While it’s true that test airframes (NF-14D) and ground integration benches (SITS) existed around that timeframe, their existence doesn’t mean AMRAAM integration was actually realized for the fleet.
As the DTIC document states, AMRAAM compatibility was only listed as a future projection (“weapons capability will increase to include…”), not an operational capability. The Grumman World article clearly points out that software was being rolled out in six staged increments. At that point, the engineers and test aircraft were fully occupied just validating core avionics and the APG-71 data bus.
When Cheney slashed the F-14D procurement and the Cold War ended, the funding for those later software packages to integrate AMRAAM was shelved. Instead, Navy priorities shifted toward strike capabilities (LANTIRN). Having testbeds in 1987 capable of testing hardware doesn’t change the reality that operational integration was never completed due to software bottlenecks and budget cuts.
Still though it has more capability of actually using aim-120 than the f-16XL or other prototypes planes in game that are missing more than just a software update.
And I do think their was a point and time were aim-120 were capable on the f-14D as many doc also like to point that it was capable of AMRAAMs if not for the software update
You are mixing up Gaijin’s balancing exceptions for one-off prototypes with their historical standards for production tech-tree aircraft.
While Gaijin has historically granted planned or theoretical loadouts to pure prototypes like the F-16XL or Yak-141 for gameplay reasons, the F-14D in War Thunder represents an operational, frontline production aircraft. For production airframes, the only realistic basis for an in-game loadout is what was actually evaluated and cleared in operational testing by the Navy’s Air Test and Evaluation Squadrons (VX units), such as VX-4 or VX-9. Early paper intentions or cancelled procurement goals do not meet that threshold.
More importantly, the only aerodynamic drop and separation trials for the AIM-120 were performed on an NF-14A, never an F-14D. Under standard DoD designation rules, the “N” prefix designates a permanent, non-returnable testbed airframe (Special Test, Permanent). That NF-14A was a heavily modified, non-standard experimental flight-test rig, fundamentally different from a production fleet Tomcat in its instrumentation, wiring, and avionics. Trials conducted on an experimental testbed cannot substitute for weapon clearance through a VX evaluation.
Furthermore, dismissing the missing integration as “just a software update” ignores the reality of modern BVR combat. In fourth-generation digital avionics, the operational flight program (OFP) is the weapon system. Without the finalized software package compiled into the APG-71 architecture, an F-14D cannot pass mid-course guidance updates over the databus or initialize the missile’s seeker, rendering the missile completely useless even if carried on a pylon. The F-14D never received that software or completed VX operational clearance because Cold War budget cuts forced the Navy to shelve AMRAAM integration in favor of strike capabilities like LANTIRN.
Ofc i I’m, it’s less of stretch to give the f14D aim-120 than it is for prototypes that need way more than that like I said they could very easily not give fake ability to prototypes as well and adjust their br
I’m currently looking for a doc that says they did testing on a f14 for separations test and that they were gonna wait the f14D to do other testing and like I proved before that their was nf14D/f14D in the time of 1987
I’m already aware of the reason why the f14D doesn’t have aim-120 irl but I definitely see why it could in game as well
I would also like to mention in the f14D manual 120 is in the sms for launcher and weapons in type 1 decoder so I don’t even think what you said about
Is even true and nobody truly knows if the f14D does or doesn’t have DL for mid course guidance(other than the fact it shot aim120 in stt) as anything related to the apg71 is hella hard to find like I can find more about the apg-65 than I can about the apg71
F-14D aim-120 argument is weird to me. F-16ADF is right there as a 13.3 option with an excellent fm, 6 aim-120s with the only drawback being the low cm count.
What also bizzare is the argument of “well we need it cuz Su-30”. No. Just because there’s two blatantly undertiered monsters r*ping the whole br bracket does not justify a wet dream of another Tomcat but with aim-120s.
I’ll tell you right now. A tomcat with 9Ms and 120s will be at least 13.7 (ADFs with 9Ls are 13.3), and it’s objectively worse than the F-15C and even some F-16s at this br. Su-30s may have the crutch called “its technically worse than Su-27SM (also undertiered)”, but tomcat does not. It will be 13.7.
Not because we need a counter for the su30 but because you can find
So arguably the f-14D could go to 13.3 as the fm is not that great is it capable yes but not 13.7 capable, than theirs the cm that are mid, the radar is great, aim54c is mid and is a draw back if you switch to 2 aim120 for it.
Didn’t stop F-16AMs without HMD and 45 cms to be 13.7.
That’s why you have hundreds of them.
Like i said earlier, undertiered vehicles is not a good justification for this. Of them, only Su-30s and maybe the J-11A/F-16D are bad to face. F-16ADF has low cms and the viggen DI has a horrible 4 sector rwr + 3rd gen airframe.
It should also be noted that the Su-30s (combined) are played 8 times more on average than any other aircraft, which is why they’re such an issue on their own as well.
I’ll be frank. The F-14D does have its own niche - smiting afk players. If you want a vehicle that could smite good, well aware players, you would be playing the ADF or a 13.7 instead.
Ahh yes because you totally can’t find other fox3 jets with fox2 irccm at 13.3
It’s the way things are balanced rn until decompression happens
Yet it’s still doing some what good tbh I played the ADF and it’s a solid aircraft especially if you don’t rely on just cm and use mountains or hills or multi path
Yeah like 4 are equal to 1 regular cm so just spam and hope you rcs/ir signature become like a jas39 to invade modern fox 3 and missile joust with a aim7m or aim54
Yeah I ain’t gonna play another vehicle I lowkey want to play the f14 so you telling me to play something else isn’t really “helpful” f14 shouldn’t be a meme plane
Most are either R-73 or pl-5e2 slingers are they not? A majority of 9M slingers with 120 combo are a higher br.
Still not a good justification.
This is inaccurate. while flare BOL are indeed much weaker, chaff BOL works differently. Catwerfer has an in-depth video on defeating fox-3s, where BOL chaff had similar range pick up to standard chaff:
Last I checked, 3.3 is not 4 times less than 3.7. And what matters in the notch isn’t the amount you spam, but the frequency anyways. Regardless of caliber, this is around once or twice per second against regular arhs, and more than twice when facing micas.
Larping isn’t a good justification, as I said before.
Jf-17 pl12 and pl5e2
Su30mk2/mkk/j11a pl12,r77,r27et,r73
F-4F ice aim9L/1 ,aim120
Tornado aim120,aim9m
Mig29 smt(9-19) r77,r73
F16D aim9m,aim120
Arguably the f16adf should also have aim9m at 13.3
I mean each their own opinion
And telling me to play something else isn’t a good justifications also
Tbh idk much about this what I do know when I notch in the f14 with bol its definitely more challenging than something like a f15,f/a18,and f16(personally that I’ve experienced)
Both are 3rd gen. Its down there for a reason. Tornado is also a HDN only radar with those so called BOL that you didn’t like.
Not a 120 carrier
The rest are not 9m carriers.
There are already good options existing at 13.3 and 13.7, therefore there’s no need for an F-14D with amraams. A common reason for addition of vehicles is a lack of something at a certain BR. US does not lack 13.3 nor 13.7.
Here’s a more straightforward question. What can the F-14D with amraams do that any other US 13.3/13.7 can’t? They all have 6-8 amraams, after all.
Oh, i forgot to talk about this, but DL channels does not matter. J-11A has (one) whole DL channel and that didn’t stop it from being a somewhat undertiered monster (only reason it’s that low is the rwr). Being restricted to 4 doesn’t do much unless you’re BVR larping all 6 120s at the start of the game.
Yet they still have access to modern fox3 with fox2 irrcm
And I never said I didn’t like them just don’t have good experience with them compared to regular chaff
Yes it is it carries the derby missile with aim9m
And all of those have fox 2 irccm missiles
Sure their is but having a choice to choose specifically what I want to play is also great like a much needed f-14D w/aim120 to make the aircraft more reliable
It being a F14D its has it own capabilities and have the capability to use aim54c+ even if it’s a meme missile and be able to carry 6 fox3 and fox 2 irccm at 13.3 and potentially not be to strong or the most abused word in the war thunder community OP
So? They’re still 3rd gen, which is the only reason why its down that low. Both are bricks that can barely turn.
Last I checked, the Derby isn’t an aim-120.
They’re all not 9Ms. The first supersonic 73 carrier is the MiG-21 Bison (12.3). The first supersonic 9m carrier is JH-7A (11.7). The first 9m carrier, get this, is the belgian F-16 at 12.7. In fact, there’s not a single supersonic 9M carrier at rank 7. IR missiles are not balanced the same.
I’ll be frank. If it can carry 120s, no one will play it with 54s. Do you carry sparrows on your F-16C over 120s? What about the F-15C? No, right?
Just run it with 7Ms next update if you need something for close range. I heard kinematically they’ll beat aim-120s once update hits.
Except it doesn’t because the meta is strictly within visual range, below 20km combat. DL only kicks in beyond 20km, where your missiles are easily notched. So it does not matter unless you’re literally rippling them in BVR larp. The only plane that consistently need DL is the F-14s, because guess what? Their missiles are only good for long range, where DL is needed, while every other arh, like pl-12, aim-120, r-77, etc. does not.
Have you never considered how Flankers remain some of the most busted things at 13.3 and 13.7, despite having, get this, 1-2 DL channels? It’s not the radar, it’s the missiles.
That is an absolutely ridiculous proposal. Are you trying to force AMRAAMs onto an already powerful aircraft just to drive up its Battle Rating (BR)? Do you simply want to play Top Gun and get into dogfights with jets like the Su-30SM?
It’s still is a aircraft capable aircraft with both irccm missiles and fox 3 missiles
So I got the name mixed up still doesn’t change the fact it has aim-9m and modern fox3 missiles
wtf are you going on about I’m talking about jets at 13.0-13.3 with fox 3 and fox 2 irccm
Just because it’s speed is getting reworked doesn’t make it nearly as good as a aim7p-2 or a aim120 like modern fox 3 are the top dogs of 13.0-13.7 if you don’t have aim7p-2 or r27er you better off trying to go after someone not paying attention
