Only tracks naval targets, thats it. Should be all targets
2 Likes
That’s because it’s supersonic, for starters. It also has an arguably better array of weaponry.
It’s subsonic and slow however, so it’s an easier target, but it has better self defense weapons. Therefore the Su-24M is the opposite of the A-10.
Also the Su-24M was designed to be a low altitude precision frontline strike aircraft. It has a MAWS system, and two different RWR’s, and (not modeled) a ground search radar w/ PD radar.
Haven’t really had the chance to deal with either yet.
1 Like
Again, it was misused and requires a radar overhaul to fix.
People were slaving their F&F munitions to radar that was fairly long range.
Su-24M’s radar is also incorrect range of only 25km, so that’s obviously a test on the live client for something that’ll be part of something bigger in a future update.
1 Like
Another Russia main crying and making up issues again. How boring.
17 Likes
Speed isn’t everything you know. If that’s the case, the Su-39, su-25t, su-25bm, and su-25SM3 should all go down in br, because they lack any thermal, and are slower than and F-4S.
The US vehicles, (many) get gen 2 or 3 thermals which drastically enhance their performance
4 Likes
Clearly you don’t know the power of an aim—9m, ESPECIALLY IN SIM. The a-10 also out turns pretty much every aircraft other than a biplane.
Do I need to bring up “muh spall-liners” when American mains literally were about to hack gaijin, because you didn’t get a spall liner… or the lower plate - “visual” bug, where the lower plate doesn’t spall? That’s been in the game for years and years. It’s not a visual bug in the slightest.
16 Likes
IF, its the countermeasures were doubled
I’d rather see the Su-24m become 11.7, get 2 r-73, and 2 r-60m, and fix its radar.
Still, the A-10C out classes the Su-24M in every way, other than speed.
1 Like
Didn’t know the F-4S had AIM-9Ms/R-73s.
I was talking about speed… but okay…
Those planes are all significantly slower than an F-4S, or any F-4 for that matter, or F5, F-105, etc.
So what you are saying is that the Harrier Gr7 at 12.7 should be 11.0 because its slower than the Su-24?
2 Likes
I did not say that at all actually, someone else did, that is why I quoted them :)
su24 go 11.7,and get 2 r73 ,2 kh28 or 4 kh25mr
if 12.7 should have 3 kh31 or 2 kh58u or 2 kh59
12.7 if it has a arena active protection lol
regardless. At 11.3 Su-24M is tenatively under-BRed compared to comprable interdictors like the Tornado IDS that can be 11.7 (for no good reason)
There is no Bias against soviets. Su-24M is perfectly placed and in fact has features that is denied to every other nation at the moment in the form of A2G radar. It even has an internal TPod which should not be trivialised and the new gimballed gunpod which might become OP.
A-10C is probably going to be very niche. Its slower than every other aircraft at that BR and doesnt turn that well. Harrier II airframes like the AV-8B(NA) can do rings around it with ease. Id even say the Su-25s which are at the same BR with comprable AAMs and tenatively better defensive suites in the form of IRCM (again another soviet exclusive) can turn just as well, if not better.
Trying to argue the Su-24M needs major buffs because the A-10C is at the same BR is a bit like me arguing the Tornado Gr1 needs Aim-9M because the Su-39 has R-73s at the same BR. Its just a bad argument
(now I do think the Tornado IDS at 11.7 need something extra to set them apart from those at 11.3 like IRCCM missiles or BOL, but that is a discussion for another thread)
3 Likes
good missle and bad plane, this is what they always do
Why is it always “my nation isn’t a total easy win, I’ll go cry to the forums”
I’m making a legitimate argument, of the best aircraft of the update for its br (A-10C) and one of the worst aircraft. (Su-24M) taking a Su-24M to sim would be suicide.
The Russian tech tree isn’t biased against? Last time I checked, every tank at top tier reload faster than anything the Russian one does. For air, the Su-27 is really the only competitor against the other nations top air.
Lastly, the A-6e has a BUILT IN THERMAL. With excellent zoom. Thankfully it doesn’t have the ordinance to make it egregiously OP.
The a-10c spam will be as apparent as the F-111a spam, or the F-16c spam. If the A-10C doesn’t go up in br, I’m getting that next. 4 aim-9ms will be unstoppable.
Go fly a Su-39 in sim, then fly a Tornado, tell me all the pros and cons. What’s funny is I own both.
Su-39 has 2 r-73s yes, but only two, you don’t have an HMD to utilize the actual capability of the R-73, and they’re very easy to flare, compared to an aim-9m.
4 Likes
They are easy to flare and you lack HMD, yes. But have you tried the long acm thingo? Decent for getting good launches. Su 39 has this if you take the radar. Though Tornado, by virtue of speed, is easier to reach targets with.
Compared to the yanks, most everyone suffers. Russia does suffer the least on their ground attack platforms though (Fighter platforms a completely different story). The A10C is very nimble if used properly, and can hold its own against the threats you listed if what my experience from Dev holds. Get it is a mighty assumption as to properly using it, but still is the case.
Also the Su 24 could do with a few buffs and be brought up on parity with the rating of tornadoes. I’d prefer it to be the better su 24 version at the same rating as nadoes than what we got. But that doesn’t seem to be the argument here.
I know it does, but even with a lock, R-73s are still very easy to flare, especially if you see an plane you know carrying them incoming.
3 Likes