There’s no real point most of the time anyways.
You’re better off just sticking with one type and working with that
It’s once converted to a similar currency and account for year over year inflation, it creeps up a little.
The French source has some issues :
- it’s considering the entire program cost, not the product cost of the missiles
- it’s only considering the purchases up to 2013. The missile is still in production up to today (tho, probably under the new MICA NG standard since it’s due to enter service very soon)
These 2 factors artificially inflate the « production » price that you are comparing to the Aim9X. Of course, the Aim9X, being so vastly produced, will have a lower portion of the price of each missiles be of the « development cost ».
Many French media are claiming a current unit cost of 600-1000K euros, some claiming the 600K euros as a DGA value, but I honestly can’t find the original document for that
That’s how you figure out how much an AUR costs, it includes a fraction of the money spent on R&D
The -9X was only purchased by the USN in lots between '03 & '17, so it also has a fixed timeframe. It’s still procured by FMS clients and existing Sidewinders can be turned in for some quantity of FMS credits, which count towards offsetting Defense Spending allotments that the US makes (Often FMA Funds are transfer to a virtual account, that can only be spent on US offerings so it remains within the US MIC ecosystem).
Similarly the AIM-9X also has later subvariants that are priced differently. Technically the cutting edge service missile is the “-9X-2”, where the -3 & -4 implement changes that fix issues with parts obsolescence & reliability. Which were tabulated in the linked comment.
Which is the entire advantage of retaining the Sidewinder airframe instead of a clean sheet design, which is not something that will apear in War Thunder, even if all eligible airframe were conferred access. There is still a massive gulf in actual performance considering the baseline missile shares the motor with the -9M; so we’ve seen how it performs at range.
I doubt that the US Tree would be arbitrarily conferred the, AIM-95, AIM-132 (ASRAAM) or AIM-2000(IRIS-T) either. So it’s not an option for the most part
It’s likely the cost of materials and labor for an additional AUR, without factoring in the cost of R&D as it’s already been recouped Which would be relevant for newly ordered missile Lots.
1 Like
Let’s hold off on even higher gen IR missiles and radar missiles until Gaijin can figure out how to properly balance top tier. Until then, hell no.
1 Like
Even the crayon eater knows this
Wt players are doomed
2 Likes
There is a debate to be had though that the next Gen IIRs being added to all would actually increase balance.
A major im-balance at top tier at the moment is nations with an abudance of HOBS (R-73, R-77/R-77-1, MICA, Magic II) vs nations with no HOBS (AMRAAM, Aim-9M, etc) and this creates a major issue at shorter ranges where something like an F-15 or Typhoon has to fire directly at the target and is dependent on guns at short ranges vs something like the SU-30SM2 or Rafale that can fire whilst being turned quite a bit and can use missiles at short ranges.
If everyone had HOBS. It might help level the playing field a bit
China will be mega screwed.
Even if next-gen IRs get added with the same seekers as on ground launched variants they’ll affect the meta a LOT.
High CM counts will be even more important.
Which china lacks
Some jets still won’t have HOBS even if next gen IR is added, unless gaijin uses the “compatibility” card to give those jets HOBS IR
Chinas entire missile kit will be more standoff wise anyway so you dont have to get close
Perhaps, but I think screwing over every other nation with crappy placeholder missiles is just as bad.
Still a big disadvantage considering the meta is medium/close range engagements anyways
Well a lot of the well awaited chn jets dont even have guns so…
Oh great, even worse
I think the meta is just going to continue shifting more and more towards medium range anyway and its not like the first time we’ve had aircraft ill-suited for WVR excepted to fight WVR monsters (Tornado F3 vs F-16 for example)
2 Likes
T[quote=“Morvran_, post:118, topic:320669, full:true”]
I think the meta is just going to continue shifting more and more towards medium range anyway and its not like the first time we’ve had aircraft ill-suited for WVR excepted to fight WVR monsters (Tornado F3 vs F-16 for example)
[/quote]
Agreed, the meta will be high missile count monsters with good medium/close range performance. Just like how it is now.
This makes the future for 5th gens look a little bleak
yeah the J-20/j-35 (J-35 could get one there is a patent for a gun mount) J-16D and J-15D dont have guns
good joke but it isn’t april 1st anymore
I don’t think patent would be enough for it to gun
good enough for gajin if push comes to shove