The AT-6E Wolverine can carry a pair and has HMCS. Preformance wise is basically a P-51 under 20K ft. It’s the prefect testbed since I know Gaijin won’t want to implement it on fast jets first, and we all remember how the R-73 was on the Su-25 when it first came.
Agree or don’t I’m just spitballing ideas.
I disagree because there is already a better test bed in game
in the form of the AH-1Z, which also only gets 2 and wont be anywhere near a painful to play as something like AT-6E would with high tier ARB map sizes
Fair enough I was just thinking of something that could give the missile a little more momentum, and you can dogfight in the Wolverine.
It was said that all next nations would receive next gen fox 2 at the same time. So it will probably be a top tier addition.
There’s not really a need for lower tier attacker testing, since SAM are already the testing platform
Thats the thing I don’t understand though. Yes we know how effective the 9X is from a stationary SAM. But AAMs and SAMs do behave deferent from each other.
Everyone talks about the seeker, but you can’t really test anything if the truck its on is just being bombed to oblivion constantly, nor is it the primary missile the SLAMRAAM is.
My point is if the goal is to use it air to air, then test it air to air.
I think the only thing that really needs to be tested and tuned accordingly is the seeker performance. That doesnt really change.
Correct me if I’m wrong but don’t people just ground mask more often then not in GRB?
Yes. The Aim9X doesn’t aerodynamicly differ that much from any currently in gamr IR missiles. Range is seen on the AAM3, TVC on the R73. The exact flight model can be tuned during development of the missile. Only the seeker remains, and testing « OP » seekers on areguably the weakest platforms (ground based systems) is good enough.
Ground masking isn’t very efficient against IR missiles tho.
Some do, some dont.
Though Terrian masking is only effective so long as the terrain is between you and the missile.
Still plenty of data for how hard it is to flare them for example
Not if you put a mountain between you and the potential launch site. Ideally never giving it a chance to fire in the first place.
Which is great, until you need to do something other than flying defensively
Which is a pretty specific situation compared to ARH missiles which can easily be multipath.
This is also pretty good during testing of a potentially OP (cause inflatable missiles), as it still allows fighter jets to evade these missiles in the situation where there’s a hill they can defeat the missile with.
My guess as to why they still aren’t added to jets is because you can evade missiles this way, and they probably did figure that the missiles we’re still too OP to be added to jets in the current implementation