No reason why not. The later F-15s get some much nastier weapons/sensor combinations do they not? Any close-range advantage the late-model Flankers have with TVC would be offset by having to avoid the C/D SPAMRAAMs at greater and greater distances.
It’ll suck being uptiered in any case.
I’ve been trying to spade the 29SMT and find it a punishing experience to work my way past the waves of Fakours, Pheonixes, AMRAAMs all before I can get into effective R-77 range. The 12-14 BR bracket is just too heavily compressed and I don’t think Gaijin will expand the BRs enough when these newer jets get added.
the APG-63v3 on the F-15C allegedly made some F-22 pilots jealous, let alone the APG-82v1 put on strike eagles. Legion pod is much newer, but will give great IRST capabilities. EPAWSS is also new, but will give strike eagles more CM and much better RWR ingame. combined with 120C-5, theyll be great.
vs a sukhoi with R-77-1 and R-73 will be very interesting to see ingame
I mean that’s not that bad considering it has thrust vectoring, at low speeds it will be amazing, combining canards + 3D tvc, i’m not sure if it will be better than the EF or the rafale at low speeds, but maybe on the same level as them, I just hope that gaijin doesn’t leave the TVC on all the time and they gives us the option to turn it on and off
tbh having a good radar will be already enough for me, im tired of the damn su27sm radar lol
The way Gaijin model Canards its going to be probably the best 2nd best jet after the Rafale.
And it wont have a shytey mech scan. Which makes it superior to Typhoons Radar which acts like a 60s Radar
A lot hinges on how they model the TVC. How they’ve modelled the thrust nozzles on the harriers for example leaves a bit to be desired - but since it is manually enacted by the player it doesn’t matter so much. You can fly around and never touch the nozzle controls all day long if you want.
If it was kicking in every time you made a hard pull irrespective of the airspeed/energy state, I could imagine it would be a real pain in the backside. It would drive you nuts.
Yet that is what Gaijin need to model regarding even a simple 2-plane TVC, much less anything more complex.
I wish my country (Chile) could buy them. We use F-16C B50/52. But we need to remove old F-5 from inventory. When the F-16 was choose, the gripen was also in the competition. But that was in 2000… So the Gripen E didn’t exist at that time. Now that the platform has madure. It could be a good addition. Also its not the first time that Embraer and ENAER has work together. So a nice deal could be made between Chilen, Brasil and Sweeden.
Sadly all the talk and rumors point out to the Eurofighters.
It should come down to the engine. Dunno if Russian speaking players has more information on Su-37 engines. The information on “AL-37FU” is mixed. Some people said it never pass the paper stage. Other said at least 3 where build and two tested on Su-37… The Terminator with AL-37FU should be better than Su-30SM. Regardless of 2D vs 3D TVc.
Anyone has info on whether the ±70 deg in azimuth (for Bars radar) is with the electronic and mechanical steering combined, or just the electronic steering?
But then again, Bars’ ±45 deg elevation coverage (which is purely by electronic beam steering) suggests that it just has a relatively narrow beam steering coverage.
So likely ±45 deg coverage in azimuth with electronic beam steering and an additional ±25 deg with mechanical steering for a total of ±70 degrees.
Unless google translate is butchering it or I’m reading it incorrectly, the -14 elevation limit seems dog**** (and contradicted by the +45 deg listed in the export catalogue) and is that “3 to 10 degrees electronic steering in azimuth”?