Yeah, it isn’t at all the point. I have no clue why you decided to turn to that topic, but get back to the original topic.
They aren’t? The Su-30SM/MK have been more than capable of taking down both air targets and conducting strike missions.
Pray tell, what do they do worse?
And look at what’s happened to them… They’ve been relegated to nothing but air defense of missiles and bombs, with literally ZERO air to air engagements.
It even has a loss doing that!
I know exactly what it means, and that’s precisely what can be seen on the battlefield.
Regardless of the Su-30’s existence or the VERY blatant lack of western aircraft in the war, it’s obscenely off topic.
If by outside of airspace you mean in captured territories and the eastern seaboard, sure… That USED to be opposing territory and due to some unknown reason it no longer is…
A MiG-15 can execute a mission. It doesn’t make it a competitive aircraft. The point. Again. Is that Russia’s best aircraft are easily inferior to the best Western aircraft. And there is no combat evidence to prove otherwise.
These statements are mutually exclusive. One cannot be true while the other is. In this case it is proof you don’t know what air superiority is.
We love playing make-believe and acting as if we’re battling an unsurmountable force… And still losing.
A MiG-15 can’t fire R-37Ms, launch cruise munition from 400km+, or breach 2 longest kill records in the span of 2 years.
A MiG-15 lacks a radar to begin with, let alone SAR mapping and precision munitions.
Your point here is irrelevant.
In what was is it inferior? I’ve asked you twice now and you still don’t seem to have an answer.
How so? Air superiority is a mix of both aircraft screening and air defense destruction. Both of which are being done, with literally no aircraft operating in opposition within 50km of the frontlines since early 2023. Between that and constant destruction of air defenses from Strelas to S-300s, I can see a pretty clear case of superiority.
Pretty much exactly what I’ve been harping on, gaijin’s implementation of current equipment is intrinsically variable due to how they chose to balance, this is why a number of vehicles are abominations of various upgrade packages and standard models.
Ah yes, saying that India is not an authority on rocketry is xenopobic. Sure my guy, please try to dispute the fact that India barley even shows up in the orbital aerospace industry.
Last I checked, India has launched 92 orbital craft so far, meanwhile SpaceX alone has launched 96 craft in 2023 alone, and among nearly all industry leading rocketry industries being located in the United States.
No, India is not even close to being remotely relevant to the world of rocketry.
That and nice Ad Hominem.
You are on the WT forums, you would post such here, but given your comment itself, I would wager your dont have such proof.
The only boons the IRIS-T has over the base model of 9X is the datalink handoff for actual formal LOAL, although the base 9X can already do limited LOAL as is, and a bit of range due to the base 9X using the same motor as the 9M. None of the above missiles will also ever reach out to 40km in actual practice.
Man you need to go back and look up the payload weight of these bombs vs the required amount of explosive tonnage to kill a base because that is the most wrong comment in this entire comment chain by a massive margin.
I’ll do the GBU-39 calc for you since you just to start out, you can do the rest yourself. The TNT equivalent of a GBU-39 is 26.45 kg, a F-15E can carry 20 of them, the total payload explosive mass is 529kg of TNT. You need 2300kg of TNT to kill a base at top tier, which just so happens to be right on the edge of the UMPK’s explosive mass of 2219.2kg, meaning the UMPK has enough TNT equivalent alone to trigger the base self destruction.
You need 5 F-15Es carrying 100 GBU-39s to kill a base.
Thats not even remotely comparable.
You can map mark a base and launch a free base kill at the start of the match, such is also extremely easy to pull off in SIM via tossing the bomb.
But then again you somehow thought the GBU-39 was somehow capable of anything remotely close to the same feats so I doubt you would understand how to do this.
And? I already gave you those dates, its 1991 and 1994 for the A and B respectively, they were on being given to units in active service in said years.
Nope wrong again, the late make 50s, 52s, post the batch ordered in 1996, all mount the improved MFDs and cockpit instrumentation that were made standard on the Block 60 under the F-16 CCIP program among a myriad of other changes made to the aircraft. (Pre- 1997 block 50s all retained the MLU’s color MFDs and cockpit instrumentation.)
This was also the kit that introduced JHMCS functionality to the aircraft along with the functionality for the F-16C to employ GPS weapons, two things that we currently have in game for the phase 2 upgrades.
Issue is that the 16C we have has a number of the phase 1 and phase 2 CCIP upgrades present, but, the first major upgrade made to the aircraft was the upgrade to the cockpit systems and instrumentation which is completely missing. The current F-16C cockpit is a direct copy of the MLU’s cockpit which is quite incorrect for a completed CCIP Block 50/52, such would only be the case for a Block 40/42.
Sniper compatibility was added with the CCIP as well, it could not be carried by block 50s prior to the CCIP.
In the case of the HUD, its not the display design that is the issue, it is instead the HUD’s projection itself, it is lacking information that the CCIP program added to it’s data system, namely the symbology provided by tape 4.3 onwards, after all, as long as our F-16C has GBU-39s it is a tape 6.1 or higher as that was the version that added that functionality, or even 6.5 due to the fact that we have the BRU-69/A for JDAMs.
The F-14B we currently have suffers from a nearly identical issue where it is missing it’s cockpit upgrade it that was installed when it got the ability to mount GPS bombs, yet, that is still missing.
Currently our F-16C Block 50 is a stock Block 50 with trappings of a phase 1 and phase 2 CCIP upgraded F-16C, but missing a number of them.
Quick edit since I know that someone will bring it up as well, no the DCS F-16C is not free of the same scorn as well, it too is a frankenviper with upgrades from across the CCIP program, before the program and after it. It too is an abomination.
Just like how the F-16C or Gripen needs a Litening II instead of a Litening III to be relevant? Sure seems like the Eurofighters dont need a Litening II to be relevant since they got Litening IIIs.
Or how for the longest time the F-16C’s TGP, which was identical to the Gripen’s TGP, had a worse thermal quality for no reason.
Nope, the F-15Es we got could have gotten their historic Litening IIIs or SNIPER ATPs without issue.
So you concede to my argument that the equipment of an aircraft means absolutely nothing, right?
Also lol, that you never made that argument to begin with, you claimed that the F-15E is quote
You then stated
To which I proved that it was indeed first make F-15E with random, ahistoric junk attached to it, which it should not.
