfight you already made several mistakes beforehand to end up in such situation anyway.
At long ranges any plane that does not have HMS will simply be able to lock the target in standard ACM mode anyway.
Only scenario where HMS on Phantom is advantage is when its long range shot against group of enemies and you want to lock specific one.
Aim9H in the f4s are actually pretty decent tbh man but yeah the situation does change at all they need to be led same as almosy IR missiles.
Exactly and situations where you can HMD you still have to point the plane at the general direction of the enemy to get a solid solution.
Cant off bore it, plus the aim7F on the ej kai actually can be fired in a better crank position due to the radar scope being wider.
Mirage F.1C without Magic 2 at the same Br as MiG-23MLD should be reasonable for testing or at least consideration.
Perhaps at the same Br as F-4E if Super 530F are also removed.
For those interested, I’m currently preparing a suggestion for an early Mirage F1. It would solve the problem if it were added, it would bring a Mirage F1 without Magic 2 and with only R530s, it would fill the gap between the Mirage III and the current Mirage F1.
Not only having to focus on the way I use it’s missiles and concentrate on “actually” playing with that aircraft, If that makes any sense to you, would be nice.
The CT and C-200 would remain untouched creating a win-win situation.
The only difference between the F1C and F1 200 is the air refueling prob.
Same loadouts.
The F1C was designed to be used as a more air to air plane, while the F1CT still has AGMS for round strike. EDIT: well it used to actually have anti tank ground missiles. Its been that long since ive looked at it.
the platforms are the same, the loadout varies marginally
EDIT to build on the other edit, technically because the F1CT is missing most its Anti ground gear it’s loadout looks empty.
However my statement was the F1C and F1 200 are identical.
Aye, but they said all 3 are the same configuration. Just highlighting CT and base F1 have notably different payload. CT belongs where it is, as does the F1 after all the fixes.
