Weapon loadouts on the J-10 and EF-2000

ralfidude · Post by **ralfidude** » 2008-05-03 17:16

well the thing is that its easy to land a eurofighter to rearm. But when it comes down to the j10s, as far as im concerned, when they take off, they never return alive. Yes, they do try to land... but no they are never sucessfull, including myself. I touched down on the runway, but the speed is always way too fast before i would crash at the other end, and if i go any slower than that, i always end up face first at the fence... more bombs on the j10 would be a tad bit more effective, but i do see what the guys are talking about with the balance here. So i agree to leave it as it is... but for gods sake fix the j10, lol, OR the runway.

turnpipe · Post by **turnpipe** » 2008-05-03 17:32

ralfidude wrote:well the thing is that its easy to land a eurofighter to rearm. But when it comes down to the j10s, as far as im concerned, when they take off, they never return alive. Yes, they do try to land... but no they are never sucessfull, including myself. I touched down on the runway, but the speed is always way too fast before i would crash at the other end, and if i go any slower than that, i always end up face first at the fence... more bombs on the j10 would be a tad bit more effective, but i do see what the guys are talking about with the balance here. So i agree to leave it as it is... but for gods sake fix the j10, lol, OR the runway.

They are going to fix the j10, I think. I must say the physics on it are a work of art and chock full of challenge accompanied by the gauntlet of a runway. I have been practicing for months and can never get quite comfortable landing it.

Sabre_tooth_tigger · Post by **Sabre_tooth_tigger** » 2008-05-03 18:24

Ages ago I read a suggestion about tree clearance next to the runway, I think its been noted anyhow

CAS_117 · Post by **CAS_117** » 2008-05-03 19:46

Well... The jets do have unlimited fuel. So I am not sure about increasing the loadout much. I've outfitted the F-16 with GBU-12's and AGM-65 Mavericks. Don't see any real issues with the F-16 having bombs, cept that the MiG-29 doesn't really use as many laser guided bombs as opposed to missiles; the Kh-29 looks much sexier than the say LT-2. I think having them with AGM-65's and Kh-29's would be best, but it doesn't change the game too much.

Viper5 · Post by **Viper5** » 2008-05-03 20:45

More weight = less maneuverability. They dont load these things to the max. Think about it. If a soldier had to, he could prolly carry thousands of roudns of ammo. But he doesnt. Why? Becuause it would slow him down.

IMO Fighters (Eurofighter, J10, Mig29, F16, F1

should have:
4x Long Range AA Missiles
1x JDAM

Fighter-Bombers- (Gr.9, AV-8B, F15, not sure on PLA/MEC equivalents) should have:
2x Short Range
2x Long Range
2x Mavericks or rocket pods
1x JDAM

Bombers-SU25, Tornado, A10, whatever the hell that ugly *** PLA thing is, SU25
2x JDAM
Rockets
4x Maverick

Post by **Rhino** » 2008-05-03 22:08

Viper5 wrote:Fighter-Bombers- (Gr.9, AV-8B, F15, not sure on PLA/MEC equivalents) should have:
2x Short Range
2x Long Range
2x Mavericks or rocket pods
1x JDAM

Bombers-SU25, Tornado, A10, whatever the hell that ugly *** PLA thing is, SU25
2x JDAM
Rockets
4x Maverick

lolz...

a harrier GR9 / II are not a fighter bombers...

the Tornado is not a bomber and the A-10 and Su-25 are also not bombers...

The Tornado GR4, F-15, SU-34 and SU-30mkk are all fighter bombers.

The Harrier GR9 / II, A-10, Su-25 are all Attack Jets.

Waaah_Wah · Post by **Waaah_Wah** » 2008-05-03 22:15

[R-DEV]CAS_117 wrote:Well... The jets do have unlimited fuel. So I am not sure about increasing the loadout much. I've outfitted the F-16 with GBU-12's and AGM-65 Mavericks. Don't see any real issues with the F-16 having bombs, cept that the MiG-29 doesn't really use as many laser guided bombs as opposed to missiles; the Kh-29 looks much sexier than the say LT-2. I think having them with AGM-65's and Kh-29's would be best, but it doesn't change the game too much.

Eyy! Congratz with the promotion

Viper5 · Post by **Viper5** » 2008-05-03 22:16

[R-DEV]Rhino wrote:lolz...

a harrier GR9 / II are not a fighter bombers...

the Tornado is not a bomber and the A-10 and Su-25 are also not bombers...

The Tornado GR4, F-15, SU-34 and SU-30mkk are all fighter bombers.

The Harrier GR9 / II, A-10, Su-25 are all Attack Jets.

meh, everyone understood the point. Im guessing you'd class the F117 as a bomber

Post by **Rhino** » 2008-05-03 22:33

Viper5 wrote:meh, everyone understood the point. Im guessing you'd class the F117 as a bomber

yes thats cos the F117 is a bomber, and so is the B2

Viper5 · Post by **Viper5** » 2008-05-03 22:35

[R-DEV]Rhino wrote:yes thats cos the F117 is a bomber, and so is the B2

Technically the F117 is a fighter. Hence the F.

Post by **Rhino** » 2008-05-03 22:45

Viper5 wrote:Technically the F117 is a fighter. Hence the F.

ye, but its only used for bombing roles

Post by **Bob_Marley** » 2008-05-03 22:59

I'd like to see ground attack aircraft with different loads for different maps, for example an A-10 on Kashan might be armed to the teeth with Mavericks while on an insurgency map it would carry Rockets & LGBs

Post by **77SiCaRiO77** » 2008-05-03 23:33

[R-MOD]Bob_Marley wrote:I'd like to see ground attack aircraft with different loads for different maps, for example an A-10 on Kashan might be armed to the teeth with Mavericks while on an insurgency map it would carry Rockets & LGBs

there! listen to him !

Rangu · Post by **Rangu** » 2008-05-03 23:52

[R-MOD]Bob_Marley wrote:an A-10 on Kashan might be armed to the teeth

technically, the A-10s ingame always are!

agentscar · Post by **agentscar** » 2008-05-04 03:10

I think they're fine as they are...

M.Warren · Post by **M.Warren** » 2008-05-04 12:19

turnpipe wrote:They are going to fix the j10, I think. I must say the physics on it are a work of art and chock full of challenge accompanied by the gauntlet of a runway. I have been practicing for months and can never get quite comfortable landing it.

Has nothing to do with the runway. Even if you created a local server and tried to land the Chinese J-10 on the British airfield in Qinling you'd still have difficulty. It's simply the aircraft but it was thought that the trees were the issue previously, but that's not the case.

And yes they are already correcting the issues for the J-10.

Post by **marcoelnk** » 2008-05-04 14:10

[R-DEV]Rhino wrote:ye, but its only used for bombing roles

well, so is the a-10 and the su-25 ...
i mean you'll never see an a-10 being send out to destroy a mig or whatever...they are normally armed with 2 aim-9 for self-defence..

Post by **Rhino** » 2008-05-04 14:13

marcoelnk wrote:well, so is the a-10 and the su-25 ...
i mean you'll never see an a-10 being send out to destroy a mig or whatever...they are normally armed with 2 aim-9 for self-defence..

no you see theres a big difference between bombing and CAS.

the F117 is used for precision bombing, the A-10 is used for CAS and as a tank buster etc.

Post by **Hitperson** » 2008-05-04 16:21

personally i would like to see more on the radar guided from on the EF2000 ASRAAM's, AMRAAM's and ALRAAMS would be a nice thing to have but also i'm waiting for GBU's and JADAM's to be bolted on to these for theater usage.

NB if we are going to have a bomb for arty why not make it a Bunker Buster.

Weapon loadouts on the J-10 and EF-2000

Should these multirole jets have more payload?