The Issue of F-16I’s BR Placement

Machinery of War Discussion Aircraft
,
1

Is the Israeli F-16I really suited to be placed at BR 14.0? This is a jet that can be obtained around BR 12.3, yet even though the F-16I is equipped with the AIM-120C-5, more advanced radar, and missile-warning systems, in actual gameplay these features are almost unusable in many situations.

The AIM-120C-5 is not well suited for close to medium distance dogfights. I also cannot select Derby missiles on the F-16I, and the radar is not an active array radar. Putting the F-16I at this “odd” BR is akin to upgrading a MiG-29 with all those enhancements and then bumping it up to BR 14.0.

So if an F-16 can be placed at 14.0, why can’t a MiG-29 have a proper 14.0 version as well?

9 Likes
2

Ah yes because F-16I is exactly the same plane as F-16A block 10. Afterall theyre both F-16s.

20 Likes
3

We are still waiting for a mig-29m for that. For some reason gaijin really doesn’t want it add modern mig-29 variants.
And that would be better than f-16i, at least air to air wise.
Air to ground sufa is much better
Wish they could just slap derby er on the 16i even though it never used them im pretty sure

1 Like
4

clearly different aircrafts and avionics - can’t be compared
let alone weaponnry,… AIM-9L only vs AIM-120C + AIM-9M ain’t comparable

if we have to compare, with everything else:
Belgiume F-16A Blk15 (13.0) : AN-APG-66(v)1 + AIM-9M (no Fox-3)
Taiwanese F-16A MLU (13.3) : AN-APG-66(v)3 + AIM-9L + AIM120A
Italian F-16A ADF (13.3): AN-APG-66(v)3 + AIM-9L + AIM-120A
Belgium F-16AM (13.7) : AN-APG-66(v)3 + AIM-9M + AIM120A

US F-16C (13.7) : AN-APG-68(v)7 + AIM-9M + AIM120A

F-16D Barak (13.3): AN-APG-68(v)5 + AIM-9M + Derby
F-16C Barak II (13.7): AN-APG-68(v)5 + AIM-9M + Derby / AIM-120A
F-16I Sufa (14.0): AN-APG-68(v)9 + AIM-9M + AIM-120C-5

clearly F-16I Sufa is the est of them all.
the AN-APG68(v)9 is the best variant of that Radar
(also not everyone does have AESA in-game even at 14.3! - so that’s not really an argument)

current AESA platform in game:
Rafale
F-2A
Su-30SM
Su-34

That’s all. (maybe soon for EF-2000 German and UK ones)

5

What BR do you want it at exactly? Have you thought this through?

6

All the radar adds is range it’s esssentislly thr exact same as all other f16 radars

8
  1. I’m not simply comparing a F-16 with BE 12.3 carrying only 9L versus a F-16I with AIM-120C-5 + 9M. What I mean is, this aircraft (the F-16I) should not be placed at BR 14.0, because it has almost no advantages against enemies of equivalent weight.
    2. You mention comparing the different variants of the F-16 radar — yes, model-wise F-16I is the newest. However, in the game, apart from increased search distance, the AN-APG-66(V)5 through (V)7 offer no functional change. ((V)5 (on F-16D) has 75 km search distance; (V)7 (on F-16I) has 95 km.) In game, whether in realistic mode, historical mode, or arcade mode, you don’t gain real advantage from those extra 20 km of radar — you aren’t going to fire missiles from 75 km or 95 km. The only possible benefit might be that when there’s only one enemy left, your extra 20 km of search lets you detect if they’re flying back toward their airfield while you are still near yours.
    3. This is also the problem I want to point out: Gaijin bases placement on data advantages while ignoring actual in-game performance. Using a similarly BR F-15E/I as an example: first, the F-16I’s acceleration and top speed are both worse than the F-15’s, and its high-altitude performance is also inferior. With only six rounds of missiles, the F-16I can hardly employ the same opening climb strategy that the F-15 uses; if it tries, it will simply be left behind. Second, at low altitude the F-16I, unlike the F-15E/I, cannot carry the AIM-120B; the AIM-120C-5 has a large turn radius and poorer acceleration, so its performance in mid- to close-range is far worse than the AIM-120B.
    4. So the conclusion is: compared to similarly weighted aircraft, the F-16I has no advantage either at high altitude or low. Its only edge is having a newer radar on paper — but in real gameplay there’s almost no difference. (Being restricted to AIM-120C-5 is a disadvantage, not a benefit.) The F-16 should not be placed at 14.0; its weight should be at most 13.7.
6 Likes
9

At most 13.7

4 Likes
10

I agree, but honestly wouldn’t make a difference anyway.

11

I think you mean… just 13.7? At most 13.7 implies you think it can go lower which is laughable

1 Like
12

you forgot the F-5TH ^^

13

F-5th has el 2032 no? Only 2052 is esa. I think u mean kfir c10

4 Likes
14

M/2032 is only Multimode PD yeah

15

idk sufa sucks
i genuinely would rather play the baraks over the sufa even at 14.3

120C5 just can’t compete in air rb, especially against mica/77-1 slingers

9 Likes
16

That’s a good aircraft, but we’ll have to give it time. As for the avionics, we’ll just have to wait for the Blk 70/72 variants. In the meantime, what I think will make the difference is pushing harder for the inclusion of Python 4 and I-Derby missiles so the Sufa and other Israeli aircraft can have more relevance (compared to the R-73 and other good IR missiles in the game).

3 Likes
17

This isnt a good aicraft by any means expet in avionics to other 14.0

18

idc what anybody will say.
i grinded the f16i sufa
and i am at stock and i just cant do ANYTHING AT 14.0
the stock preset is 2 aim9m and 2 aim120c
usless if you fight at 14.0
and you dont get any kind of bombs so you cant just bomd things
you play as a scavenger that cant do shit
that my exprience with stock f16i sufa
and no i dont gonna spend money for speedin up this process if i grinded 410K RP
and funny to see the aim9L still there askin to be unlocked LOL

6 Likes
19

I mean thats the case for most of the stock grinds, it’s just stupid.

1 Like
20

i mean with the f15i raam it was a lot diffrent
so far its (the f16i sufa) the most annoying exeprince i ever had
u just there but you cant do shit
idk how to express it i guess its just nonsense

21

Not like the sufa which even fully spaded is still bad