11.3 my bad, but it still would leave a vacuum where there would be nothing sitting at that low of a BR besides the F-8E at 10.7 which arguably is limited by it’s speed, missiles and endurance. We already have the F-4S and F-4J sitting up higher. The F-4E shouldn’t be given AIM-7Fs and AIM-9Ls only to slam it up against PD capable enemies when the F-4E is more than likely not going to have CAA or Flood mode, and even if it did, it isn’t a perfect match to PD as you’re basically doing a lot of hacky stuff to get Missiles to work in Look-down environments. If you gave it AIM-7Fs and AIM-9Ls and caused it to move up, it would be one of the worst performing aircraft of it’s BR
theres other planes at 10.7 u know and a whole lot at 12 and above
well I assume u havent played it recently but you basically ahve a 95% chance of getting uptiered to 12.0 because thats where all the premimums are so Its an inferior plane in its current state anyway
There’s no other options besides the F-5E and the F-8E that come to mind, and even still, the F-4E with the agile eagle at least in terms of flight performance actually makes it a decent aircraft in the current BR bracket in terms of flight performance and you don’t face Mig-29s or F-16s. It’s the issue of the radar being nigh worthless unless you’re staring up into the sky when there should be some options for you. in terms of engagement in look down environments
It faces F-4S a lot, yes. It faces Mig-23s a lot yes. But those are still Gen 3 fighters in terms of flight performance. Even when they do have PD radar.
But I don’t see why the F-4E should be made a sacrificial lamb as fodder for more F-16s and Mig-29s
The F-4E with corrected radar, TISEO, AIM-7Fs and AIM-9L/Ms is superior to a MiG-29A without the R-27ER, and even with it, can still prevail due to magazine depth.
Edit: and it is substantially better than an F-16 without SARHs
I’m sorry, but again. How does the performance of an F-4E beat the performance of an F-16? Especially when even in 1 circle engagements the F-16 still handily beats the F-4E? You’ve basically just said ‘Trust me bro, it’ll be better than a Mig-29 without R-27ERs and an F-16 without SARHs’
SARHs become bread and butter as you inch closer to top-tier until you get AMRAAMS and what not. Why wouldn’t they fly with SARH’s?
The only thing it will have going for it is it’s armament, but even if it had a ‘corrected’ radar. It isn’t a PD radar. The only way for that Radar to work in look-down environments is with CAA and Flood mode with TISEO giving some assistance, but it more than likely won’t score a lock besides manually painting the aircraft with and then giving the Sparrow a simulated doppler input.
Because some just straight dont have access to SARHs? Really are you that simple?
And yes, a corrected radar and accompanying systems would be more than enough to make it competitive.
Because without the multipathing crutch, the F-16 doesn’t make it to that point, or eats a 9L/M side aspect.
This just tells me everything i need to know about your understanding on the topic. The TISEO is capable of locking targets on its own, regardless of radar limitations. It can slave the radar and more importantly the CW emitter. From there it works the same as any other CW missile launch, its the capability of the missiles seeker, not the radar. And as long as thats the case, it has just as much potency as any other AIM-7F equipped aircraft.
That’s the part where I’m still lost a little.
Given the Aim-7F and on have inverse monopulse seekers, could that solve the problem of the partial look down capability?
Well, and before that, can TISEO full slave the illuminator as well? That could be massive for a late block F-4E
It can slave the emitter but the Aim-7F doesnt have an inverse monopulse seeker. That came later on the Aim-7M so i dunno how effective it would be
3 Likes
It could slave the emitter to the target, yes. But unless you want your missile to track, some kind of doppler signal is required which is what helped it track targets. I have heard you can use the TISEO to more or less act as a track for the Radar by having the Radar slaved to the TISEO and then use the aspect knob for the initial input for the sparrow and automatically guide itself to the target without a lock, as the TISEO is having the radar point directly as the target. But that’s still very hacky and forcing a plane to work with hacky measures against dedicated PD planes would hurt it.
3 Likes
Technically it would still be limited by the capabilities of the AIM-7F, but the way the missile is currently modeled means it is just as effective in shoot down scenarios as a 7M.
The radar being slaved to the TISEO track, with the CW antenna emitting, is essentially the same way every SARH currently works. The only difference is the radar is “slaving” itself. In both cases the missile is just looking for the best doppler return, especially because to the best of my knowledge, the game does not program the missile with a prelaunch speedgate to help differentiate targets. This is why you can get missiles that track other targets than what is locked.
3 Likes
Phantoms were often doing ground attack due to how rare it was for the VPAF to actually bring their aircraft out.
However, in operation Bolo, F-4s wiped out half of their MiG-21s in a single sortie.
The Falcon wasn’t anywhere as bad as is often claimed in Vietnam, like the AIM-7 it was a victim of unfortunate circumstances.
2 Likes
I’d agree to some extent, considering that the AIM-4 was only retired alongside the F-106 in the mid '80s as they transitioned to the F-15.
Though the Sidewinder was almost certainly the better missile for both the expected target set (small single seat interceptors), and for the F-4. Not that the Falcon was a bad missile, just less suited for short ranges or low altitudes dogfights and sudden, reactive / non planned engagements in comparison to the Sidewinder.
The Falcon comparatively(to the Earlier Sidewinders e.g. AIM-9B / -9C / -9D / -9E ) excelled at higher altitudes (basically anything above about 15,000ft) where the lower drag and the advanced seeker (and optional IR guidance) / radar (and automation) of the F-102 / F-106 permitted much relaxed engagement criteria and extended range.
7 Likes
This youtube video explains a lot about the shortcomings of the Aim-7 and how they were fixed and improved
1 Like
Pretty much right on all accounts.
The Sidewinder really proved itself as a reliable, dependable missile in Vietnam. There, the Falcon had to contend with being knocked around on logistics trucks for hours, ground crews who used rather… coercive methods of maintenance, being entirely exposed to the hot and humid weather for all its sorties, AND as you said, enemies who were the exact opposite of what it was designed to shoot down.
In the Deltas it had everything it needed, including a very fancy attack planning computer to make best use of it.
Yep, and there he also talks about why the Sparrows just outright failed so often.
1 Like
yeah Most of the time, the ejector that launched the sparrow down wouldnt even fire and sometimes it would fire but not ignite the sparrow so the sparrow would just fall to the ground.
1 Like
this was due to the very humid climates of Vietnam
1 Like
F-4E from USA tech tree hybrid early & late 70’s. and upgrade AN/APQ-120 to AN/APQ-120(V) radar
I need to adhere from Flight Manual USA Series F-4E Aircraft 1 Feb 1979 (page 202, 218 and 220)
I think is an F-4E in 80’s for Air National Guard
1 Like