Follow Ups:
Posted by Victor Feltes on August 08, 2000 at 00:40:53:
In Reply to: Aircraft techs posted by Pedro Silva on July 26, 2000 at 13:31:31:
>And I now think Mig-29, Su-27 (first seen by the West in 82, I guess, even though they're probably late70's designs..), as well as F-14, -15, -16 and -18 should be 3rd generation too. They're so much better than most of the competition (at the time, and even now)that we should not "condemn" them to 2nd generation game performance just because they were off for a couple of years.
I have asked the Anonymes guys questions like this in the past. What is the nature of generation level? They say that it represents basic differences in construction; a plane designed in 1970 is fundamentally different from one made in 1980. However, at the same time, they have said that 'it's more a matter of judgement than straight years.'
In light of all this, I am not quick to change the generation levels of all these important aircraft. I'm willing to bet that some of these would be better modeled through increased tech ratings opposed to increased gen levels. I guess I'd like to hear more from you guys before acting on this one.
>F-4 Phantom should be 2nd generation
I agree. My source places it around 1967, well into generation 2.
http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/gustin_military/db/us/F4PHANTO.html
>EF-2000, F-22, JSF should be upgrade to 4th generation (it's 2000 and none of those is really flying yet)
Good point. Sebastien has said that "units developed but deployed right now would be gen 4". The EF-2000 won't enter service until 2003. It will be 2007 before all of Sweden's JSF 39 Gripen's are operational. (As of March 2000, only 85 of 289 ordered Gripen's had been delivered.) Lastly, Sebastien himself has rated the F-22 as being gen 4.
http://www.csd.uwo.ca/~pettypi/elevon/gustin_military/db/ital/EUROFIGH.html
http://www.canit.se/~griffon/aviation/text/39gripen.htm