Well first of all aim 174 is only available on singular aircraft for now and it’s still in testing second aim 260 is still not in service it’s testing and other missiles yes but the Russia has R 77 M that can be comparable to meteor and amram
Hang on
Well…
Sea Harrier FA2
- Placeholder HUD no A2A Symbology at all
- Placeholder RWR, tells you basically nothing
- BOL at nerfed levels, basically doesnt work as either flare or chaff
- All Harriers have major inherrent issues like the fact they are the hottest things in the known universe (totally wrong btw)
Tornado F3 Late
- Finally gotten 50% of its major issues sorted recent but relies on BOL for CMs. Which basically dont work as stated before.
- Missing Phimat for Large Calibre chaff to aid in defeating Fox-3s
Harrier Gr7:
- Placeholder MAWS that barely works
- Massively Over BRed at 12.7
- Gets constantly denied new mechanics like GPS guided bombs
- Aforementioned BOL and Harrier issues
Tornado F3
- Fine for the most part, but lack of CMs sucks but not as badly felt vs non-IRCCM missiles and Fox-1s instad of Fox-3s
Tornado Gr1
- Higher BR than the MLD somehow
- Missing most of radar kit
- Missing any justification for being at 11.7 like IRCCM missiles or BOL
- Missing LOADS of ground attack weapons
Sea Harrier FRS1
- Same BR as the Mig-23MLD despite being massively different in Performance
- Placeholder HUD that gives no A2A symbology
- Placeholder RWR that gives no useful information
- Missing Radar Gunsight
- Aforementioned harrier issues
Sea Harrier FRS1e
- Well placed for BR but all the aforementioned Sea Harrier FRS1 issues are present minus the RWR as it has the correct RWR
Going lower than that:
- SRAAMs are broken and barely work
- Red Tops massively underperforming
- Buc S2 misisng radar and Napalm
Im basically not playing Sim at the moment, because basically every British aircraft at the moment is either unplayable (or at the very least, rather unfun) due to bugs or unplayable due to BR or both. Why waste an afternoon trying to play an aircraft with massive handicaps and not enjoying it when I could just be playing a different game and then enjoy said aircraft if/when they fix them.
Heck, you spend most of your time complaining that the soviets are unplayable and bitch and moan at ANYONE who dares say otherwise, like @TheArcticFoxxo pointing out that the Su-27 doomsayers are hypochondriacs and that its perfectly competitive just takes skill
4 Likes
Such as?
Last time I checked the Sea Harrier FRS1 vs Mig-23MLD wasnt a fair fight. Or would you like to cope some more?
So no if you ask me Russia is definitely capable of fighting effectively
Valid however you are comparing a multi roll ground attacker with the multi-role fighter
FRS1 isnt a multirole ground attacker. Its a naval defence fighter. Its original intended purpose was to intercept shadowers such as Soviet Tu-95s
During the Falklands it dropped a few bombs, but spent 90% of its time defending the Carrier Taskforce from air attacks. The Harrier Gr3s in the taskforce did most of the ground attack work
Strictly speaking the Sea Harrier FRS1 has the wrong classification in game.
Ok my bad but overall the harrier at the beginning from what I know was designed as a mainly ground attacker or am I wrong?
yes, for the most part. Later Variants like the AV-8B+ were intended for multi-role. and the FA2 was a pure bred fighter
Though the Sea Harrier FRS1 in the early 1980s took on the US and readily beat the F-5E in 1v1 combat (winning at a ratio of approx 8:1) and the F-15A in 2v2 combat (winning at a ratio of approx 3:1)
Gaijin has rather butched the Harrier’s in game with a great number of issues. Including how they model heat signatures which results in the Harrier being one of the hardest aircraft in game to defeat an IR misisle in. Despite it actually being able to prevent rear-aspect IR locks through the use of vectored thrust. (potentially also able to prevent the lock of an Aim-9L using this same tactic as well)
All of the issues you have pointed out are also issues that effect other nations.
F4F ICE is a top tier plane in Sim and it doesn’t even have a HUD.
My experience that BOL flares have been fine. You just can’t blindly turn them on periodic and expect to be immune to all missiles like they used to be.
Is the MAWS in the GR.7 any different than any of the other top tier MAWS?
F4F ICE is effectively the same BR as the F-15C in Air SB and worse in every single way.
SRAAMs work fine and all of the SRAAM carriers get to shoot them at flareless jets half of the time.
Yes. He was really competitive in that 1v1 where he won 20% of the time.
A tournament player and self-proclaimed duelist lost the vast majority of the time against me…someone who doesn’t play tournaments and doesn’t even train for tournaments.
1 Like
You see I didn’t know that thank you for the info
Unfortunately that’s with every aircraft for example a SU-27 and a MiG-29 both have butchered flight models
There are plenty of vehicles in game that never actually existed or were test bed vehicles only so neither point is really significant
Whilst true, that is historically accurate, unlike for the FA2. Also the F-4F ICE has 4x IR missiles, 4x BVR missiles and A gun and is super-sonic. the FA2 doesnt really have most of those things. Its only defence is firing at longer ranges and that is hard to do with no HUD
Also the FRS1 has the same placeholder HUD. Waiting 2 years for a placeholder HUD to be replaced is getting old fast. At the bare minimum, they could give the FA2 the F3s HUD
Confirmed bug reports that htey are 1/4 the size they should be for both flares and chaff. For Chaff, that is literally they have 1/4 the weight of their IRL counterparts (should be virutally the same as most standard chaff) . For Flares, that is more complicated, but probably should be akin to large calibre flares actually, just with the shorter burn time.
Yes, uses a PD radar instead of UV sensor, should only trigger for an acutal incoming threat and not for literally any flare or missile dropped vaguely behind the aircraft. Gr7s MAWS will even trigger from its own flares being dropped, including by the MAWS system, creasting this never ending loop. Most of the time, its best to leave MAWS turned off.
Currently its a straight C&P from the F-111A
Comparing a ground attacker with limited offensive ability with a top tier AMRAAM carrier is a strange choice, but you do you.
They dont though. They have 800m range, should be 2km (Year+ old report for that), I’ve had a great number of SRAAMs miss a target by a few metres and its impossible to judge the distances. They also have a number of issues when fired at close range (Sub 400m) and tend to spiral widly out of control and miss. I have a report in that is 6 months old for that.
(also should be all-aspect but I respect the balancing issues for that)
Also the SRAAM carriers themselves. French Hunter F6 with 9Bs is apparently 9.0 worthy, but give it 4x SRAAM instead of the 9Bs and its 9.7 worthy. Maybe with full strength SRAAMs, but at the moment, no way. (also gotta love how the FGA9 is 9.7 as well)
Also the Harrier Gr1 has very poor cockpit situational awarness (let alone no radar or RWR) and a smokey exhaust (which is wrong) that can be seen accross map (4 month old report for that one btw)
1 Like
the point I was making is that those missiles yes they’re in testing however we don’t know what vehicles will carry them So they most likely won’t be added until they get into the service cuz there is a difference between prototype vehicles and prototype weapons that were supposed to be mounted on the vehicles
For example mig 23 MLD in real life carried on r73 we don’t have it in war thunder because it’s unbalanced
how the hell is germany p2w
Yes, and the point I’m making is that Gajin has already crossed the bridge of making fictional vehicles, so they could just as easily give the missile to any US/NATO aircraft as most of the modern ones can operate on most nato shackles/launch units.
well we’re going to need to wait and see
??? Least biased UK player pretending F-22 wouldn’t be unkillable versus your jets?
1 Like