You can doubt all you like, there’s literal documents disproving your opinion, that I linked already (now prob a couple hundred messages ago thanks to sartt)
So, if you’re pretending to be an expert here, do you actually have an engineering degree, or have you never attended university? Because people who have received higher education know how to cite reliable sources, not gossip tabloids
5 Likes
Guess you better add in the Passive jammer to the Mig-29SMT or was it the Su? I can’t remember which one exactly.
1 Like
yes please, MiG-21 had some ECM pod too right?
would love to see TEWS, SPECTRA, and the Russian one (idk what its called) modelled
1 Like
They obviously better than US ofc because European need them but don’t you forget that most of European Air Force still using American AMRAAM too right? If they can make out right better than US made why do they keep them for eurofighter?
logistics and economics
1 Like
I’m a Yank, just an educated one lol.
3 Likes
I do not deny that the AIM-120 is an excellent air-to-air missile. When the AIM-120 was in service, it was certainly more advanced than the R-27ER, which was in service around the same time. However, the AIM-120D is no longer the most advanced missile. The U.S. Department of Defense is clearly aware of this, otherwise, why would they continue developing the AIM-260? European countries have production and defense demand issues, so they naturally use U.S.-made military products. Similarly, the U.S. also imports products from other countries. For example, the U.S. Navy’s latest Constellation-class is technically based on Italian designs. However, that guy claims that U.S. technology is 50 to 100 years ahead of the rest of the world. I just want to counter this. The U.S. undoubtedly still possesses the most powerful military, but the idea that the U.S. is ahead of the world in all technologies is absolutely nonsense.
4 Likes
Maybe they are in it class as medium range missile AMRAAM are not same class as something like Meteor and R-37M that title for US equivalent is AIM-174B
1 Like
The AIM-174 is essentially an air-launched version of the Standard Missile 6, but with a single-stage rocket propulsion. I speculate that this is currently just a temporary solution by the Americans to counter the Chinese PL-15 on naval aircraft. The Navy is likely still working on developing the next-generation air-to-air missile specifically designed for fighter jets, similar to the dual-pulse solid rocket engine used by the Chinese missiles, which was initially planned for the AIM-120D but ultimately canceled due to cost concerns.
All i remember from what i read is the MiG29 had one, and the su27 had one integrated into the radar itself, thus it was only useful on the radars scope. It was pretty effective as far as the document I saw years ago said.
I have no idea if a MiG-21 was ever equipped with one
You average a 1.1-1.3 kd from basically any tank from any nation you have at top tier for the most part. Basically no difference between a STRV and a challenger.
Let that sink in.
Seems like you got your education at the same place we did 😂
1 Like
You’re right, so sometimes Typhoon carry a mix of AIM-120 and Meteor missiles to balance long-range and medium-range capabilities. Similarly, Rafale fighter jets carry both MICA NG and Meteor missiles. I’m not trying to downplay the AIM-120, but many countries have developed ARH missiles, and several have already started using AESA seekers in their ARH missiles. The idea that the U.S. is 50 to 100 years ahead of the world and that everything developed by other countries is inferior is something no rational person would agree with. Moreover, different countries have different defense needs, and weapons development is essentially based on those needs. For example, what works for Italy may not work for Russia. In 2014, Russia planned to purchase Italy’s B1 Centauro, but eventually realized that the hard tires used in wheeled vehicles weren’t suitable for Russia’s geographical conditions, so they ended up purchasing Iveco’s light multipurpose vehicles instead. However, that doesn’t mean Italy’s equipment is bad just because it wasn’t suitable for Russia.
1 Like
I welcome you to challenge using the Challenger 2 in Warthunder, but still, here’s the question: why is the U.S. win rate in GRB so low? You can’t say the invincible Abrams is worse than Italy, right? So, if it’s not an issue of US MAIN’s intelligence, how do you explain that the current top U.S. tier win rate is only 35.536%? Even more, the win rate for the U.S. is around 50% from BR 7.3 and gradually drops below 40% at the top tier. Oh, by the way, in case you didn’t know, even in AIR RB, the top-tier U.S. win rate is only around 50%, and it’s even lower than Russia’s 60% win rate. You can’t really say that the F-15E in War Thunder is worse than the SU-27SM, right?
I think the fact that an American player is in the Chinese squadron says a lot. Could it be that you’re the real “commie spy”? I am just kidding XD. A player who can achieve a negative KD with the F-15C clearly shows that I’m not lucky enough to receive education in the same place as you. Maybe American players in the game need the AIM-260 more than the U.S. Air Force in real life
It says “I looked at open squadrons that auto accepted and applied.” It ain’t that deep bud.
I have 2d of fighter time played, nothing close to your 86 😂.
I do however, have less than half your time in tanks, and already the same or better than you in each tank we share lol.
Maybe it’s time to start admitting you’re in that same class as sartt and got the same education. I can’t for the life of me understand why’d you come on here talking like you did, being as absolutely average as you are :)
2 Likes
I said I was just kidding LOL, and I’m pretty sure that the vast majority of Chinese players are not commies. Again, I’m not targeting individuals, but US MAIN. I’m just curious, don’t you find it strange that your Abrams KD is positive, which means you’re not playing badly, but your win rate is quite low? Don’t you realize how bad your Abrams teammates are?
I admit that I might not be as good at GRB as you are, but when I first started playing this game, War Thunder was still called “World of Planes.” So from the beginning, I was never a ground main. I started playing GRB simply because some of my friends who played War Thunder only played tanks and no one played planes. For me, the ground combat part was more like a tank collection game, much like collecting tank and plane models in real life—I’m just happy to have them in my hangar. So I mainly played to collect all the tanks as quickly as possible. If anything I said offended you, I apologize, because people tend to speak carelessly online. :) But I am genuinely curious: when you always play top-tier American vehicles like the M1A2SEP, don’t you ever get angry or frustrated because of your American teammates’ poor performance?
In sim, USA winrate is almost 100% across the board…
Also… playing Italy ground makes me want to chew my legs off.
This must be acknowledged: how Gaijin treats Italian vehicles is indeed Russian bias. However, Italy now at least has the Hungarian Leopard 2A7 and the European Typhoon, so there has been some improvement.
1 Like