Grid fins aren’t the reason for its insane >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.
Israelis have DASH 1/2/3 to fall back on if gaijin ever feels like stripping JHMCS off of their F-16/F-15 fleet
We don’t need to, empirical evidence shows otherwise.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331532719_Missile_Grid_Fins_Analysis_using_Computational_Fluid_Dynamics_A_Systematic_Review
Last I checked the MiG-19 is capable of doing this exact same maneuver without issue.
More than happy to if they have their analogues. IRIS-T is far too sophisticated of a system to think of adding anytime soon, unless 9X-III and R-74M2 are in the picture as well. Seeing as MICA-NG is in the files, I’d imagine it isn’t the hardest to start work on them.
Even then, absolutely none of these are “scum of the barrel” as I’ve said.
The most current weapons on the game? Such as what?
The Grom was in service over 9 years ago… The hell are you talking about.
The R-73’s first launch was in 1977, with its full scale production beginning in 1982. Its service date means absolutely nothing.
^
CM-50s with JHMCS first hit their mods in 2004, with standard 50+ models incorporating it in 2006.
Oh boy, I didn’t know we had the first F-15E to ever grace this earth!
Da yis, India is the authority on rocketry, my mistake. /s
I’d love to see some proof of that, given the fact that the Mig-19 does not have thrust remotely close to 1-1.
I’m glad we can agree on this, although you do seem to be overestimating the efficacy of the first versions of the IRIS-T, you also seem to be underestimating the likes of the base AIM-9X, given it has the same generation and type seeker as the IRIS-T, and the exact same seeker as the ASRAAM, it would easily match the likes presented.
Oh dont play dumb with me you know well what I’m talking about, it got added this patch and allows the SU-34 to nuke bases from across the map without effort.
But if you really need some help, I’ll give you part of it’s name, “UMPK Bomb” , the first recorded usage of this kit was on June 20th 2024 and the first announced usage of the weapon was on July 14th 2024.
Service date marks the first delivery to operational service, missiles sitting in a box are a factory are irrelevant, as such its the only date that matters, and my mistake on the AIM-9M-1’s service date, it actually entered service in 1982.
And yet the cockpit, HUD, TGP, and a myriad of other equipment present are indicative of an original block 50 F-16C, but once again, as stated prior, gaijin does adds HMDs to whatever it wants, this is why both the F-16C, F-15C and F-15E are all abominations of a myriad of different aircraft blocks.
I didn’t know that the USAF even had original AN/AAQ-14 pods still in their inventory in 2010, after all, they were removed from service in 2008, man, its amazing how they fished out obsolete targeting pods for the F-15E 2 years after they were replaced by SNIPER pods which were already replacing the AN/AAQ-14 as early as 2001, its even more funny with the F-15I Ra’am since it got replaced in 1995.
Heck its even more funny when you find out that it seems like none of the LANTIRN’s upgrades ever occurred in war thunder as well, namely the third generation FLIR of the LANTIRN 2000 or the myriad of upgrades that occurred with the LANTIRN-ER.
But nope, we get the original 1987 LANTIRN, predating the airframe that its attached to in game by a year, its not even capable of handing off GPS targets, yet, here it is feeding data to JDAMs and GBU-39s somehow.
They have publicly maintained that they use ordnance as a balancing mechanic.
They also publicly admit that they estimate armor when they don’t have actual data for the armor.
When it comes to planes, they go off of whatever data that gives balance. The pedigree of the information isn’t really relevant except in these forums.
E.G. Russian tech likely works better than IRL as they are famous for public data that is better than the performance.
NATO data is hamstrung by the classified performance being unavailable. This is particularly relevant to the ability of AA ordnance maintaining lock through use of countermeasures.
The bottom line is that at Top Tier, what you are playing is a facsimile loosely based on reality. (Not to mention the limitations of the simulation they run. An accurate simulation would bog down the game and limit it to the realm of supercomputers,.)
Evidence one way or the other either doesn’t exist (classified) or must be taken with a large grain of salt (when it comes to Russian or Chinese stuff).
All of this is largely irrelevant if the game is balanced. All arguments should focus on BALANCE. Because if it is balanced Gaijin probably isn’t going to change it. If it is not balanced they will change it with a modicum of support. The on caveat is if GAIJIN sees it as balanced. They have statistics for in game performance that we don’t. “X plane should be better than because I read this article online about it, watched a video, some other unscientific online media,” is not an argument that they will or should listen to.
Publicly available knowledge.
Su-57 has no substantive claims of any sort of capability as it has demonstrated none of it.
F-35 has been purchased by nine nations. Su-57 zero.
F-35’s operated by Israel, completely dismantled the Iranian Air Defense Umbrella. All without being detected by Iran, all planes returned without damage.
F-22 is not for sale as the USA thinks it is too capable to sell (important for USA security) Poland has been trying and has been denied.
I mean, you can believe Russian stuff is great. But the proof is in the money. NATO stuff sells. Russian stuff only sells to nations who can’t afford NATO stuff.
Allegedly, this is the issue that isnt a concrete fact. S-400 is one of Russias premier SAM systems and it is marketed as being able to intercept stealth airframes.
We know Israel managed to hit targets in Iran “undetected” what we do not know if the S-400 detected them, or if Iran even had permission to switch it on to track and engage the F-35.
In the same breath we know the Su-57 was operating near and over Ukraine with that shot down S-70 drone…Well within the established range of the Patriot systems…
In many cases it’s better to conceal the real performance of a system from potential adversaries
Key word being MARKETED. To be fair the effectiveness cannot be independently verified either. However, the fact that all of the F-35s returned after flying all over Iran is the only fact that we have and it is indicative of being stealthy enough to hit targets in airspace defended by S-400s with impunity.
Was it?
I can find no independent sources claiming this.
And if the Su-57 is good against the Patriot. Why isn’t it striking HVT’s in Ukraine? You know. Like the F-35 is in Iran. Against premier Russian systems.
Nah, clearly its so stealthy that even the damage it does is stealthed.
We love xenophobia.
The average IQ of Punjab probably exceeds your own… I honestly wouldn’t be surprised if you sat below 106.
By all means, sure. Got an email I can send it to?
Real quick question though… What’s 5970/5450?
From what I remember, that’s >1…
I’m not overestimating the first versions of IRIS-T, I’m stating my opinion based on the quite open fire tests of it from 1999-2001. It has features that the 9X-II doesn’t even have, and that the 9X-III was too expensive to incorporate.
How am I underestimating the 9X? It’s a cut and dry equivalent to the R-74M2, with both featuring IIR seekers, capable thrust vectoring, and extended range of 20km+.
Oh boy… Not bases! It’s almost as if the GBU-39, LS-6, and AASMs do the exact same thing!
It’s effectiveness in realistic battles is utterly useless, as by the time they reach a base the match is more than likely done and over with, or simply taken by somebody that decided to use effective bombs instead.
If it makes you feel any better, the UMPK kit is better in every imaginable way and takes 1 pylon instead of 4 to destroy a base.
Alright…? So tell me again how the UMPK is relevant to its effectiveness in ARB/ASB in any sort of way?
Yeah, except for when missiles are delivered to operational units before its service entry date (I’m looking at you, AIM-120…)
CM-50s still have the exact same cockpit layouts, CJ-50++s were the very first to integrate Viper standard displays and avionics.
The WAC HUD would be the exact same no matter what model it is… The ONLY different HUD to choose from was solely used on 40/42s (they’re better than 50/52s anyway), so I have no clue why you choose to mention it.
Original CM-50s had the ability to carry AAQ-33 from the get-go. The issue presented is that it simply isn’t in-game.
The F-16C in-game perfectly aligns with a 50+. The early F-15s effectively need to be ahistorical to be relevant in a PvP game, while the F-15E is simply an amalgamation of dozens of different systems.
So you concede to my argument that dates of introduction / use mean absolutely nothing, right?
Su-35 for sure.
Ukraine have Patriot systems that reach into that airspace.
Su-57 was escorting S-70 drone before the DL went down and it was forced to shoot the drone down as seen by the footage.
Su-57 is being used to deploy Cruise missiles
Simple facts remain you and I have no idea the capabilities of any of these systems.
It doesnt though it proves that Iran didnt shoot at them, not that they could have. Very different.
and a singular S-400 system again we dont know if it was even switched on.