You will most likely never see any concrete numbers as that’s classified.
And in the context of WT, 2 have it, so it’s a production thing.
Yeah unfortunately no matter how many links you can get with other aircraft in war thunder people are not gonna use them properly or at all. My guess is some idiots would just lock missiles every time you try to fire your own.
1 Like
Yeah. Same with buddy lasing or MUMT. WT “team mates” are usually very retarded.
1 Like
Just look this up and it looks super strong, sadly a full barrage (btw one ship can launch 56) of Mark 5 tomahawks would out range it by a measly 1450 nautical miles (based of the information I found). And if somehow it does get in the range to launch it there are many devices on a US navy vessel to deal with it before it hit the ship, so I don’t think it’ll be a big problem.
For this part i’m going to assume you are taking about the more advance R-37M variant
Yes…… but you can’t kill something you don’t know is there, as of now the main russian radar on the Su-33 can not reliably pick up the f-22 at a range that would give the R-37M an advantage. By the time your radar would detect be able to detect the f-22, it could and would already have a Aim-120D or (if it gets put on the airframe) Aim-174 pitbulling on your flanker.
I really could not find any good information about this shell but based off what I found off of reddit and some websites it was a gps guided shell. Kinda like the M982 Excalibur which can be launched form the M106A6 Paladin which is 150mm.
Just a couple cool facts to leave off on that you can counter argument kinda like what I did
The F15EX can carry 20 Aim-120D’s
The F-18’s radar can detect a Su-57 easily due to its size
The new Harpoon anti radiation missile has about 300km of range
F-18 super hornets radar is stronger than most if not all russian aircraft radars
The Aim-9X can pull 60g’s
The DU armor used during the first gulf war was not penetrated once.
Oh and one last think
Spoiler
The F-22’s maiden flight was in August of 1997, so if we were stuck in 1995 we could theoretically have a F-22 and if you say introduced into service in 2005 here are some things in game that were around the same time or later (btw i’m not including things like the F-15C’s HMD because if I named all things with those caveats I would run out of space)
The Su25SM3 entered service in 2017
The Su27SM entered service in 2003
The Pantsir-S1 entered service in 2017 as well
These are only Russian examples but it is weird how they are pretty recent and still in game
I have no hate against you or anyone who disagrees with me, but I have a shit ton of information about the US military and I like to get my point across.
1 Like
VA-111 is torpedo, not a cruise missile. Russia has those too.
And you are assuming US will get F-22 and Russia Su-33 (even though Su-33 was introduced much earlier than F-22). Even R-37 on Mig-25 or Mig-31 (which are more likely to be included in the game due to year of service) pose a serious threat.
Not really. This is from Locheed Martin page and there it says 1997.:
You still have the Vista Saber II & VTAS III HMD / HMS prototypes for the F-15C & -15A respectively which were trialed, so there is some wiggle room as to what is actually mounted.
1 Like
Sorry that one was a misunderstanding on my part I got the time the program was started and the maiden flight mixed up.
I’m not assuming that i’m only referring to when you replied to me saying “There is no competition IRL” with “The R-37 might speak a different story”
Yes but it is an anti ship weapon, also like the harpoon which outrages it as well and be LRASM. The usa navy didn’t need to adopt a super fast torpedo when it already had things better. I’m not educated on Russian equipment beside a decent amount about jets and air defense, but if there is anything they have like the LRASM Tomahawk, and HARPOON I would love to hear more.
That is cool but it says that the shell can not change its flight path only the time it detonates. Which would make strong irl but not in game.
Btw I love this civilized discussion we are having, this is rare to see on forums and it is fun to learn about other nations
Again I will post the things that I think would be very dominant in game for the USA it does not have to be you to respond but anyone who thinks they have an effective counter or defensive against them
The F15EX can carry 20 Aim-120D’s
The F-18’s radar can detect a Su-57 easily due to its size
The new Harpoon anti radiation missile has about 300km of range
F-18 super hornets radar is stronger than most if not all russian aircraft radars
The Aim-9X can pull 60g’s
The DU armor used during the first gulf war was not penetrated once.
You were assuming because you assumed I was talking about R-37M while I was talking about R-37 in its own time period.
Yes its anti ship weapon and there is naval part of the game in which part of the game torpedos are already implemented. So whatever torpedo US gets it would be weaker than this one.
Actually it will be other way around. It would be strong in the game due to much smaller battlefields and probably not so strong IRL as computer automatically calculates detonation time according to previous detonations.
“the self-propelled vehicle will be able to build “a vertical wall” from detonations for neutralizing, for instance, aerial threats”
1 Like
Well you see my friend you’re comparing 4th gen fighter to a 5th gen one i dont know what are you expecting and also you can just get low until you get close enough and look here my friend stealth doesn’t make you invisible on a radar it reduces the Range in which radar can achieve a weapon grade lock
1 Like
Yeah however my friend you also forget that Iraq really didn’t have any kind of good round like there is proof that some of them were carrying practice ammunition and Abrams performance during the Gulf War is overblown just because they were fighting the t72 from 70s
I think where your confusion came was cause of the YF-22
1 Like
Because the production team cannot accept the fact that the United States is ahead of Russia or the Soviet Union in guided missiles, aircraft, and radar, it should be said that they cannot accept the fact that any country is ahead of the Soviet Union
1 Like
No. They know it. Which is why 99% of NATO equipment is limited to 1990s or earlier or heavily artificially nerfed, like BOL is.
6 Likes
But it did not restore his rightful weight level and combat ability. He has a high rating, and 11.7 has no combat significance at all,it has no comparative value at all
Ignoring the blatant copium yes US is ahead of Russia however it’s not at the point where the Russia cannot fight back effectively However there is still Aspects in which Russia outperform US
2 Likes
No offence, and I really dont want this to get political. But a certain conflict, in a certain eastern nation, has shone some… doubts… on that statement. And much of the equipment provided by western nations to date has been… reserve, older equipment and only recently, more modern equipment.
I think the Soviet Union was on par with the west. I dont think the Russian Federation has done much in the past 30 years to maintain that position.
4 Likes
I don’t want to get political either however let’s be realistic for a second 90% of the people that reference the current conflict hyper criticise Russian equipment with some valid reasons and then just glands over the NATO equipment performing the same or the wors As an example first deployment of t-90m in this conflict everybody was reposting once it’s got destroyed and then you have first deployment of Abrams which They Lost 3 or 4 in one battle in less than an hour people were most ignoring it or coping that oh it’s old equipment. All I want to say is I’m not saying that US equipment is bad or the Russian is better I’m just saying the difference between them is really not drastic as people think
3 Likes
And by the way all of the Abrams as stated by US Secretary of Defence were upgraded to A2 standard before they got donated Andy armour upgrade is specific to Ukraine so we don’t know if it’s better or not
But I think its more than just equipment, there are certainly exception like the CR2s lost did not have Dorchester, so I take that with a pinch of salt in an actual conflict, but you have things like Russian vehicles running out of fuel and ammo, infantry running out of food, reliance on things like smart phones for navigation, outdated infantry weapons, Tyres bursting, poor tactics and training, multiple friendly fire instances with Russian AA shooting down Russian aircraft, the black sea fleet…
Russian equipment ‘might’ not be massively behind western nations (at least at the moment) but I think the Russian military is.
Again some valid points here however we’re talking about the vehicles performing in game not how Russian military is performing in real life Real life is real life game is game