the HMD is the biggest downside
despite having a worse engine the thrust to weight ratio is functionally the same at normal speeds due to the increased weight of f16c
and in exchange you get MAW and iirc extra countermeasures
His point relied on the strength of the missile, not the airframes. We can discuss that as another cause, but that wasn’t his point.
F-16AM + non-historical HMS on that same patch??? Are we playing the same game?
Now they got the EF, along Brits and Its.
It got fixed, knowing Gaijin, that could be perfectly not fixed by today if it wasn’t for player’s pressure.
It still is a 4th gen platform that has decent instantaneous turn, decent speed and a functional radar, all that you need to ramp kills on ARB.
Now its time to say Japan bias too i guess? lol.
which is interesting because a lot of the time there is an export version that is slightly better than the US tree one
2 Likes
because of domestic upgrades most of the time
Bruh
Every time this same argument, and every time I have to explain that you lose 2 missiles to use the MAWS, it’s incredible how people talk about this plane without ever having touched it
sorry I forgot about that
it still is a reasonable platform with amraam though which the other guy was claiming france didnt have
1 Like
OP would never concede the US gets a rounded model of their platforms, while there has been a noticeable amount of cases of export variants being straightup better than the US peer at least for air purposes, the same happened with Russia for instance with the MiG-29G/MiG-29SMT cryouts, among other examples on older platforms.
When the seek and destroy update came to the game you had to grind an entire tectree to get there, to get to a platform that was much inferior to the f16C and especially the f15C.
It’s such a good platform that no one uses it in the game.
If you think this plane is reasonable, it’s because you’ve never played with it, f16AM is the second worst f16 in the game, it only loses to OCU, just like AM it is a block 15 without HMD with fox3, the main difference between OCU and AM is that OCU has only 60 countermeasures.
When seek and destroy came, while Israel had the 3 worst f16 in the game, the D block 40 with only derby and France had access to the second worst in the game that you had to grind an entire tt to have access.( all lower platforms)
Not in dogfights nor avionics. If it was subpar on those departments, it was marginally.
boo hoo the US alongside literally NATO + JP + ISR got back to the BVR game after months of utter R-27ER domination + their BVR flagship, pretend to be suprised.
I mean, i saw decent amounts of 16AMs back in the day previous to the Rafale, its unfair to compare them while the ravioli rinses the F-16 any day of the week. But given that you willingfully opened that flank, let’s talk how MICAs noticeably outperform your so feared 120s on the ranges that do matter…
Or not?
Again, it was back on day 1 of seek and destroy which brought blu back to the BVR jousting where the Belgium F-16 shined at its best. The OCU was a cheap addition that one could seriously argue it shouldn’t be added in the first place at the timing they did.
And again, i can’t see where there could be this ‘us main’ problem other than being decent planes affected by compression as a whole.
This discussion is literally not going anywhere but coping over literally the US IMC and a missile that, as of making this comment, is an AIM-120A/B with marginal corrections on its flight path and the maneuverability that they shouldn’t have nerfed from the A/B models.
They talk shit on the eagle’s kd but they dont mentio their favourite aircraft’s kd lol.
1 Like
Yeah thats how it works
If it’s allegedly it’s somewhat contested. So you can’t fully deny it.
Quartas121’s whole thing is “murica fuck yeah! perfect country, perfect military, never does anything wrong, never makes any mistake, rah eagle sounds or whatever!!!1!!1!”.
So yeah either lightly trolling or pointing out his hilarious biases, whichever applies better in the situation, is something that has to happen.
1 Like
the R-77 is not and never has been equipped with TVC, you’re thinking of the R-73
1 Like
I was under the impression that the R-77 was also a TVC missile, my mistake. I shall remove my foolishness.
like?
He is talking about the BOL pods on the Finnish hornet (F/A-18C MLU 2)
Idk about the Swiss one tho, because it is just copy pasted from the American one
1 Like
well if the finnish had their hornets upgraded, why not?
if the americans didnt, no reason to complaing
USN has BOL and put it on their hornets a long time ago.
Not to mention ATFLIR @ron_23 which I think is on German hornet but not US, same like AAS-38B which isn’t on US C early
and what difference does that make ingame, besides the TGP looking a bit different
When fixed it will be decent pod. And still a capability missing for no reason