Wow this forum is full of delirious NATO fanboys…
Please refrain from going massively off-topic and stop the discussion here. Simply point out what options Russia might have and call it a day. No need to involve politics and ongoing conflicts, since it is clearly against the rules.
Good to see that you admit that you cant find a “Near peer” PACT aircraft that has been used against a near peer since Vietnam.
Last I checked the Syrian Air Force does not exist, the Gulf War and the GWOT was won by NATO, and Israel still exists.
Seems like those Mig-29 kills occurred, because since the nations and groups that fielded them don’t exist anymore.
Maybe they should not have installed grid fins on a missile.
I see no issue with adding such, as long as the missiles present are the same as they currently are Russia will get another Sukhoi that does the exact same things as they normally do, but can now be more of a low speed UFO, like the SU-33 which can currently break physics and handle like a RC plane.
All seem pretty right except for GBU-39, that’s old gen glide bomb
Correct one most of F-15 kills are from IDF.
Same thing with China. But China at least has more options of stuff to fake
several decades behind NATO IRL
Source: trust me bro
China is NOT decades behind NATO, I have no clue how you’ve came to this conclusion? Are we going to forget about aircraft like the J-10CE which beat the Eurofighter 7:0 in a mock up engagement both WVR and BVR.
Or how the US is upgrading their E/A-18G Growlers as China has figured a way to bypass their current jamming equipment?
Russia isn’t behind technologically, they just can’t mass produce modern vehicles and China for sure isn’t decades behind as well.
How is talking about the advancement of nations technologically and especially in aviation not relevant to War Thunder?
Yeah bro, War Thunder isn’t a game about vehicles but rifles and helmets!
Relavent? Yeah, you could call it that. Unfortunately, any proper argument about said aircrafts capabilities is going to simply degrade into needless arguments about whether russia is a corrupt country with an obselete military or not.
I’ve made my position on 'em clear anyways, and it benefits y’all, since I am fine with them being added with capabilities matching NATO aircraft’s.
(Simply due to obvious balance concerns)
In our game, Russia gets the most modern weapons, and the United States flies planes from the 1980s. And so it is in everything. Russia essentially has nothing to introduce other than its parade aircraft like the Su-57 and Su-75! And the United States still has F-18, F/A-18 F-15EX, F-22, F-35, and many modern modifications of the F-16 ahead. I’m not even talking about the weapons that the gaijin kindly does not provide in the name of balance.
Fans of Russia in the Russian-language forum.
Most of that is Israel during their famous ‘turkey shoots’ against Su-22s and Mig-21/23s lmao, the uS only makes up about 20-25% of that KDR
Well here’s the issue. No weapons system is ever used in a fair fight if the combatants can help it.
The Bf109 got the most ‘kills’ of any type in WW2. Yet a great percentage of that was in the early-war against slower aircraft and often shooting up stuff on the ground. By 1945 - Bf109s were most certainly NOT getting a positive kill/loss ratio - although the numbers taken over the lifespan of the thing wouldn’t show just how bad this would be.
The Hawker Hurricane got the highest tally of kills of any RAF Fighter - yet is anyone going to use that to say the Spitfire, Tempest or Typhoon was a terrible fighter by comparison?
The MiG-17 in Vietnam was at one point getting a decent tally over Phantoms - yet if the daft rules of engagement were relaxed and the F-4s were actually employed as they were designed that wouldn’t be the case. Nobody would say the MiG-17 was a better aircraft than the Phantom in terms of raw power/firepower/radar, etc. despite the numbers from that scenario.
Long story short. You can argue about numbers (in favour or against) until the cows come home. The best way is to take the numbers and balance them against the context. It remains a fact of historical record that most Soviet fighters have suffered when pitted against Western types in a shooting war. Were those numbers ‘fair’? No. But you fight a war to win, not to give your oppo a ‘fair fight’.
F-15C ingame is a 2005 upgrade of the plane.
F16C is a 90s version IIRC.
As for your statement that “russia has nothing to offer” it’s completely delirious. Their only PESA aircraft ingame at the moment is the Su-34. They have multiple variant of thrust-vectoring PESA carrier that could also bring better missiles. Su-35S, Su-30SM, and the multiple, quite solid export variant like the MKI or MKM. Mig29M and 29K are also completely absent from the game and could offer a lot more than the current Su-27SM.
Grid fins aren’t the reason for its insane drag at >M2?
Somehow does it worse than a MiG-19… That’s pretty funny.
There are myraids of new weapons that can be added… from R-27 developments to newer R-73/R-74s, what we have right now is quite literally the scum of the barrel
The F-15 Multistage Improvement Program was initiated in February 1983, with the first production MSIP F-15C produced in 1985. Improvements included an upgraded central computer; a Programmable Armament Control Set allowing for advanced versions of the AIM-7, AIM-9 and AIM-120A missiles, and an expanded Tactical Electronic Warfare System that provides improvements to the ALR-56C radar warning receiver and ALQ-135 countermeasure set. The final 43 included a Hughes APG-70 radar.
Yeah… From the base model R-73s that came from the '70s to the R-27s from the early '80s… They’re definitely the most modern weapons you can possibly find!
The MOST MODERN missile is from 1984…Compared to America’s 1998 ARHs…? It’s laughable.
Ah yes, the F-16CM-50 from the mid 2000s is definitely a 1980s aircraft.
Or the F-15E, hailing from 2010.
Definitely 1980s aircraft.
I’m talking about the HMD for the F15C specifically. They never had it before 2005. Gaijin added it because they understand that a top tier plane without HMD is basically a dead plane. At least they are sensible enough to understand the game need some balancing to be playable, unlike many, many people in this thread.
Sure, ya’ll can keep telling yourselves that.
Last I checked the Mig-19 is not supermanuverable.
Cool so can we also get the, IRIS-T, MICA-IR, AIM-9X, AIM-120C-5, Meteor, AAM-4B, Pyhton 5, etc.
Russia fields the most current weapons in the game, with the most recent addition being the glide bomb on the SU-34 which entered service less than a few months ago.
The R-73 entered service in 1984, the AIM-9M entered service in 1983.
The R-77 entered service in 1994, the AIM-120A entered service in 1991, 120B was 1994.
The F-16C Block 50 entered service in 1991.
The first F-15E entered service in 1988
Other than the Israeli versions; you’d be playing without HMS if that was the case.
Does not matter, gaijin has already stated that equipment on the aircraft is not indicative of the age or make, just look at the abomination that is the F-4E, or the F-15E being both one of the latest F-15E makes due to it fitting GBU-39s and also the literal first batch due to it’s Litnening install and it’s cockpit setup, based solely on the airframe and equipment.
Gaijin could add or remove the HMD on a whim without issue along with providing no background on such as well. Such is why saying “X aircraft has this, thus it should have different equipment” has never gotten gaijin to actually change anything, if such was the truth, the F-14s would be rocking VTAS currently and a myriad of other changes, but they don’t.