Until F-15C models none of them had any sort of countermeasures, this situation is even describied in flight manuels and pilots notes.
Congrats on learning that part, sadly most Usa planes didnt actually used BOL dispensers on their armament hence why they rejected my suggestion on adding BOL dispensers to F-16C and D.
Since F-15A didnt have any sort of Fox-3 capabilites best option would be F-15C, it can use both Fox-1 and Fox-3 depending on how Gaijin wants implement.
Well then good luck using your one time chaff option while staying defenceless against any sort of IR missiles.
Congrats on your condescension, totally necessary.
It will be the same deal as the GerMiG-29 9.12 and 29G. Same plane with minor tweaks and added weapon capabilities.
You’d be silly to think that Gaijin would drop a top tier air superiority jet without a proper CM solution. Gaijin are also known to combine capabilities/systems across different variants of the same jet for gameplay balance (See F-5C using CM dispensers not used in US service, or R-24s on the MiG-23ML that weren’t able to be used until it’s upgrade into the MLA/MLD standard.)
You mean F-15C’s? Cause with MISP upgrade it became F-15C actually.
Not really.
ML models also recieved radar upgrades only, that way they achieved ability to use R24 missiles.
Do you have any conformation from inside? İf not then this is nothing but a theory and since you cant prove anything your words doesnt mean shit actually.
And what makes you think that they will add base version of Eagle while they’re praising Fox-3 missiles and adding Gripen C with december uptade.
Using your theory i can also claim that they will pass F-15A and will add C model first but this claim also doesnt mean shit since i dont have conformation from company about adding F-15C.
İf you think that was childish then you need to grow up first.
It’s an observation from planes Gaijin have implemented over the last three years as well as comments Smin/Mods has made in that same time. I used the example of the German MiG-29s as that is the most recent and glaring example of the point I am trying to make.
You can and will believe as you wish and I won’t lose any sleep knowing that that is the case.
" The later production variant of the “ML” was designated the “MiG-23MLA”. The fighter first flew in 1977, with mass production beginning in 1978 and sales to foreign customers starting in 1981. Externally, the “MLA” was identical to “ML”. Internally, the ‘MLA’ had an improved Sapfir-23MLA (N003) radar with better range, reliability and ECM resistance, and a frequency spacing feature which made co-operative group search operations possible as the radars would now not jam each other. It also had a new ASP-17ML HUD/gunsight, and starting in 1981 the capability to fire improved Vympel R-24R/T missiles."
If it can fire the R-24s with the addition of the upgraded onboard radar, then it isn’t an MiG-23ML.
Fox 3 missiles weren’t confirmed to be coming in december, only the Gripen and even that has a chance of not being seen until 2024.
I mean, no F-15 has been confirmed aside from meme leak lists but you knew that.
You should try it yourself sometime, might do you some good.
I won’t be commenting further on this topic as we are off topic and liable for fury by the mods. Tag me in the F-15 topic if you want to discuss further.
" The later production variant of the “ML” was designated the “MiG-23MLA”. The fighter first flew in 1977, with mass production beginning in 1978 and sales to foreign customers starting in 1981. Externally, the “MLA” was identical to “ML”. Internally, the ‘MLA’ had an improved Sapfir-23MLA (N003) radar with better range, reliability and ECM resistance, and a frequency spacing feature which made co-operative group search operations possible as the radars would now not jam each other. It also had a new ASP-17ML HUD/gunsight, and starting in 1981 the capability to fire improved Vympel R-24R/T missiles."
If it can fire the R-24s with the addition of the upgraded onboard radar, then it isn’t an MiG-23ML.
Not so…There is no official name of the MiG-23MLA (it’s just that it’s shorter and more convenient to write)…
No, the engines are not meant to account for that.
This isn’t a Mig-29K, 29M, or 35. These use RD33 engines, series 3 is a reliability upgrade.
@Miraz05 Su-27 is unironically worse than 29SMT.
They don’t limit armament.
@AlfiestheName
R-27s & R-73s isn’t “OP”.
If Su-27 brings a 10 missile loadout it’s as slow as F-18.
F-15C* not A, we’re likely not getting F-15A because of Japan.
@Mongaroth33
That’s not how that works.
F-15C literally carries the same payload as F-14B.
If it’s a reliability upgrade like you say though, just like the reliability upgrade on the 29G, why does the G have more thrust than the standard RD-33? and why does the series 3, a further improvement, have less?
WDYM?!?!?! The whole 40kgf missing is equivalent to 0.34% the empty weight of the plane! The plane could go from a static 1.099 TWR with no fuel to a WHOPPING 1.102 TWR.
This is clearly a game breaking issue worth its weight in gold. The MiG-29SMT will become the best plane in-game if it got the extra 40kgf of thrust its “missing”.
20kgf per engine on AB, its still literally nothing, but i figured id be accurate, not that that’ll stop the russian players from flagging the post til its removed xD