You mean the Malaysian F/A-18D one?
Yeah I only play Japan ground I have no idea what’s what for Japan air
1 Like
Basically 3rd line = Thai planes and 5th line = Malaysian planes. And possibly at some point we’ll get 4th line = Indonesian planes but that’s not here yet
Yeah I just know they have jets idk who’s specific nation they are, they got like 2 sub nations back to back so I’m not gonna try and learn them for air until I get there eventually, ground is a lot easier to remember for me lol
Can’t blame you, I barely know what I’m looking at when looking through ground trees lol. Was just giving you a tip so you know better
1 Like
Where did I say it shouldn’t be lighter? But anyway nothing was removed. It was delivered without them. Actually I just checked that in game it weighs a lot less than a F/A-18A. The weight data is probably not available from any unclassified source but could be in the right ballpark (or not).
How the hell did you get all worked up like that (and that other guy too!)? I didn’t say it justifies it. I haven’t played it at all in ARB and just a few matches in SIM. I’ve flown it more than any aircaft in test flight and was just offering a reason why Gaijin might think it deserves that BR. But yeah the statistics do point out that it doesn’t.
The reason for its BR is 10 AMRAAMs, Smin answered this, regardless of if it couldn’t fly or literally would explode after 10 seconds of being in the air, 10 AMRAAMs is 14.0 territory and the devs had no interest in making the vehicle a MLU 1 version nor reducing its AMRAAM count.
Just curious, how many out of the 200-220 currently existing ones?
Careful, he might not understand that it’s basically how every upgrade program that does not necessitate major structural changes work lol.
“oh man the rafale F4 has much better computers than the F1, because it uses artificial intelligence on its cameras”. Well duh they just replaced the old computers by new ones
1 Like
even there, EFT AMK.
Literaly put on add ons on any eft and buff its flight performance by a good bit
yes, even the Rafale F4 has some structural changes, but it’s not true everytime. For example, while a bit extreme, the hornet and superhornet. Meanwhile, the EFT only has relatiely mnor changes that don’t change the shape or position of equiments, making compatibility easier
Superhornet doesn’t count, it’s a whole new plane marketed to the US congress as an upgrade so that they’d accept to pay for it
While even a F-15EX remains just an update of a largely unchanged design
There is also an official Swiss government source that directly supports the AIM-120B for the Swiss F/A-18C/D fleet.
In the armasuisse document “Luftverteidigung der Zukunft – Bericht der Expertengruppe Neues Kampfflugzeug”, PDF page 172, section 17.1.1, the Swiss F/A-18C/D is explicitly described as using AMRAAM radar-guided air-to-air missiles.
Footnote 79 specifically identifies the missile as the AIM-120B AMRAAM:
“Mit dem Rüstungsprogramm 2011 wurde ein erster Teilersatz der radargelenkten Luft-Luft-Lenkwaffe AIM-120B Amraam realisiert. Um den F/A-18C/D bis 2030 einsetzen zu können, müssen auch die übrigen Radarlenkwaffen dieses Typs ersetzt werden.”
This is an official Swiss government source and directly connects the AIM-120B with the F/A-18C/D fleet.
PDF page 172, section 17.1.1, footnote 79.
We are requesting AIM-120B, not the later AIM-120C-7 configuration. Official Swiss documentation explicitly confirms AIM-120B service on the F/A-18C/D.
It’s no question what Swiss F/A-18’s carry. It was always clear and iirc also communicated that in WT the Swiss Early gets the armament it has, fully aware that it’s not authentic in any way.
If you wanted an authentic proper Swiss Early F/A-18C, as introduced in 1996, it would carry 120B’s, 9P-4/5’s, and loose all other stores. The 120B’s would push it up to at least 13.0, and there the inferiority of the AIM-9P-5 compared to the AIM-9M would be felt… Too strange position balance-wise…
2 Likes
Then I’m not really sure what the purpose of this suggestion is.
If the developers intentionally chose to ignore the historical Swiss configuration and keep its current non-authentic armament purely because giving it the historically correct AIM-120B would require a higher BR, then the issue is not really whether the aircraft historically carried AIM-120B — we already agree that it did.
In that case, adding AIM-120B would simply be a question of whether Gaijin is willing to prioritize historical accuracy over keeping the current BR/loadout unchanged.
I understand the balance concern, but if BR is the only reason not to add an historically correct weapon, then leaving the aircraft as it is essentially means accepting the non-authentic configuration permanently.
Which is a fact on most aircraft in-game, very few have the best missiles they could/did actually use.
But OP was looking at it more on the grounds of balance and not historical accuracy. Their point was that they didnt like facing Fox-3s with only Aim-7Ps and wanted to Aim-120s to make it fair in an uptier, but with an expectation that it would only increase the BR to 13.0. Despite the fact that direct equivalents are at 14.0. Even with limitations, it would still likely be 13.7 and the Swiss F-18 could end up in an even worse state, facing even harder uptiers.
2 Likes
What about limiting the Swiss Early to 6× AIM-120B instead of 10?
The aircraft could be given the historically correct AIM-120B, but without the double AMRAAM racks. This would keep its missile load lower than the 14.0 F/A-18C while still giving it the historically correct Fox-3 capability.
It could then be placed around 13.3, alongside the Su-30 premiums, instead of going straight to 14.0.
Frankly, I don’t bother about the Swiss Early Hornet too much, as there is the Late as well.
What really ruffles my fur - and yes, I will keep repeating it and fighting it - is that the Swiss Mirage III and F-5E have obsolete armament, being modelled/equipped as “Late” variants of the two types, but with armament that would only fit “Early” variants.
That limitation would probably result in 13.7
Using the Su-30 Premiums is bad because they are hugely under BRed and havent been moved because “they fight each other so much they are balanced” nonsense. Apparently a decompression is in the works though which we may see sometime this decade knowing Gaijins rate.
At which point it would be best compared to something like the F-16As at 13.3, where the better loadout and better CM count put it ahead. And thats assuming it doesnt also get Aim-9M/Aim-9Li which then seals it at being 13.7
So its not quite that clear, and no gurantee that it would be “better off” with that loadout at that BR relatively speaking. I cant think of a single time where an aircraft got an upgraded loadout with a corrosponding BR increase and it was better off as a result.
2 Likes