The previous iteration of the flight model was not good…hence why you and basically everyone I’ve dueled Su-27 vs F-15 has lost by large margins.
4 Likes
Not really… The Su-35 preceded the Su-33 in development, being based upon the same airframe though with the obvious enhancements to the airframe such as wing geometry.
The MiG-35 would indeed be an upgrade, but I’d much rather take a MiG-29 9.31/9.41 over it.
Do you mean su27m?
Yes?
CAESAR SPG, Panzerhaubitze 2000, MLRS (US)
PAC 3 Patriot
IRIS-T SLM, NASAAMs and ASRAAM
ATACMS
GLSDB
STORM SHADOW/SCALP
GBU 39
SWITCHBLADE FPV
STRV-122B
CV-90
BARACUDA THERMAL REDUCTION NETTING
there are more but these are what comes to mind.
In “most countries” good or even great military gear still gets delivered even if over-budget and past due date, and can be seen in service by the hundreds of thousands of units often in multiple countries.
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.
2 Likes
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 figures 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.
3 Likes
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
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.
2 Likes
Fans of Russia in the Russian-language forum.
1 Like
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
1 Like
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’.
2 Likes
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.
1 Like