Ill put it on my watchlist, thanks!
That is true. From now on it is all just speculation. Anyone can make stuff up about the Su 57 or the F 22 Raptor because there is no reliable public info about these jets since they are still in service. Whoever tries to leak real data would probably get arrested or even killed by an agency like the CIA or KGB. In the end it does not seem like there is any jet that can really go head to head with the F 15E or the Eurofighter.
1 Like
Last I checked, both the F-15s and the SU-27s here are intact and not destroyed.
You are aware that the 104-0 is from actual combat and constitutes actual kills right? Training exercises have no bearing on such counts for reasons that should be obvious.
Since, well … You aren’t killing your sparring partner.
isn’t most of that IDF and Gulf War seal clubbing?
4 Likes
Phase I: Denial.
I’m not an expert in aircraft but my understanding is that the Flanker series currently have an underperforming flight model in game. Fixing that would be a start. This may not make them better in BVR but it would at least give them some help in WVR, which is one of the advantages they should have.
Now again, I’m not an expert, so please correct me if I’m wrong, but aren’t aircraft like the Su-35 and MiG-35 upgrades over what we currently have in game? Wouldn’t they offer some benefits over the current vehicles the tree has access to?
And?
A kill is a kill. Does not matter what aircraft it was, emphasis on was.
Or are we going to try and do the entire “near peer” bs, which would end up meaning the SU-27 has shot down a grand total of 0 aircraft with 2 deaths since it’s 6 kills were on pre-collapse Mig-29A monkey models.
“bs” lmao
that also counts negatively on the MiG-29 though no?
Yes. Both the MiG-29 AND the Su-27 are garbage compared to their NATO peers. (F-18 and F-15).
Well to be fair - the Fulcrum is more of an F-16 counterpart than the Hornet. Similar vintage, similar initial role.
Although arguably a later block F-16 is a far more dangerous opponent (either in terms of A2A or A2G) than a late-model Fulcrum.
1 Like
Name me an “near peer” equivalent PACT aircraft has been used against a near peer since Vietnam.
Holding Mig-29As which were downgraded for export from their original make and grossly out of their prime in quite high regard.
Then again, such would mean that the F-15’s 104 to 0 KDR is accurate since more than 60 of it’s kills are similar vintage Mig-29 export models or better Mig-29s.
1 Like
I’m not the one posturing.
sure lol
Do you know the difference between you and me?
I do not deny achievements of USA science and technology, while you seem to consume a lot of propaganda claiming that USSR/Russia is in stone age in technology.
Fallacy of the extreme.
I didn’t say stone age. I said decades behind NATO. Which is objectively a fact.
Russia cannot make a competitive car, airliner, or electronic device. What other fact explains this other than insufficient technological capability?
US cannot make a competitive airliner either, I guess they’re decade behind Europe lmao.
And it’s a pish argument, F-15 has only ever faced vastly inferior aircraft in every capacity.
CR2 is another example “never lost in combat” until it was given to Ukraine and had to face a peer adversary. F-15s in real combat with a peer nation are going to die
1 Like
Airliner? might be (still better than Russia)
military aircraft? probably not
Why does it matter what real life technological advantages one millitary bloc has over its enemy at a fixed point in time?
I’ll be the last person to ever support non-western millitary alliances given my demographics mean I’d have a pretty bloody terrible life if I did not live inside the EU with its cultural values and laws.
However:
If one nation has, whether real or imagined, such superior technology that peen-measuring contests claim nothing could ever level the playing field with it…
- Why add it? We can’t balance the Maus so it was removed from the TT and acts as a collector’s novelty piece.
- Why not give it a BR appropriate of this fact?
Vehicles that can meet each other should - if equal BR - have an even fighting chance against one another using the right tactics (that don’t rely excessively on teamwork - ergo, f4f is not viable vs a6m5 zero because it needs thach weave and similar numerical games). It doesn’t matter if they’re years or even decades apart.
Otherwise,
do we want F4F wildcats fighting A6M5 zeros? That’s historically accurate.
do we want F4U-4Bs fighting mig-15s? That’s historically accurate.
do we want PzIvs fighting IS-2s? That’s historically accurate.
Do we want fireflies fighting Tiger IIs? That’s historically accurate.
Nobody other than wunderwaffe-brained people want that.
In that case
why are we obsessing over using warthunder as a “MY FAVORITE PLANE WILL ALWAYS BE SUPERIOR TO YOURS!!!” If it’s so superior, give it a higher BR.
The Mig-15 is infinitely superior to my favorite corsairs. I accept this. My corsair will also never fight Mig-15s unless I uptier it intentionally by some 3.0 BR steps.
1 Like
Boeing orders right now, TODAY, would belie that statement.
Eh. This is more about: “Now that Russia doesn’t have any advanced aircraft left IRL how will they compete now and forward?”