The AIM-9M and the AIM-120A were made years before the F/A-18C, the F/A-18C shown in the game is 1989/1990. The AIM-9M was made in 1983, the AIM-120A was made in 1988. Also the War Thunder wiki litterally says that it was made in early 90s!
Sources: (PDF) AIM-120 AMRAAM: Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile Overview , AIM-9M/L Sidewinder | IPMS/USA Reviews Website
McDonnell Douglas F/A-18 Hornet - Wikipedia
No.
1 Like
Sure, if you want it to be 14.0 go for it :)
1 Like
Loadouts are always a balancing decision. The reason why the F/A-18C (I assume you mean the Premium) is at 12.7 is because it doesnt have 9Ms and 120s. With it would be 14.0.
Its already one of the strongest aircraft at its BR with the Aim-7Ps
2 Likes
Can’t wait for you to be told 7Ps are bad and the aircraft is bad at the rating and needs better weapons to compete.
1 Like
AMRAAMs were sent to the air-force initially in 1991, followed by the Navy acquiring them in 1993.
Aim-9M should be added to it and it should be 13.0.
6 Likes
Absolutely not. F-18C is already under tiered, 6 AIM-9M would warrant a 0.7 BR raise at the very least.
If it was limited to 4x Aim-9M (So no twin missile carrier) and so it could run 2+6 or 4+4, it would be fine at 13.0, would be akin to the F-15A
yeah but it would still have the OP AIM-7P if it received 9M only it should Be 13.3 for its kit but with AIM120A def 13.7
Hmmm… Keeping the comparison with the F-15A, Its trading a lot of potential speed and height (and thus energy for the Aim-7) for having IOG on the Aim-7. It actually probably balances out overall okay. 13.3 gets tricky because then its really comparing Aim-7P to AMRAAM, like on the F3 or F4F ICE (13.0s that should be 13.3 if it wasnt for compression) and I dont think that math works out the same. Though its an overall impossible thing to really balance due to how messy 12.0-13.0 is. 13.0 could easily be 2-3 BRs in its own right.
If it got Aim-120, then its 14.0, unless it was limited to 2+6 or 4/6+4 or something.
1 Like
why would it be 14.0 when F15C/J10A/SU27SM is 13.7 ?
aim7p with DL is a massive upgrade to standard 7M
Because all F-18s with AMRAAM are 14.0 and C5s really isnt a big enough upgrade to comment on. So its a matter of quantity, if it had the 2+10 fit, it would be 14.0
f18c vs su27sm3 would be peak
C5 is a massive upgrade its 15X better at range than the A model also it has downgraded engines so for BVR its way better
Not sure why you want it to go to BR 14.0 when you can just get the tech tree one instead.
1 Like
and range is almost entirely irrelevant in WT at the moment, the better short range time to target on the A/B is usually more desirable than the extra range. I know loads of people that just stick with the A/B or run a few C5s for early game volleys, but have A/B on the remainder of the pylons.
F18c early should recieve nothing and be made 13.0
if you play any form of BVR you carry the C5 its why the F15C GE isnt 13.7
Right, and on the Typhoon I usually run C5s because im too lazy to be swapping mid battle, but even then… on average, im firing at like 15km quite often, A/B would actually be better most of the time.
and when you look at stuff like the F-16I, is C5 really good enough to justify it being 14,0 and not 13.7?
C5 keeps its speed manuvering at range allowing you to fire farther its best to carry both but for current meta C5 is better