The Ammunitionkatalog of Försvarsmakten lists only one version of the Rb 75, unlike the Sidewinders(Rb 24/24J/74), and Försvarsmakten’s official website states that the Rb 75 is “Systemet används inte längre i Försvarsmakten.(The system is no longer used in the Armed Forces.)”
EDIT: To avoid any misunderstanding, this means that Försvarsmakten currently do not have an improved version of the AGM-65 in their inventory, NOT that Gripen cannot use the AGM-65 in technically.
We guess rumor of subsonic attack aircraft at rank 8 for USA & Italy, and new F-16 with General Electric engine from USAF & Israel coming to this quarter ?
I personally think that the F-111E/F and/ or F-15A/C are more likely than yet another AV-8B & F-16.
I don’t think we have an AV-8B in the game though.
i thought it would come with the harrier gr7 but the av8b is more advanced so shouldn’t be surprised
So with newer jets and fox 3 coming, you guys think we gonna see the Mirage 2000D soon? 6 missiles and a much better climb rate, i see the MICA being the only barrier keeping us from it
I guess at least Italy could get light combat aircraft 11.0 at rank 7 & AV-8B+ Harrier II early without AIM-120 in rank 8 Q3 or Q4 this year
The Harrier II is derived from the AV-8B(which itself is a heavily modified Sea harrier ). Sort of(The UK walked away from the joint project only to buy back in later once the design was practically finalized), and the GR. 7 is almost practically the same as the AV-8B(Night Attack), bar some ordnance, the outrigger Sidewinder stations, the choice of Targeting pod, CM & ECM fit-out and various other changes.
Not particularly, the evolution of the GR. 5, -7 & -9 are pretty much the same as the AV-8B(DA), -B(NA), and AV-8B+
Sure there were some test articles like the Brimstone or AGR-20, ECM pods, etc., that would make points of difference between them but for the most part they are interchangeable.
I just think that the AV-8B+ / GR.9 would be the logical candidate of the US’s first AMRAAM as it isn’t a fighter(comparatively poor A2A characteristics), could take the AMRAAM and could be effectively added to at least three nations (US, UK, ITA) and so be an easy way out without pushing boundaries, like an F-15C, F-14D, F-16C-40/42 or F/A-18C would, among others.
Personally I think they should add AMRAAMs to the -15ADF, in order to cover the gap to the Typhoon, as its probably one of the better options they have, and there are other airframes that could populate the 11.x ~12.0 gap. and would take relatively little additional work, and sits in the same boat as the J-8F, where it never carried Sparrows in Italian service (the reverse of the US version), though they were both wired for either missile.
Thx! That sounds Gaijin can just add whatever they feel makes it balanced.
You guess gaijin might plan consider early lightweight multirole fighter from USN/USMC this year ?
I’m not sure Italy get another attack aircraft rank 8 this quarter ?
Maybe, F-16A Block 15 ADF for Italian Air Force could add 2nd IR AAM AIM-9M & medium ARH BVRAAM AIM-120B AMRAAM replace AIM-7M and increase to 12.3 or 12.7 this year
I was secretly hoping dev maybe plan consider early fighter aircraft 12.0 with AIM-7, 2nd lightweight multirole fighter with new pulse doppler radar, General Electric engine & targeting pod for Israel, and consider new F-16 with early active radar BVRAAM, General Electric engine, new pulse doppler radar & targeting pod for USA this year
I’d like to think so its just that there are a large number of potentially viable strike options available for the Attacker line (A-6E WCSI / A-6F, A-4M, AV-8B(DA) /-B(NA) / -B+ , A-7F, A-10C, F-4G, etc.) that could follow on from the A-7E, so to commit to something like the F/A-18 (even if its fairly weak comparatively until the -18C/D) so soon seems like a misstep, as it escalates to proper multirole fighters too quickly, especially since it would be proposed to be sitting at ~11.7 or so.
I’d see similar issues with a F-16C-40/42 & -50/52, or F-15E turning up for the same reason, I personally think that the US could take a few updates before getting more advanced fighters so aircraft that got skipped past could be added.
This delay could also be used to permit a number of mechanics implemented / revised /expanded on to allow for a more complete implementation to be made, or stores & capabilities added / revised, to better set things up going forward. And a number of the aforementioned aircraft could in someway be further added to other trees or share ordnance, and thus streamlined slightly.
The idea behind the AV-8B for Italy would be to provide a strike aircraft, that has a little more than a just pair of Sidewinders to back it up, without compromising the A2G aspect, even if Gaijin withholds certain stores for balance reasons.
I think with IRCCM as it is now it could probably move to at least 12.3, if the mechanic was not revised to only reject flares shortly after release (~.25~1.25 second delay), which is probably more realistic.
Since the -9M doesn’t offer any other concrete advantage over the -9L that we know of for sure (I’ve seen some theories that seeker range was improved by lowering the IR threshold as was done with the -9L on the Tornado, and was tested with the AIM-95 ).
Depends heavily on how far they (and the prospective R-77 & counterparts) proliferate across nations, and are modeled as the R-27ER / R-77 still wins when jousting, and if spamming them out become prevalent other airframes will do it better, so I personally wouldn’t see a need for their addition to increase BR. And even so there are still specific situations where the AIM-7M/P would be better than an early AMRAAM variant, should specific (ECM / ECCM) mechanics be modeled to a sufficient level of detail.
I could definitely see it happening as a stop gap, now that the -2000 lost its Sparrows since the only other multirole they really have access to is the F-15E and that would likely be a step to far, though depending on exactly which TGP(s) they turn up with will decide how much of an advantage over the AVQ-23 as the dumbed down Sharpshooter(AN/AAQ-19) pod isn’t great for Target Acquisition even with an IIR channel, and shouldn’t work with Maverick cueing, and the LITENING is potentially massive overkill for the most part.
The Block - 25 or 30 would probably turn up preferentially as they offer sequential performance advances ( the APG-68 with resultant performance improvements and utility modes with the Block 25, and the best T/W ratio of all F-16’s with the -30), in relatively minor areas (as things are not added chronologically, comparative performance to existing airframes is fine ) without going whole hog Multirole of the block -40/42 & and synthesis and additional utility and ordnance options of the -50/52, which as stated above would likely devalue a number of potential additions if added early so alongside the F-15E / F-16XL will likely be retained for later / capstone airframes, since the F-22, F-35 F-15 SE & -EX, F-16C-70, F/A-18E, etc. would probably be far too much until existing developmental airframes reach production status.
Special event for the 80th after Operation Husky ( [Special] A Decal and a 3D Decoration Commemorating 80 years from Operation Husky - News - War Thunder )
A real shame that the map based on it was removed from rotation last week.
The Carentan tutorial returns ! ( https://www.reddit.com/r/Warthunder/comments/14t064t/datamine_227081_227083/ ) " Liberation of European Village " is a short mission which straddles the line between the Tutorial 's and Single Missions, it has been seen in development bit by bit for a few years now. And now again !
still nothing about the upcomming summer event i assume?
And the next battle pass reward
I don’t know A-6E WCSI (Weapons Control System Improvement) different from A-6E TRAM (Target Recognition and Attack Multi-Sensor) & A-6E SWIP (Weapons Control System Improvement) ?
It’s true that dev not add new attack aircraft toptier for USA tech tree for almost 2 years, I hope USA could get new attack aircraft toptier 11.7 or 12.0 better A-7E this year
I got no problem if gaijin consider F-16CG Block 40 under F-16A Block 10 & F-16A Block 15 ADF for USA tech tree this quarter (Q3) or next quarter (Q4) because some look like F-16A Block 20 & F-16AM MLU, at least improved BVR combat in Air RB & Air SB and close air support all-weather in Ground RB & Ground SB
No problem if any day dev could add AIM-9M on F-16A Block 15, F-16A Block 20 & F-14B and increase battle rating
Let’s say dev add R-73 on MiG-29 9-13 (USSR) and MiG-29 9-12A (GDR) Q3, Personally,I think necessarily to omitted R-27ER/R-27ER1
I don’t worry on a certain day dev consider 2nd lightweight multirole fighter for Israel tech tree F-16C Block 30 Barak I equipped limited IR AMM & without ARH BVRAAM like F-16A Netz, at least Air-to-Ground armament like Kurnass 2000 but carry targeting pod better AN/AVQ-23 Pave Spike and improve CAS night and raining battle in Ground RB & Ground SB toptier
I’m not sure that first fighter aircraft 12.0 toptier with SARH for Israel Air Force coming to Q3 ?
Effectively the only difference between the A-6E WCSI and TRAM as things currently stand would be access to the AGM-123, which is a rocket(AGM-45B motor) assisted GBU-16. Unless they add buddy guidance so another player can guide the standoff AGM-84E, they don’t have the post release control capability, so its just a AGM-65F(both use the -65D’s seeker) with a slightly larger Warhead.
The SWIP further adds capability to carry the AGM-65E & -F, -84 and -88. and provide post release control to the AGM-62 ERDL, AGM-84E
My issue is that with the F-14B being added, a number of options are now effectively obsolete to a degree since its a much more survivable airframe, with similar or better capabilities, and the slightly lower BR won’t move them out of reach of 11.7~12.0 Fighters. So I no longer really have a sense of what is coming next, or at least in what order things are going to arrive, considering the number of potential options.
Before the F-14B was announced, I would have said the F-111E/-F, the AV-8B(NA), or tech Tree A-6E TRAM counterpart would have been most likely, but i couldn’t now say that we won’t see an F/A-18, F-16C-40 or F-15E / F-16XL as a wildcard.
The sequential progression though the blocks is going to be important in order to prevent a similar fate to the F-4E, where capabilities were handed out slowly overtime (and still remain incomplete), when potential blocks some advancement it also allows for things to go as fast as needed to keep up with other additions since there are many options, and delays the appearance of the Multirole variants until there is sufficient airframe diversity to support them as well as allowing the remaining dedicated Strike airframes to see their relevance before things devolve into true missile spam with 10’s of Fox 3’s in the air at any given point in time.
in regards to the F-16’s I think a Block 25 would be likely be a good lead in airframe for US for when the AIM-120, assuming that they don’t go with the AV-8B+, or if they need a slightly higher performance variant the block 30/32 would be next in line, since it can also get better Sidewinders if they are needed.
They probably should have added the -9L to the F-14A (and modeled the AN/ALR-23 IRSTS) and bumped up the BR to 12.0, and added another Attacker in the F-14B’s place.
They could do it with the F-14B but that would be beginning to force a rapid escalation of the capabilities of newly added fighters, which will make things worse overall, or at least without a revision to how IRCCM works in game, since they defeat flares wholesale at least for now.
It probably is but its to early to know if its an F-15 or F-16 variant at this point, or if it’s even planned to be accompanied simultaneously by its counterparts in other nation’s trees, or otherwise matched in some way. and its probably going to be expediated since there is a pressing need due to the -2000 losing its AIM-7’s, though why the removal was coupled to the new airframes release will probably never make sense.
I’d bet money they are going to add the F-15A (Baz for Israel) and SU-27S first since they can only carry SARH missiles, rather than the F16C Barak (bl. 30) which can carry ARH missiles.
I am also dying to know. With the new SL system, and coming changes, it’ll actually be flyable.
Kinda expecting a Gripen B/D or some kinda MiG-29 but hoping for an F14A late, F-111B or any kinda Mirage.
Whatever it is I hope it’ll be creative like the German high alt interceptor and not like the Swedish mustang. I know people like it but I only dabble in props if it’s funky like a weird German design.
But I think F-16C Block 30 & F-16CG Block 40 better F-16C Block 25, at least fitted with General Electric F110-GE-100 engine, carry targeting pod, and for F-16C Block 40 carry laser guided bomb & addition of cockpit lighting systems compatible with Aviator’s Night Vision Imaging System (ANVIS). F-16C Block 25 might seem like F-16A Block 20 from ROCAF in china tech tree now
I guess attack aircraft 11.7 in rank VIII for USA tech tree might AV-8B (NA), and attack aircraft 12.0 & 12.3 maybe A-6E WCSI, A-6E SWIP & AV-8B+ early
F-111F Aardvark good new aircraft toptier CAS at bomber line under F-105D but without AIM-9
Now Kurnass 2000 good air-to-ground armament but losing AIM-7. Personally, I think first fighter aircraft 12.0 carry SARH only maybe F-15A Baz
Personlly, I think F-15A Baz similar to Su-27S/Su-27SK Flanker B, pre-MSIP F-15J/F-15C Eagle & Shenyang J-11 basic & J-11A because no AIM-7M Sparrow & no modern IR AAM maneuvering capability 50G+
I don’t worry if any day dev consider F-16C Block 30 Barak without early ARH BVRAAM, at least equipped LANTIRN AN/AAQ-19 Sharpshooter targeting pod better AN/AVQ-23 Pave Spike & Air-to-Ground like Kurnass 2000
I guess early fighter aircraft which carry medium-range ARH BVRAAM maybe IAI Kfir 2000 or Boeing F-15I Ra’am