Why does the Su-30SM get R-77-1 while the F/A-18C is stuck with AIM-120B?

Once again, having almost 5000 kgf more thrust is not a minor difference, and their performance on dev showcased that, the F-15I was a rocket, reaching mach 2 like it was a suggestion, while the F-15C MISP II in the US tech tree was overall the better plane when compared to the US F-15E as it is slightly lighter.

The GBU-15 / AGM-130 mounting issue is a ongoing problem for both aircraft as both should be able to mount AAMs + those two pieces of ord via a spacer, same deal with the wing mounted paveways.

Should still get the 130 too, more things to work on sadly.

But in the end, prior to the engine addition, in RB air, the F-15E had vastly inferior flight performance to the I, yes, it had worse A2G capabilities, but in ARB, A2G performance is largely a secondary concern, if not tertiary in today’s climate.

Thinking about it more this is also why gaijin is somehow fine with the Finnish F/A-18C being the same BR as the US one, A2G abilities are not taken into account when balancing for ARB, only A2A abilities. For both of these planes their A2A abilities are largely the same bar the Finnish F/A-18C missing the JHMCS which is a major issue, but, to gaijin, not enough to have it be at a lower BR. It should get the JHMCS regardless though.

1 Like

lol i also ripped when i was blacking out and didnt throttle down enough or too slowly, the acceleration is genuinely so stupid, and since my mouse is old i cant scroll to 101, just 104 so i still end up too fast its kind of funny since most french jets are underpowered, and bam, now youve got TOO much power T_T

the thing is that they couldnt have copy pasted the US F-18 then
the finnish f-18 with the MLU, which gets a HMD, has a completly different cockpit ftom the US one

ontop of gaijin being lazy and went on copy-pasting they also copied the wrong cockpit for the finnish hornet

rn it gets the same cockpit as the F/A-18C late, even tho it should have the F/A-18C early cockpit
you can easily tell that because the finnish hornet has a knob in the cockpit controlling HMD brightness
image

as it stands i think the finnish F-18 was just a afterthought for this update

good example is all the US hornets getting atleast 1 ingame camo,
while the finnish one didnt get any and now only has a marketplace camo which is comunity made

1 Like

Yep, its a massive issue and another great example of gaijin being lazy. Should not have occurred in the first place.

Sadly seems to be par for the course now which is getting progressively more infuriating.

Thats why R-73/R-27ET works best for me.

It’s been over a year since the AIM-120A was introduced, during this time many new missiles have been introduced to other nations, in our game we have missiles even from 2017, as well as aircraft, and the US still has missiles from the 1980s, which is strange. Why did the gaijins stop introducing missiles for the US?

Fakour90

Firstly, this is not a plane that can be upgraded, it is a plane from Marathon.

It wouldn’t hurt to know that AMRAAMs are already the best, another point just to answer ur question, the only ARH added after the general Fox 3 update is R-77-1, and that RN is the only competitor to the AMRAAM in terms of longer ranges. And if going by date, China/EU’s 2015/2017 missiles are still largely unanswered by the US, except AIM174B. By that logic, the US will be forced to compete with 200+km range missiles with AMRAAM.

1 Like

it is a missile in the US tech tree
that was put into mass production in 2018

1 Like
  • R-77 (RVV-AE) — Russia
  • PL-12 — China
  • MICA-EM — France
  • Derby — Israel
  • R-Darter — South Africa
  • AAM-4 — Japan

The R-77-1 is better than the AIm-120A. The AIM-120 often goes into traps, loses the target, and loses speed 7 seconds after takeoff. It is very easy to escape from the AIM-120, you just need to fly to the side or near the ground and that’s it. But the R-77-1 rarely loses the target.

lol

1 Like

Is he wrong, 120s are hilariously easy to notch and defeat by multipathing.
They become poorer the lower altitudes and cannot pull the same G or start tracking off the rail
R-77-1 and MICA EM are superior in todays meta.

1 Like

THEY ARE ADDED AT THE SAME TIME.

Well, they are both just as easy to dodge, if using the method given. They literally have the same seeker.

Marginally, and discounted by the fact that at longer ranges, AMRAAM carriers have way superior kinetics.

Still better than any other missile other than R-77-1.

2 Likes

lol early game BVR determines battles and the 120’s are still king there, the MICA fucking sucks at BVR and misses if launched above 15km, never used the r77-1 but this take that aim120’s are suddenly trash and useless is delulu tier

5 Likes

Did I say 120s were bad? I said they were no longer Meta.
Yes they are better at BVR

Players have learned to defeat them, you can no longer sling 120s from miles away and get kills.
Realistic ranges for ideal 120s shots are 20km
At that range the R-77-1 and MICA are as dangerous.

If you get closer to 10km and below the MICA/R-77-1 become truly scary weapons.

What are you trying to say ultimately here?

1 Like

That R-77-1/MICA are superior missiles in game with the current meta.
Which has shifted from BVR to flying medium altitude and closer ranges

F15Es or EFs never have to enter 20km if they are smart. They can climb high and stay high. Their kinetics determines that no missile can defeat them. Even if AMRAAMs are able to be dodged, 1. some won’t, 2. they force everyone to notch. This kinda comes down to carrier, but still.