f-104 Aeritalia F-104S ASA

[KekDermott@live 552]

30 minutes ago, Potatoman530 said:

The f-15C and the mig-23 are not far off like a patch or two. the F-15C could be able to carry AIM-9Ls and maybe a more modern version of the sparrow and the mig-23 could get R-60Ms and the r-27  The F-104ASA could maybe fall into that category or below with the mig-21 bis with R-60Ms or perhaps the phantoms with AIM-9Ls  

The MiG 23 definitely isn't far off but the F15? No way, some nations don't even have 3rd gen jets yet. And the MiG 23 is in no way equal to the F15 it's much more comparable to the Phantom.

[Potatoman530 31]

Your thinking of the modern f15 the ones with amrams and aim-9xs those ones will probably not be added for years the one I am thinking of has sparrows like the AIM-7 E2 it would be comparable to the mig-23 because sure it would have the speed but the mig-23 would be more maneuverable and have superior radar missiles because the r-27 is better then the sparrow on top of that r-60Ms or even r-77s. The f-104ASA with look down shoot down the Aspiede missiles and aim-9ls flares and chaff would fall nicely into this category  

[MonkeyBussiness 1,228]

On 20/11/2020 at 02:05, Potatoman530 said:

Your thinking of the modern f15 the ones with amrams and aim-9xs those ones will probably not be added for years the one I am thinking of has sparrows like the AIM-7 E2 it would be comparable to the mig-23 because sure it would have the speed but the mig-23 would be more maneuverable and have superior radar missiles because the r-27 is better then the sparrow on top of that r-60Ms or even r-77s. The f-104ASA with look down shoot down the Aspiede missiles and aim-9ls flares and chaff would fall nicely into this category  

1) the Mig-23 isn't more manoeuvrable even with better leading edge slats

2) the Mig-23 didn't carry the R-27 or the R-77 only a prototype for export market did (Mig-23-98)

3) the earliest sparrow the F-15A did carry was the AIM-7F (mach 4, 25g , 70km max range +/-) wich is superior to the best SARH missile of the Mig-23 (R-24 , mach 3, 25g ,35km max range +/-)

4) the F-15A could carry 4 sparrow compare to only 2 R-24 on the Mig-23, we'll take the MLD , it's the most advanced fighter version wich was mass produced

5) the F-15A have a better avionics than the Mig-23MLD

6) the Mig-23MLD could beat the F-15A in a dogfight with IR short range missile R-73 vs AIM-9L/M , but you need to approche that F-15A and you can only carry 2 of those + 2 R-24

7) in a dogfight situation the R-60M is inferior to the AIM-9L/M , both could carry for of those

[Охраняет-Камни 6,650]

On 19/05/2020 at 11:44, mc205v said:

Aircraft upgraded to the F-104S-ASA standard were also capable of carrying the all-aspect AIM-9L Sidewinder IR AAM, became main armament, replacing the previous version "B"and "F".

Is there any evidence that AMI used Aim-9F?

Btw In my opinion ASA should be represented in 3 different versions (3 separated planes) ASA CIO, ASA/M and ASA CBO.

Current mixed F-104S I would split into CIO and CBO as well.

ASA CIO and ASA/M 2 interceptor variants should be foldered in the line after F-104S CIO (next to F-86K (or better after F-104G)) and before Tornado ADV.

ASA CBO should be placed in the line after S CBO, which I would relocate after F-84G (or better F-84F) and before Tornado IDS.

My suggestion to split CIO and CBO on the Russian forum (upvote if you want to support):

https://forum.warthunder.ru/index.php?/topic/295546-razdelit-f-104s-na-otdelnye-modifikatsii-perekhvatchika-i-istrebitelya-bombardirovshchika/&tab=comments#comment-8216631

 

[Ziggy1989 1,648]

15 hours ago, _Condottiero_ said:

Is there any evidence that AMI used Aim-9F?

Btw In my opinion ASA should be represented in 3 different versions (3 separated planes) ASA CIO, ASA/M and ASA CBO.

Current mixed F-104S I would split into CIO and CBO as well.

ASA CIO and ASA/M 2 interceptor variants should be foldered in the line after F-104S CIO (next to F-86K (or better after F-104G)) and before Tornado ADV.

ASA CBO should be placed in the line after S CBO, which I would relocate after F-84G (or better F-84F) and before Tornado IDS.

My suggestion to split CIO and CBO on the Russian forum (upvote if you want to support):

https://forum.warthunder.ru/index.php?/topic/295546-razdelit-f-104s-na-otdelnye-modifikatsii-perekhvatchika-i-istrebitelya-bombardirovshchika/&tab=comments#comment-8216631

 

I read that even the 104S carried the Aim9F, but I could not find anything on it really. I could not find much on the missile itself. 

 

I agree with everything you posted. Gaijin can supplement Italy with the versions and variants of the ASA until next Gen.

 

The flight models are practically copy paste and they can make money off them if they are competitive enough as people invest to collect them

 

This is literally Italy's flagship century fighter. An aircraft Italy was proud of and took great pride in and modernizing. WT is really wasting a good opportunity. 

[MonkeyBussiness 1,228]

they can do like the red top on the lightning , only put his rear aspect capability and nerfing/deleting his all aspect ones

[Ziggy1989 1,648]

6 hours ago, MonkeyBussiness said:

they can do like the red top on the lightning , only put his rear aspect capability and nerfing/deleting his all aspect ones

Red top was all aspect? I did not know that. 

 

 

[MonkeyBussiness 1,228]

On 27/11/2020 at 20:09, Ziggy1989 said:

Red top was all aspect? I did not know that. 

 

 

only against supersonic target

[_Pixy 196]

On 26/11/2020 at 06:25, _Condottiero_ said:

Is there any evidence that AMI used Aim-9F?

Btw In my opinion ASA should be represented in 3 different versions (3 separated planes) ASA CIO, ASA/M and ASA CBO.

Current mixed F-104S I would split into CIO and CBO as well.

ASA CIO and ASA/M 2 interceptor variants should be foldered in the line after F-104S CIO (next to F-86K (or better after F-104G)) and before Tornado ADV.

ASA CBO should be placed in the line after S CBO, which I would relocate after F-84G (or better F-84F) and before Tornado IDS.

My suggestion to split CIO and CBO on the Russian forum (upvote if you want to support):

https://forum.warthunder.ru/index.php?/topic/295546-razdelit-f-104s-na-otdelnye-modifikatsii-perekhvatchika-i-istrebitelya-bombardirovshchika/&tab=comments#comment-8216631

 

iirc the Aim-9F is the German improved Aim-9B, the one thats on the F-104G ingame now.

[MonkeyBussiness 1,228]

On 21/12/2020 at 13:21, _Pixy said:

iirc the Aim-9F is the German improved Aim-9B, the one thats on the F-104G ingame now.

wich is the exact copy of the AIM-9B in game

[DMSPKSP 105]

Still hoping to get this thing! Big support from me!

[EvenManatee887@live 129]

I think I may have a pretty good way for the ASAs to be added to the TT. So first off, the F-104S CIO would replace the current F-104S in-game, then the so called 'foreign tree' would essentially split. One line would continue to something like the F-16 or the Tornado ADV while the other one would branch ahead of the G.91 line, in-effect continuing it indirectly. The line ahead of the G.91s would have the F-104S-ASA-1 and ASA-1, and they would be succeeded by the ASA-M. The F-104S CBO meanwhile would find its place at the end of the bomber tree, going from the F-104S CBO to the F-104S CBO ASA and then that would be followed by something like the Tornado IDS or AMX international, effectively making the bomber tree into a 'heavy' attacker tree while the F-84G line would be continued by light attackers. Overall we would see about 5 F-104Ss across the tree.   

[_Pixy 196]

15 hours ago, MonkeyBussiness said:

wich is the exact copy of the AIM-9B in game

Yeah, just as it is in real life, its just a AIM-9B with better responsiveness and accuracy in tracking.

[MonkeyBussiness 1,228]

On 27/12/2020 at 09:30, _Pixy said:

Yeah, just as it is in real life, its just a AIM-9B with better responsiveness and accuracy in tracking.

it's different irl that's my point , it track better but not in game

On 27/12/2020 at 07:05, EvenManatee887@live said:

Overall we would see about 5 F-104Ss across the tree. 

for the love of god , pls no !

[Prantz 11]

I'm confused, does the ASA with AIM9L have a M61 cannon? 

[Охраняет-Камни 6,650]

7 minutes ago, Prantz said:

I'm confused, does the ASA with AIM9L have a M61 cannon? 

Yes, of course. You remove cannon only to install equipment for SARH missiles (AIM-7E or Aspide).

[DMSPKSP 105]

I really believe that this is a great option for Italy and we should have it as soon as we can!

[Conte_Baracca 4,547]

On 27/12/2020 at 03:30, _Pixy said:

Yeah, just as it is in real life, its just a AIM-9B with better responsiveness and accuracy in tracking.

Which isn't modeled by Gaijin.  Or is it?

[Dr_Pavel 3,961]

53 minutes ago, Conte_Baracca said:

Which isn't modeled by Gaijin.  Or is it?

 

It isn't. AIM-9F (aka AIM-9B FGW.2) are a 1:1 copy of AIM-9Bs in game. 

 

[Conte_Baracca 4,547]

17 hours ago, Dr_Pavel said:

 

It isn't. AIM-9F (aka AIM-9B FGW.2) are a 1:1 copy of AIM-9Bs in game. 

 

Besides I tried real hard to find evidence of it used by Italy.  And it really didn't  look like it.

 

To the original post the ASA, I think, should be done like F-104S.   CIO and CBO in one model controlled by loadout. 

 

Also with Aspide and AIM-9L and ECM it will be a solid aircraft 

 

 

[Dr_Pavel 3,961]

38 minutes ago, Conte_Baracca said:

Besides I tried real hard to find evidence of it used by Italy.  And it really didn't  look like it.

 

To the original post the ASA, I think, should be done like F-104S.   CIO and CBO in one model controlled by loadout. 

 

Also with Aspide and AIM-9L and ECM it will be a solid aircraft 

 

 

 

Doubt Gaijin's going to bother modelling the ALQ-70 jammer tbh. 

[CokeSpray 7,273]

Suggestion passed to the developers for consideration.

[leroyonly 4,310]

As the Aeritalia F-104S ASA Starfighter has been implemented as per 2.15 Wind of Change,

 

Moved  to Implemented Suggestions.