Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 18/09/21 in all areas

  1. One of the dumbest change in a long time. PLS don't go thru with this. ***All newly obtained universal back-up vehicles, orders and wagers will now have validation time to be activated and expiration time (for orders). All relevant data added to their description. ***Attention: all previously obtained universal back-up vehicles, orders and wagers to be used within a lengthy period of time, as now stated in their description.
    309 points
  2. 181 points
  3. Now I have even less reason to play the game: naval's too expensive to play without backups atm.
    168 points
  4. I agree with others here this should not go to live server, no reason whatsoever If someone stocks it, they deserve it to use when they have time The difference in rewards in SL and RP for the destruction of ground vehicles of different classes - light/medium tank, heavy tank, SPG, Anti-Aircraft (for other types of vehicles, the division of rewards by class will not be used) has been removed. ***All newly obtained universal back-up vehicles, orders and wagers will now have validation time to be activated and expiration time (for orders). All relevant data added to their description. ***Attention: all previously obtained universal back-up vehicles, orders and wagers to be used within a lengthy period of time, as now stated in their description.
    155 points
  5. 139 points
  6. Aside from the obvious " To make people play more " do we have another justification for this? I heavily disagree with this change.
    109 points
  7. It really does seem like they want to do everything they possibly can to hurt the people giving them money. It's really quite incredible. I almost wonder if Gaijin/War Thunder is actually some sort of elaborate international Stockholm syndrome study.
    97 points
  8. I think it is time to address one of the biggest issues that has been plaguing the game for years at this point, harming the game and its playerbase, and that has been a major complaint of thousands of players who have never been listened to, but dismissed with cold and baseless claims instead. Thousands of players are negated the right to play with certain vehicles just because they aren't considered to be "worthy" of them for not having the personal performance Gaijin with its formulas expect them to have out of their "statistics". Vehicles don't have performances. PLAYERS do. Just because lots of competitive players got to play a vehicle before me, raising its performance statistics, doesn't mean that I should be expected to perform like them, and, if I don't, then me losing thousands of SL for playing with it is deserved because "I don't perform good enough". Those Skynet formulas of Gaijin don't take into account the HUMAN FACTORS that are involved, only baseless numbers without context. This system DOES NOT WORK. I have spent time, effort and MONEY into grinding many vehicles only to have my right to play with them denied because I don't have a pro player's performance because apparently vehicles are magical wonder-machines that earn statistics by themselves. I deserve my RIGHT to play these vehicles even if I am not the Doomslayer and I am here to demand this right in the name of all the players that, like me, are being neglected and denied the right to play the vehicles we like and HAVE EARNED. Some of us are just casual players who want to have some fun with War Thunder after arriving home from work or school. Yet Gaijin PUNISHES us for not being top-performance competitive players like the ones who got to play certain vehicles before us. What are we, expected to take War Thunder as a job in order to earn our right to play the vehicles that we enjoy!? Here's the thing: we are stuck in a neverending cycle that, unless we use some logic, will NEVER end: 1- top players get and perform well with a vehicle. 2- said vehicle gets extreme repair costs because "it performs good according to statistics". 3- no player that isn't a top player can play with that vehicle because they lose thousands of SL because its repair cost was based on the top players' performances. 4- the vehicle's performance statistics keep increasing as less and better players play it every time. I personally guarantee you that, if you gave, for example, Strv 122s a minimally decent repair cost, their performance would drop DRASTICALLY as more average players like me would at last be able to play with them, just in a matter of days. I am TIRED of having the Strv 122s collecting dust in the hangar just because Gaijin thinks it's fine to FORBID me to play with it because "if I don't have a 5:1 KD/R and 90% WR with it it's my problem because according to sTaTiStIcS that should be a typical value for a player using this vehicle". I am using Strv 122 as an example because it's been more than a year since I spent 60 GJN and 1 month of grind with a vehicle that I hated just to get it and yet I still can't play it, but same goes for many vehicles in many ranks accross all the trees. Repair costs should be based, if anything, on the objective capabilities each vehicle’s technical specifications grant them for their time compared to their contemporaries, not in player performance.
    68 points
  9. Does this mean more or less rp in the grand scheme of things? (probably less) Come on, nobody asked for this, nobody wants this, let us just use our wagers when we want to. This, in combination with the GE wagers not being given out any longer, just seems like yet another way to weed out ways to grind more efficiently Points for dying? who thought this was a good idea? the current system is fine, surviving a shot should be rewarded, not dying
    64 points
  10. Why can't you guys just leave things alone and stop screwing with everything every single time. Now backups and wagers expire? Why? What good reason is this happening? Also changing SP numbers AGAIN. Why? Why can't you just leave things alone. Continually to "tweak" them doesn't always mean a good correction. Just stop. Every time I turned around you guys are changing stuff, I still haven't learned what SP or BR bracket I'm in when entering tank matches because its SP numbers are changed every week. Is that so we stop leaving matches when uptiered? THEN STOP GIVING CONSTANT UPTIERS. You guys could ruin a wet dream.
    48 points
  11. Wagers/orders/backups expiring is a terrible change that will overshadow the good stuff in this update. Please reconsider.
    46 points
  12. Please don't go trough with this. I have ~120 backups, and I usually activate 5 on each vehicle it runs out on. I don't want to use all my backups just because they "expire". This feature is annoying as it is with boosters, we don't need our wagers, backups. Also golden wagers. Pardon me, but I don't really have the time to play 15-20-25 matches in one sitting with 3 of my friends on a daily basis, and I certainly don't want them to just disappear into thin air. Seriously? I'm gonna get punished for being undertiered? Why would you think this is a good idea? Literally why. It's gonna be next to impossible to get the 2900 points in a match Special task Edit: My client progress on the Dev server is from JUNE. I got 10-15 vehicles in that time period. I cannot test drive several vehicles because of this. Please update player data during these open dev servers, because being TWO PATCHES behind in progress is just ridiculous.
    46 points
  13. This is a incredibly bad move, and is only causing ill-will from your player base. Retract the planned change, apologize, and move on. Simple as.
    38 points
  14. 37 points
  15. If I understood it correctly, that it will have expiration time like boosters, I want to hear atleast one argument, why are you planning to make our lifes much harder in War Thunder. There are people that have tons of wagers and back-ups collected through years and I'm asking, what is a logical point of adding expiration time to them?
    36 points
  16. Fun fact, I was the voice of some of the crew in the teaser, along with @Scarper8)
    32 points
  17. ***All newly obtained universal back-up vehicles, orders and wagers will now have validation time to be activated and expiration time (for orders). All relevant data added to their description. ***Attention: all previously obtained universal back-up vehicles, orders and wagers to be used within a lengthy period of time, as now stated in their description. Please don't do this. If there is one thing that I hate, it's timers on everything that we have to do. WE DO NOT NEED MORE TIMERS, instead will be nice to remove the actual timers on the RP/SL boosters.
    30 points
  18. Greetings members of the War Thunder Sim community! Over the past year we have seen some radical changes come to War Thunder, with many of them having a large effect on the Air Simulator game mode. Unfortunately, many of these changes have not been well received by a majority of this community, and in our effort to make our voices heard we penned an open letter to the developers. This was a very positive move; united as a group, our voice was louder and it was heard. However, change is not a quick nor easy process, and currently it feels like the game mode is wallowing in limbo. I know first hand that many veterans of the community have moved on from the game, or are considering it, as the state of the Air Simulator mode continues to deteriorate. I do not want to see this small, but passionate, community fade away into insignificance. Despite its faults, I adore this game mode, and wish to see it improve and flourish. War Thunder sim has massive potential, no other flight sim (and yes, whatever your opinion I do classify this mode as a type of flight sim) has the exposure that War Thunder does, nor the affordability or the variety of aircraft. To make change easier, and indeed make it the best change for the community in general, the developers need a clear picture. And yes, I know there are many, many, many forum posts ranting and raving about the multitude of issues. However we need to *condense* our feedback down to a single source that can be easily viewed and analysed. To this end I have constructed a survey, one that I hope everyone will partake in. PLEASE COMPLETE THE SURVEY HERE The aim of this survey is to collect the opinions of the player-base in regards to recent major changes, as well as collect some hard information on the player base in general (I.E how many of us still play war thunder, do we feel encouraged to spend money on the game, how often do we play sim, etc). The survey will be open for approximately two weeks. At the conclusion of the survey, all information will be placed into a spreadsheet. Myself and a few assistants will analyse all submissions and submit the results along with a report of the findings, with the intention that this information is passed on to the relevant devs. Forum topics are all well and good, but if you want to improve your chances of seeing positive changes here I implore you to fill in this survey. If we are able to present a clear, and meaningful set of information to the developers, the chance for change is greatly increased. Many thanks in advance,
    27 points
  19. As always good changed overshadowed by horrendous ones. These can go pound sand: So less points in downtiers and no additional points in uptiers? If a Puma rushes a cap, I kill him after he caps I get jack all in spawn points and he can return in a G.91 to kill me and 3 others? God forbid anyone gets passive points for just existing, why should I not get proximity points if I'm participating in a furball, one of the most enjoyable types of chaotic combat? More clarity on the 30% is needed as its vague and confusing but again, why gimp how much points we earn for dealing out damage? Are you just trying to make it impossible to do special tasks and dailies where you need to get a score above a certain number? God forbid players make money in this wretched economy, does Gaijin enjoy pissing players off that much? But this THIS This can go down a deep dark hole and never return. If I stockpile them I can chose when and how I use them. This is a slap in the face to your veteran players who play the game more than anyone and stockpile backups and whatnot to use them when they feel they need them. This is unacceptable and needs to get kicked out the window now.
    25 points
  20. “Best Squad” — The number of unsuccessful attempts have been changed from 4 to 3, the maximum reward has been changed from 500,000 SL to 250,000 SL............JUST WHY ?!!!!
    19 points
  21. The Strv 103C has a dozer modeled in game but it it does not appear to be functional. Is this intentional or could this vehicle have been forgotten?
    19 points
  22. No. Don't do it. Don't even think about doing it. Forget that you ever wanted to do this. It's a terrible change, we don't need it, we don't want it, it's unnecesary and wrong.
    18 points
  23. What can we do now? Interaction with the terrain and changing its shape is one of the main features of the upcoming "Ground Breaking" update. This is an additional element of interactivity that diversifies the gameplay in War Thunder tank battles. Soil, sand and snow are now not only authentically crushed under the tracks of tanks - you can dig out shelters, and bombs leave huge craters! Ramparts and craters will now create cover for vehicles and can seriously change the usual routes in War Thunder locations - both for you and the enemy team. Ground vehicles and dozer blades Many armies of the world make use of dozer blades on tanks. For example, in the Soviet army, from the T-72 onwards, equipment for self-entrenching was installed on all main battle tanks and some armored vehicles, and a corresponding standard appeared in the training of tank crews. Many western tanks have dozer blades both in the basic configuration and in modifications for street fighting or engineering purposes. Dozer blades and tank shovels are present on many ground vehicles in War Thunder as well, and in the "Ground Breaking" update, all of them will receive an animation of the blades sinking into the ground. Using the entrenchment equipment players will be able to quickly build tank trenches anywhere in a game location, where there are no buildings, rocks, boulders, ice or paved roads around. Entrench! Put the dozer blade down and rake an earthen dugout in front of you. Take it back and repeat the procedure again and again. When self-entrenching, the speed of the tank decreases due to the lowered blade, so it is advisable not to be seen by the enemy during mining operations. A few rolls - and the trench is ready. A long-term firing position with a tank inside appears literally in an open field: be it the Kursk steppes, the pastoral fields of the Maginot Line, the sands of desert maps or the snowy plains of winter locations. The tank hides its vulnerable hull, meeting enemy fire only with a turret. In addition, a tank hiding in a trench is much more difficult to hit! However, the earthwork is not an absolute shelter - you can penetrate it with a powerful kinetic or shape-charged projectile, but the thicker the earthworks are, the more difficult it is to get through. Bomb craters Now ammunition with a significant mass of explosives leaves craters on the soft terrain in tank locations. Air bombs weighing approximately 50kg or above, heavy rockets and missiles form a pit, the diameter and depth of which depend on the mass of the explosives. For example, a small armored car or self-propelled gun will fit into a crater from a 250kg bomb, and a crater from a 5,000 kg Pe-8’s “Tzar Bomb" will easily cover several heavy tanks at once. In the bomb craters you can hide from enemy fire, and lifting from the bottom of a deep hole to its rim can become a problem for vehicles with poor off-road performance. Explosion craters can significantly affect gameplay, making it difficult to access certain positions or providing cover in open areas.
    18 points
  24. does the dev team even understand that they only get food on the table if they keep the players happy. they are a service provider, unlike a car company or a food company, people will be able to live without them. these changes to wagers and backups show that they really need to be reminded of this. That they even need to be screamed at in formus is a really bad sign. i hope they learn it this time, and as many before me said: changing the same stuff every update will just alianate everyone. DONT DO THAT. as for the rest, looks solid, especially the naval changes, heads up for this
    17 points
  25. DH A/T/B US : 4/1/2 : 7 GE : 2/1/2 : 5 RU : 2/1/2 : 5 UK : 2/1/5 : 5 JP : 2/5/2 : 9 CN : 1/1/0 : 2 IT : 1/1/2 : 4 FR : 1/0/0 : 1 SW : 2/1/0 : 3 RS A/T/B US : 2/0/2 : 4 GE : 1/2/1 : 4 RU : 3/1/1 : 5 UK : 1/1/1 : 3 JP : 1/1/0 : 2 CN : 1/3/0 : 4 IT : 1/1/1 : 3 FR : 1/1/0 : 2 SW : 1/1/0 : 2 IS A/T/B US : 1/1/0 : 2 GE : 1/2/1 : 3 RU : 3/2/1 : 5 UK : 1/11/1 : 13 JP : 1/1/1 : 3 CN : 1/1/0 : 2 IT : 1/3/1 : 5 FR : 1/2/0 : 3 SW : 1/1/0 : 2 HT A/T/B US : 3/0/1 : 4 GE : 1/2/1 : 4 RU : 1/1/1 : 3 UK : 2/1/1 : 4 JP : 0/1/2 : 3 CN : 1/2/0 : 3 IT : 2/0/1 : 3 FR : 2/1/0 : 3 SW : 2/1/0 : 3 Total US : 17 GE : 16 RU : 18 UK : 25 JP : 17 CN : 10 IT : 15 FR : 9 SW : 10 So yeah... france is last, what are you gonna say now ?
    17 points
  26. Guys its not funnny to leak classified Documents of modern equipment you put the lives of many on stake who work daily with the Vehicles! Keep in Mind that those documents will be deleted immediately alongside sanctions. Thanks for reading!
    17 points
  27. 2.9.0.99 → 2.10.0.14 changes (first dev server) Part 3&4: A-4E – added a radar to its DM. (non-functional) AH-1Z, AH-64 (all), Ka-52, Mi-28N, Mi-35M, Apache AH. Mk. 1, G-LYNX, Lynx AH. Mk. 1, A129, A129 CBT, EC-665 (all) – TV tracker changed to IR tracker. AV-8 (all), Harrier (all) – 30 mm ammo: 200 → 130 rpg. F-4C – empty weight: 13.900 → 13.190 kg. F7F (all), P-38 (all) – 12.7 mm changed to late version. (higher accuracy, slower overheating, different belts) P-63C-5 (all): wing-mounted 12.7 mm ammo – 200 → 250 rpg nose-mounted 12.7 mm ammo – 250 → 200 rpg PV-2D – ventral turret: horizontal limits – -12° / 12° → -25° / 8° vertical limits – -25° / 8° → -12° / 12° I-185 (all) – rockets and 100 kg bombs now drop separately. Mi-24A – new cockpit. MiG-21bis – countermeasures are now considered external. MiG-27M: countermeasures changed to larger ones sight view : horizontal limits – -38° / 38° → -160° / 15° vertical limits – -55° / 38° → -90° / 90° Pe-2-83, Pe-2-110, Pe-2-205, Pe-2-359 (all) – 7.62 ShKAS ammo: 430 → 450. Boomerang (all): added a 3 mm armour breakoff points of the wings and tail changed added a central gear Phantom FG. 1 – empty weight: 14.200 → 13.490 kg. Phantom FGR. 2 – empty weight: 14.140 → 13.430 kg. F-1, T-2 – at sea level 1800 km/h TAS – thrust and torque coefficients lowered. Ki-100-II – fuel tanks are now separate. BR.20 (all) – the Airframe mod no longer has positive effects on max speed and turn time. Mirage III (all) – oil cooler added to their DMs. Super Mystère B2 – max parachute speed: 350 → 310 km/h. A 32A – loadouts changed: 1x 500 kg + chaff → 3x 500 kg + chaff 1x 600 kg + chaff → 3x 600 kg + chaff B 17A – 50 kg bombs now drop separately. M26, M26 (T99), M26E1, T26E4-1, Tiger II(H) (all), IS-7, Centurion Mk. 5 AVRE, Olifant (all), M26 (132ª Div.Cor.), Strv 104 – mantlet is now volumetric. M42 (all) – added a second reverse gear, ratio of the first forward gear increased. M47 (all), Type 87 RCV, Lvkv 9040C – the machine gunner is now a substitute of the commander. Fla.Rak.Pz. 1 – drowning check height multiplier: 0.6 → 0.35. Leopard 2 A4, VBT Mk. 7, Strv 121 – UFP and LFP composites merged, UFP: 520 → 400 mm. (X-Ray shows wrong data) Leopard 2 A5, Leopard 2 A6, Strv 122 (all): armour over the breech: 35 → 5 mm armour over the UFP right before the turret: 14 → 35 mm M 48 A2 C: 90 mm ammo – 46 → 64 ready-rack was therefore increased by 12 reload time multiplier when reloading from normal rack – 1.28 → 1.33 Panssarivaunu 272-1 [aka KV-1B], KV-1E, – 7.62 mm ammo: 1890 → 3024. Pz. IV/70(A) – recoil offset: 0 → 0.3. Pz. IV/70(V) – recoil offset: 0.05 → 0.3. Sd.Kfz. 234/4, Sd.Kfz. 251/22 – added shell ejection. 9P157-2: max engine RPM – 2900 → 2600 brake force – 100.000 → 130.000 added 2 reverse and 3 forward gears gear ratios changed ASU-85, BM-8-24, PT-76B, T-60, T-70, ZUT-37, Ka-Chi, PGZ80, ZTS60, ZTS63-1, ZTZ59D1, ZTZ69, T-69 II G – now have Hot Tracks tracks. BMD-4 – used the BMP-3's user skins, this was fixed. BMP-3 – sight with the Sodema modification: zoom out FoV – 10° → 29.8° zoom in FoV – 9.21° → 6.14° sight FoV – 5° → 14° BT-7 (all): arcade turn power multiplier – 1.2 → 1.1 arcade power multiplier – 1 → 1.2 IS-7 – now the entire turret is volumetric. PT-76B, ZTS60 – armour over the engine deck: 6 → 5 mm. T-64BV – horizontal limits of the 12.7 mm: -180° / 180° → -95° / 95°. Avenger – bottom of the turret rear: 38.1 → 20 mm. Centurion Mk. 3, Strv 81 – new 10 mm armour around the grille over the engine deck. Challenger 2 (2F) – roof MG is now controlled by the loader, added a deadzone around the commander's optic. Chieftain Mk. 5 – 120 mm ammo: 53 → 54. Conway – armour around the grille over the engine deck: 14 and 38 → 29 mm. Staghound AA Mk. I – 12.7 mm ammo: 1305 → 1400. TTD: spall shields can now be hidden in X-Ray added a spall shield between the engine and the crew ZA 35 – gunner optics is now part of the DM, 19 mm aluminium 5083. Type 16 – 40 mm turret composite → 5 mm RHA. Type 60 APC (Type 64): UFP, cheeks – 20 → 16 mm LFP – 20 → 18 mm armour around the machine gun port – 20 → 16 mm upper side – 12.7 → 14 mm lower side – 12.7 → 16 mm rear – 20 → 14 mm front half of the top – 10 → 8 mm driver's hatch – 20 → 8 mm gunner's cupola – 10 → 12 mm floor – 10 → 12 mm 7.62 mm – ammo: 3000 → 1500 12.7 mm: controller – gunner → commander ammo – 2500 → 800 Type 61 – vertical limits of the 12.7 mm: -10° / 40° → -10° / 25°. Type 89: 35 mm: now autoloaded vertical limits – -9° / 60° → -10° / 35° final forward gear is now a bit longer CM-11 – turret front: 173 → 150 mm, now the entire turret is volumetric. CM-25, M113A1 (TOW) (all): horizontal speed – 18 °/s → 30 °/s vertical speed – 18 °/s → 30 °/s horizontal speed with emptied battery – 8 °/s → 30 °/s vertical speed with emptied battery – 8 °/s → 30 °/s WMA301 – size of ready-rack increased by 3. AB.41 – steering deflection: 30° → 20°. Sherman Mk. Ic (IT) – 76 mm ammo – 77 → 71. AMX 30R – drowning check height multiplier: 0.6 → 0.4. AMX 50 – UFP: 80 → 90 mm. EBR (all): barrel – 20 → 30 mm engine sound – Chaffee M24 → StuG "track" sound – light → EBR wheels last reverse gear is now a bit longer CV 90120 – horsepower: 670 → 800. ItO 90M (all) – drowning check height multiplier: 0.5 → 0.25. Pbv 301: UFP – 15 → 20 mm LFP – 15 → 50 mm lower side – 8 → 15 mm gunner's cupola – 8 → 15 mm turret – 8 → 10 mm 20 mm – vertical limits: -9° / 40° → -15° / 48° Strf 9040 (all) – medium tank → light tank. Strv 103-0 – 7.62 mm ammo: 1375 → 500. Strv 103A, Strv 103C: coaxial 7.62 mm ammo – 1375 → 500 roof 7.62 mm ksp 58 ammo – 1375 → 1500 Strv 122B (PLSS) – 120 mm ammo: 42 → 37 mm. There are new codes regarding ricochet angles on water, but it doesn't seem to fully function at the moment. Battleships, battlecruisers, heavy cruisers, light cruisers, destroyers, frigates, minesweepers, gunboats, aircraft carriers: compartments, bridge – 1.45 → 2.2 mm superstructures: can no longer be damaged by fire can now catch fire from shrapnel fire chance when hit by explosions increased radio station: 1.45 → 2.2 mm can no longer be damaged by fire can now catch fire from shrapnel fire chance when hit by explosions increased ready-rack: 7 → 2.2 mm fire protection HP – 10 → 3 fire damage multiplier – 1.5 → 1 shell storage: 7 → 2.2 mm armour quality against shrapnel – 2 → 1 fire protection HP – 7 → 11 fire damage multiplier – 1.5 → 1 explosion chance when hit by fire increased can now catch fire from being hit by fire much lower explosions are enough to make it explode or set it on fire charge storage: 2 → 2.2 mm fire protection HP – 6 → 11 fire damage multiplier – 2.5 → 1 fire chance when hit by fire increased much lower damage explosions are enough to make it explode or set it on fire auxiliary ammo storage: 3 → 2.2 mm fire chance when hit by shrapnel lowered elevators: 10 → 2.2 mm fire protection HP – 5 → 11 fire damage multiplier – 1.1 → 1 HP increased fire chance when hit by fire increased fire chance when hit by explosions lowered fire chance when hit by KE lowered main calibre turrets: 3 → 2.2 mm fire damage multiplier – 1.5 → 1 auxiliary calibre turrets – 3 → 2.2 mm AA calibre turrets – 6 → 2.2 mm torpedoes: 5 → 2 mm HP increased explosion chance when hit by fire lowered transmissions: 25.4 mm "engine" → 16 mm structural steel fire protection HP – 10 → 0 explosion damage multiplier – 1 → 1.5 can now catch fire from explosions engine rooms: 10 mm "engine" → 16 mm structural steel fire protection HP – 6 → 0 fire damage multiplier – 1 → 2.65 explosion damage multiplier – 1 → 1.5 shrapnel damage multiplier – 1 → 1.5 can now catch fire from explosions bottom of the ship – 25.4 → 20 mm Wyoming (BB-32) – rear armour of the stern: 115 → 203.2 mm. Dreadnought: armour over the bridge and the radio station – 51 mm RGA → 76.2 mm RHA elevator of the radio station – 102 mm → 101.6 mm the bridge and the radio station now have 101.6 mm floors deck armour after the fourth turret – 70 mm → 76.2 mm Invincible – rear armour of the bridge: 76.2 → 177.8 mm. Norfolk (78) – horizontal limits of the torpedo launchers: 0° / 179.5° → 0° / 180°. York (90): top armour of the shell storage – 50.8 → 63.5 mm front and rear armour of the shell storage – 25.4 → 63.5 mm side armour of the shell storage – 114.3 → 102 mm side armour of the auxiliary shell storage – 88.9 → 25.4 mm armour in front of the engine and after the transmission – 25.4 → half 63.5 mm, half 25.4 mm bulkheads between storages – 76.2 → 63.5 mm HEI, HEFI, HEF-T, HEI-T shrapnel radius scales increased for the following: 20 mm – GIAT M621, M24A1, M39 (all), M61 (all), M195, M197, Oerlikon KAD-B, T160 30 mm – ADEN (all), akan m/55, akan m/75, DEFA (all), GAU-13/A, Hispano-Suiza 825, Oerlikon-Bührle KCA 37 mm – Cannone Breda da 39/45 Mod. 39 30 mm Model 30-1 – HEFI of the default loadout now uses the demarre formula. 30 mm NR-30: default belt – T / HEFI, APHE → HEFI / HEFI-T / AP-T / APHE armoured targets – T / APHE / APHE → APHE / AP-T air targets – T / HEFI / HEFI / HEFI → AP-T / HEFI-T / HEFI-T penetration – 60 → 54 mm (ground weaponry) HESH: fuse sensitivity – 0.1 → 4 mm fuse delay – 0.05 → 0.1 m Starshell: radius – 1700 → 2000 intensity – 1600 → 2000 FI-T, HE, HEF, HEFI, HEFI-T, HEI-T shrapnel radius scales increased for the following: (the list might contain vehicles with unused HE) 15 mm – M.G. 151 S. 20 mm – akan m/40B, akan m/45B, Cannone-Mitragliera Breda da 20/65 Mod. 35, Cannone-Mitragliera Scotti-IF da 20/70 Mod. 41, Fla.K. 38, GI-2, GIAT M693, Kw.K. 30, Kw.K. 38, M168, Oerlikon FF, Oerlikon KAD, pvlvkan m/40, Rh202, Type 98 23 mm – 2A7 25 mm – 72-K, LW25, M242, Oerlikon KBA, PG87 30 mm – HSS 831A, HSS 831L, L21E2 35 mm – GA-35, Oerlikon KDA, Oerlikon KDE, PG99 37 mm – 2A11, 61-K, Fla.K. 36, Fla.K. 44, Kw.K. 34(t), Kw.K. 36, Kw.K. 38(t), M1A2, M3, M5, M6, Pa.K. 36, PG65, SH-37 40 mm – 37/42M, akan m/70B, Bofors L/60, lvakan m/36, lvakan m/48, M1, M266, T1 Mle. 51 57 mm – Bofors L/70 Mk. 1 7.62 mm Type 74: rate of fire – 500 → 700 rpm AP speed – 853 → 750 m/s T speed – 835 → 750 m/s 12.7 mm M3P – rate of fire: 900 → 1100 rpm. 15 mm M.G. 151 S., 20 mm akan m/45B – HEFI-T shrapnel radius scales increased. 75 mm SA 35 – APHE speed: 500 → 470 m/s. 105 mm Bofors, kan strv 104 – slpprj m/62 APDS speed: 1450 → 1400 m/s. 105 mm L7A1 (Centurion Mk. 10, VBT Mk. 1, VBT Mk. 3), kan strv 103 (Strv 103C only) – L35 HESH speed: 730 → 720 m/s. 120 mm L11A1, L11A5, L30A1 – L37A7 HESH CE damage range: 167 → 152 mm. RP-3 (ground) – KE penetration at 10 m: 5 → 26 mm. M220A2 TOW Weapon System (CM-25, M113A1 (TOW), Begleitpanzer 57), Rbs 55 (Pvrbv 551 (all)) – reload time: 12 → 10 sec. M220A2 Dual Launcher TOW Weapon System (VCC-80 Dardo, M3A3 CFV) – added TOW-2A, but neither can currently use it. HN-6, Type 91: lock range from rear aspect – 7 → 6 km lock range from all aspect – 4.5 → 6 km Mistral SATCP: lock range from rear aspect – 6.5 → 6 km lock range from all aspect – 4 → 6 km flare detection range – 5 → 6 km gate width – 1 → 1.5 (naval weaponry) HE: water now detonates it shrapnel radius scales increased SAPBC, SAPCBC: shrapnel count increased shrapnel radius scale increased shrapnel penetration scale lowered shrapnel damage scale lowered 5-inch/54 Mk. 42 – Mk. 41 HC-VT drag coefficient: 1 → 0.93. (bombs) RGB-12: weight at end of burn – 30 → 66.6 kg length – 1.35 → 1.24 m drag coefficient – 0.1 → 0.75 force of booster – 8000 → 16.500 N burn time of booster – 3.5 → 0.53 sec start speed – 180 → 0 m/s end speed – 260 → 120 m/s RGB-25: weight at end of burn – 33 → 76 kg drag coefficient – 0.1 → 0.75 force of booster – 8000 → 27.000 N burn time of booster – 3.5 → 0.53 sec range – 2800 → 2500 m start speed – 180 → 0 m/s end speed – 260 → 180 m/s RGB-60: weight – 113 → 113.5 kg weight at end of burn – 45 → 97.5 kg drag coefficient – 0.1 → 0.75 force of booster – 10.000 → 40.000 N burn time of booster – 3 → 0.72 sec thrust deviation – 0.04 → 0.003 start speed – 200 → 0 m/s end speed – 300 → 275 m/s KAB-500Kr: guidance – optical → IR it can now lock on ground vehicles as well, with a range of 6 km (rockets, missiles and countermeasures) Chaff (normal) – life time: 20 → 15 sec. Jet countermeasures – max deviation: 15° → 25°. AGM-22 – guidance range: 3 → 3.5 km. AGM-65A: lock range – 20 → 6 km it can now lock on the ground as well, with a range of 10 km AGM-65B: lock range – 20 → 12 km it can now lock on the ground as well, with a range of 10 km PARS 3 LR – it can now lock on the ground as well, with a range of 10 km. Kh-29T: guidance – optical → IR range – 20 → 15 km max lock angle before launch – 30° → 55° gimbal limit – 60° → 58° track rate – 2.5 °/s → 7 °/s AIM-9L: lock range from rear aspect – 6.5 → 6 km flare detection range – 4 → 6 km AIM-92A ATAS: lock range from rear aspect – 7 → 6 km lock range from all aspect – 4.5 → 6 km gate width – 0.5 → 1.25 Mistral SATCP: lock range from rear aspect – 6.5 → 6 km lock range from all aspect – 4 → 6 km flare detection range – 5 → 6 km gate width – 1 → 1.5 9M39V: lock range from all aspect – 4 → 6 km flare detection range – 5 → 6 km gate width – 0.7 → 1 AIM-9B, Shafrir-1, Rb 24 – flare detection range: 4 → 10 km. AIM-9B FGW. 2: flare detection range: 4 → 8 km lock range from rear aspect: 4 → 5.5 km min angle to the Sun: 20° → 10° AIM-9D, AIM-9E, AIM-9G, AIM-9J, AIM-9P, R-13M1, Firestreak, R530E, R550, Rb 24J – flare detection range: 4 → 8 km. R-3S, PL-2: flare detection range – 3.5 → 8.7 km max lock range – 7 → 8 km R-13M: flare detection range: 4 → 8 km max lock range: 7 → 11 km min angle to the Sun: 20° → 10° R-23T – flare detection range: 11 → 15 km. R-60 – flare detection range: 4 → 7.5 km. R-60M: flare detection range: 4 → 5 km min angle to the Sun: 10° → 7° Red Top – flare detection range: 4 → 7 km. SRAAM – flare detection range: 4 → 6 km. PL-5B: flare detection range: 4 → 8 km max lock range: 7 → 11 km New video setting – DLSS Sharpness. New option – enable_laser_designatior_before_launch. 393+ GPUs were put on an "old hardware" list. It is unknown what its purpose is. (link) Spain, Vietnam – bridges moved, their numbers lowered. [Race] Deadly Banking (long) – waypoint circles moved. [Air Sim EC] Afghanistan – airfields, their AA and their spawns moved at 7.7+. Breslau – map borders changed. Currently UNUSED new loadouts: F-4E 2x AGM-62A + 4x AIM-9E 2x AGM-62A + 4x AIM-9J MiG-21 PFM SPSK 32x S-5K 2x R-13M 4x R-13M 2x R-60 4x R-60 MiG-23MLD (currently doesn't use any loadout) 4x S-24B 40x S-8KO 64x S-5K (x2) 16x 100 kg 4x 250 kg OFAB-250sv 4x 250 kg FAB-250-M62 2x 500 kg FAB-500-M54 2x 500 kg FAB-500-M62 2x Kh-23M 2x R-23R 2x R-23T 2x R-24R 2x R-24T 4x R-3S 4x R-13M1 6x R-60M 8x R-60 Jaguar GR. 1A 3x 1000 lbs AJ 37 2x 30 mm 2x 30 mm + 2x Rb 24 2x 30 mm + 2x Rb 24J 4x Rb 05A Mi-28NM 4x GSh-23 80x S-8KO 20x S-13 8x 9M120 16x 9M120 8x 9M39V Currently UNUSED new weapons: Navy 500 lbs GBU-38 500 lbs Mk. 82 GCS-1 750 lbs M117 GCS-1 SS.12 Rb 53 Oerlikon Oe82 (2 variants: AP and HE) (Swiss rocket, also labelled as such ("sws_"), however this does not necessarily mean that Swiss aircraft are coming.) Interesting CDK additions: GBU-12 some of the A-7E cockpit textures are labelled A-7B (This, once again, does not necessarily mean it'll come anytime soon, if at all.) duplicate F-5 textures and cockpit textures were placed into the Swedish aircraft folder (This, once again, does not necessarily mean a Norwegian F-5A will come anytime soon, if at all.) Raw changes: https://github.com/gszabi99/War-Thunder-Datamine/compare/2.9.0.99..2.10.0.14 The version shown in the launcher / client is often incorrect, as it doesn't take into account the "hidden" updates, downloaded in the background. Current dev version – 2.10.0.14 Current live version – 2.9.0.100
    16 points
  28. Just because sometimes I have to be away doesn't mean you have to make up "facts" to try and support yourself from losing in an argument that's flawed and one that should have not been ignited in the first place. The reason why the MiG-23MLD was developed is because they could and because Afghanistan taught them harsh lessons on the evolution of modern air combat, not because it was supposedly and somehow the temporary 4th gen replacement of the upcoming next generation jet fighter. As a matter of fact, the MiG-29A was more or less finalized and being delivered to the VVS in 1977, five years before the MiG-23MLD was officially inducted into service. I don't understand some of the people here. Why do you think a slatted MiG-23(M) with R-24 missiles to get the Soviets closer to your AIM-7E-2s and Skyflashes would somehow be overpowered? Do the extra two letters/suffixes in the designation really give you the loose impression that you should be terrified? Or are you frustrated that there is going to be a Soviet jet that will closely match your dogfight BVR missiles and flare count? Quite simply, compared to the MiG-23M, it has 0.5G more wing load because starting with the MiG-23ML the Flogger became lighter, actually good flare/chaff count of 72 (much needed, thank you), a much stronger engine which boosted the climb rate from 195 to 225 m/s and the top speed from 1,350 to 1,400 km/h though with all these missiles I don't think performance matters as much, leading edge dogtooth slats with vortex generators and a much better radar with range decent enough to counter the radars of the pulse doppler Phantoms and even the F-4E's radar in range. I don't think some of you know, but the RP-23D-III of the MiG-23M has this LD mode past 2000 meters which isn't particularly good at filtering ground clutter. I don't know if I want to mention the R-24R/T because even with a primary source like the Polish MiG-23MF manual they stubbornly still can't fix the R-23R/T, so sadly I think with their negative experience in this series, they'll also mess up the R-24s. But if properly implemented they will be 24G missiles with little to no tracking delay and 50 km of seeker acquisition range. The F-4J and S are more than enough to counter this Flogger variant. I think the only reason you were trying that hard to advocate for the F-16A is because you're a fan of it; exaggerating the MiG-23MLD's actual performance so your favorite plane gets added.. though I don't get it, because you want the F-16A Block 1 which only gets four AIM-9J, the block 5 which gets four to six AIM-9Js and the block 10 which finally gets AIM-7Fs. So why exactly? The late naval Phantoms are more than enough. Better than a handicapped F-16. Adding the earliest blocks of the F-16A would be like if Gaijin had first added the F-4C without its missiles at all, only with the gunpod. The F-16 is renowned as a 4th generation jet fighter with more advanced BVR and short-range weapons than the previous generation of fighters. I would rather see it first added with AIM-9Ls and AIM-7Ms against the MiG-29A with R-27Rs and R-73As. Oh yes, last note, the counterpart of the F-16 is the MiG-29, not the MiG-23MLD just because it fought off Pakistani F-16s in an alternate universe where the Indians had it. There is no record of MiG-23MLDs dogfighting Pakistani F-16As.
    15 points
  29. Please don't punish your loyal players like this. I rarely comment on changes, there's always going to be changes some people like that others will dislike. But this one, I can't see a single player being happy with this change.
    15 points
  30. @Stona Stocking up universal back ups should be left as it is right now and that change shouldn`t go to the live server at any patch
    15 points
  31. Another underwhelming update for France. A modernization of the Jaguar, that should have come way before and a ground vehicle that should have been implemented like 6 months ago. Don't even bother to add the Mirage F1, It's DoA. Give us the Mirage 2000. And yes I'm salty, The Mirage F1 is a famous aircraft that should have been there for a year already.
    15 points
  32. 2.9.0.99 → 2.10.0.14 changes (first dev server) Part 1&2: New vehicles: A-7E (US): Tier VII 10.7 after the A-7D 390.000 RP 1.060.000 SL stock rep cost – 5540 / 3400 / 7020 SL talisman – 2900 GE PT-174 (US): Tier II 1.7 1000 GE premium rep cost – 420 / 610 SL PT-658 (US): Tier III 2.7 hidden 1450 GE premium rep cost – 740 / 620 SL Mitscher (DL-2) (US): Tier II 4.3 after the 14.000 RP 55.000 SL stock rep cost – 2090 / 2780 SL talisman – 860 GE MiG-21 PFM SPSK (GER): Tier VI 9.7 gift premium rep cost – 5070 / 5070 / 5530 SL MiG-21bis-SAU (GER): Tier VII 10.3 / 11.0 / 11.0 after the MiG-21MF hidden 390.000 RP 1.060.000 SL stock rep cost – 2110 / 6220 / 13.290 SL talisman – 2900 GE Wiesel 1 A4 (M.K. 20) (GER): Tier V 7.0 after the Kugelblitz 130.000 RP 370.000 SL stock rep cost: 4610 / 6920 / 6530 SL talisman – 2200 GE Wiesel 1 A2 (TOW) (GER): Tier VI 9.0 after the Kürassier 270.000 RP 740.000 SL stock rep cost – 2570 / 3190 / 4600 SL talisman – 2700 GE Wiesel 2 (Ozelot) (GER): Tier VI 9.0 after the Flak.Pz. Gepard 1 270.000 RP 740.000 SL stock rep cost – 3610 / 4480 / 2890 SL talisman – 2700 GE MiG-23MLD (USSR): no economy data Mi-28NM (USSR): Tier VII 11.0 after the Mi-28 hidden 400.000 RP 1.030.000 SL stock rep cost – 3280 / 2220 / 3210 SL talisman – 2900 GE PT-76E (USSR): Tier IV 7.0 hidden 8020 GE premium rep cost – 2390 SL 2S25M (USSR): Tier VII 10.0 after the 2S25 390.000 RP 1.060.000 SL stock rep cost – 2510 / 2970 / 1520 SL talisman – 2900 GE Pr. 201M (USSR): Tier IV 3.7 after the Groza 100.000 RP 310.000 SL stock rep cost – 3560 / 5930 SL talisman – 1800 GE Jaguar GR. 1A (UK): Tier VII 10.7 after the Jaguar GR. 1 hidden 340.000 RP 930.000 SL stock rep cost – 2130 / 8330 / 11.840 SL talisman – 2800 GE Ystervark (UK): Tier III 4.3 after the Crusader AA Mk. I 33.000 RP 140.000 SL stock rep cost – 1190 / 1150 / 1740 SL talisman – 1200 GE Marlborough (UK): Tier V 6.7 after the Dreadnought 380.000 RP 990.000 SL stock rep cost – 29.670 / 43.670 SL talisman – 2300 GE V-12D (CN): Tier II 1.7 after the V-11G 7900 RP 10.000 SL stock rep cost – 290 / 490 / 1050 talisman – 530 GE ZTL11 (CN): Tier VII 9.3 after the PTZ89 340.000 RP 930.000 SL stock rep cost – 3040 / 3690 / 1640 SL talisman – 2800 GE VCC-80 Dardo (HITFIST) (IT): Tier VII 10.0 after the VCC-80 Dardo 340.000 RP 930.000 SL stock rep cost – 6300 / 6640 / 13.450 SL talisman – 2800 GE Tigre (IT): Tier III 4.7 1750 GE premium rep cost – 890 SL LVT-4/40 (FR): Tier II 2.3 hidden 700 GE premium rep cost: 220 / 200 / 320 SL EBR 75 (FL 11) (FR): Tier III 4.3 after the AMX 13 (FL 11) 26.000 RP 110.000 SL stock rep cost – 960 / 1080 / 1350 SL talisman – 1100 GE AJ 37 (SWE): Tier VII 10.7 after the A 32A 390.000 RP 1.060.000 SL stock rep cost – 1970 / 5150 / 17.600 SL talisman – 2900 GE Strf 9040B (SWE): Tier VI 8.3 after the Ikv 91-105 220.000 RP 590.000 SL stock rep cost – 4400 / 7970 / 13.370 SL talisman – 2600 GE "Planned" release date – 2021-10-26. Cowell (DD-547) – now hidden. Crusader AA Mk. I – Tier IV → III. New decorator – "trinket". Ground manipulation is available to everyone, but the new Protection Analysis feature is only available to Gaijin. Backups, orders and wagers now have expiration dates. New missions: [Ground Strike] and [Operation] Bourbon Island Vyborg Bay (not yet implemented naval map) Default crew placements for new players changed: M2A4 is no longer placed on the second crew by default LVT(A)(1) is now placed on the second crew by default Pz.Kpfw. II C is no longer placed on the third crew by default Pz.Kpfw. III E is now placed on the third crew by default BT-5 is no longer placed on the fourth crew by default T-26-1 is no longer placed on the fifth crew by default Vehicles needed to unlock the next Tier changed: US Tier II ships – 2 → 3 USSR Tier IV boats – 5 → 6 Dynamic campaign changes: Korean war dynamic campaign readded (unlocked by having 4 Tier V US or USSR aircraft) US vehicles – A-26 (all), AD-2, AD-4, AU-1, B-29, F2G-1, F2H-2, F3D-1, F7F (all), F9F (all), F-80 (all), F-82E, F-84 (all US), F-86 (all US), P-51D-30, XA-38 USSR vehicles – Il-10 (1947), La-9, La-11, MiG-15 (all), MiG-15bis (all), Tu-2S-44, Tu-2S-59, Tu-4, Yak-9P fixed how a lot of aircraft could appear in strange campaigns (e.g. French Yak-9T in Khalkin-Gol, or H-81A-2 in Peleliu) also changed a lot of aircrafts' years when they can appear Battle Pass S5 preliminary timeframe – 2021-11-24 → 2022-01-26. Reworked rewards (see forum changelog, they explained it better than I could). The following vehicles received dozer blades – T-64BV, T-72 (all), T-80B, T-80BVM, T-80U, T-90A, Centurion Mk. 5 AVRE, Chieftain Mk. 3, Type 74 (E), Type 90. Statcard changes: F7F (all) – one-second burst mass: 9.26 → 9.27 kg/s MiG-19PT, Su-7 (all), Su-17M2 – one-second burst mass: 13.45 → 13.38 kg/s MiG-19S – one-second burst mass: 20.18 → 20.07 kg/s MiG-21F-13 – one-second burst mass: 6.73 → 6.69 kg/s P-38 (all) – one-second burst mass: 3.58 → 3.59 kg/s P-38L (all) – one-second burst mass with gunpods: 5.74 → 5.75 kg/s Su-17M2 – one-second burst mass with gunpods: 21.35 → 21.28 kg/s BR changes: Vautour II B – AB: 10.0 → 9.7 Crusader AA Mk. I – AB: 4.7 → 4.3 Type 93 – 9.7 → 9.0 Economy changes: F-4E all 500 lbs loadouts now require the M117 mod instead of the Mk. 82 removed the Mk. 82 mod M117 – Tier II → I Mk. 83 – Tier III → II Mk. 84 – Tier IV → III added AGM-62 as Tier IV mod F-8E Tier I mod costs – RP lowered Tier II mod costs – RP lowered Tier III mod costs – RP lowered, SL increased, GE increased Tier IV mod costs – RP lowered, GE lowered MiG-19 (all), MiG-21F-13, Su-7 (all), Su-17M2 – armoured targets belt spawn cost multiplier: 1 → 1.2 MiG-21MF Tier I mod costs – RP lowered Tier II mod costs – RP lowered Tier III mod costs – RP lowered Tier IV mod costs – RP lowered, SL increased, GE increased Jaguar GR. 1 Tier I mod costs – RP lowered, GE increased Tier II mod costs – RP lowered, GE increased Tier III mod costs – RP lowered, GE increased Tier IV mod costs – RP lowered, SL lowered, GE lowered added Mk.13/18 as Tier IV mod F-4EJ Kai Tier I mod costs – GE increased Tier II mod costs – GE increased Tier III mod costs – GE increased Tier IV mod costs – RP lowered, SL lowered, GE lowered added GBU-38 JDAM as Tier IV mod BR.20 DR SB stock repair cost – 550 → 540 SL modification repair cost coefficients increased BR.20M M1 SB stock repair cost – 740 → 720 SL modification repair cost coefficients increased F-8E (FN) 2x R530 loadout now requires the R530 mod instead of the R530E 2x R530E loadout now requires the R530E mod instead of the R530 Jaguar A Compressor – Tier II → I Engine – Tier III → IV G-suit – Tier IV → III added ATLIS II as Tier I mod added BGL-400 as Tier II mod added BGL-1000 as Tier III mod added AS.30L as Tier IV mod A 32A Tier I mod costs – RP lowered, GE lowered Tier II mod costs – RP lowered, GE increased Tier III mod costs – RP lowered, SL lowered, GE lowered Tier IV mod costs – RP lowered, SL lowered, GE lowered 3x 500 kg + chaff loadout spawn cost multiplier – 1.13 → 1.25 3x 500 kg + chaff loadout: spawn cost multiplier – 1.16 → 1.25 reward multiplier – 1 → 0.71 Mi-28N Tier I mod costs – RP lowered Tier II mod costs – RP lowered Tier III mod costs – RP lowered Tier IV mod costs – RP lowered, SL lowered, GE lowered Class 3 – stereo rangefinder changed to laser rangefinder Kürassier (GER) 270.000 → 220.000 RP 740.000 → 590.000 SL crew – 210.000 → 170.000 SL expert crew – 740.000 → 590.000 SL ace crew – 1.010.000 / 2100 → 950.000 RP / 2100 GE RP multiplier – 2.26 → 2.2 Tier I mod costs – RP lowered, SL lowered Tier II mod costs – RP lowered, SL lowered Tier III mod costs – RP lowered, SL lowered, GE increased Tier IV mod costs – RP lowered, SL lowered 2S25 Tier I mod costs – RP lowered Tier II mod costs – RP lowered, GE increased Tier III mod costs – RP lowered, SL increased, GE increased Tier IV mod costs – RP lowered, SL increased, GE increased T-64BV stock repair cost – 1920 / 1780 / 3960 → 1810 / 1680 / 3750 SL Tier I mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, RP lowered, SL lowered, GE lowered Tier II mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, GE increased Tier III mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, GE increased Tier IV mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, GE increased added Dozer Blade as Tier I mod T-72A AB stock repair cost – 1820 → 1710 SL Tier I mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, RP lowered, SL lowered, GE lowered Tier II mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, GE increased Tier III mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, GE increased Tier IV mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, GE increased added Dozer Blade as Tier I mod T-72AV (TURMS-T) – added Dozer Blade as Tier I mod T-72B (Kontakt-1) SB stock repair cost – 5330 → 5080 SL Tier I mod costs – RP lowered, SL lowered, GE lowered Tier II mod costs – GE increased Tier III mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, GE increased Tier IV mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, GE increased added Dozer Blade as Tier I mod T-72B (Kontakt-5) Tier I mod costs – RP lowered, SL lowered, GE lowered Tier II mod costs – GE increased Tier III mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, GE increased Tier IV mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, GE increased added Dozer Blade as Tier I mod T-72B3 RB stock repair cost – 2200 → 2060 SL Tier I mod costs – RP lowered, SL lowered, GE lowered Tier II mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, GE increased Tier III mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, GE increased Tier IV mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, GE increased added Dozer Blade as Tier I mod T-80B stock repair cost – 1610 / 2240 / 3900 → 1520 / 2120 / 3900 SL Tier I mod costs – RP lowered, SL lowered, GE lowered Tier II mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, GE increased Tier III mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, GE increased Tier IV mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, GE increased added Dozer Blade as Tier I mod T-80BVM stock repair cost – 1800 / 3640 / 10.970 → 1690 / 3430 / 10.380 SL Tier I mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, RP lowered, SL lowered, GE lowered Tier II mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, GE increased Tier III mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, GE increased Tier IV mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, GE increased added Dozer Blade as Tier I mod T-80U AB stock repair cost – 2190 → 2070 SL Tier I mod costs – RP lowered, SL lowered, GE lowered Tier II mod costs – GE increased Tier III mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, GE increased Tier IV mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, GE increased added Dozer Blade as Tier I mod T-90A SB stock repair cost – 5660 → 5390 SL Tier I mod costs – RP lowered, SL lowered, GE lowered Tier II mod costs – GE increased Tier III mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, GE increased Tier IV mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, GE increased added Dozer Blade as Tier I mod ZTQ62 (USSR) Tier I mod costs – GE increased Tier II mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, GE increased Tier III mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, RP lowered, SL lowered, GE lowered Tier IV mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, GE increased added Smoke Grenades as Tier III mod VCC-80 Dardo Tier I mod costs – RP lowered, GE lowered Tier II mod costs – RP lowered Tier III mod costs – RP lowered, GE increased Tier IV mod costs – RP lowered, SL increased, GE increased ZT3A2 stock repair cost – 2230 / 2950 / 6500 → 2300 / 3030 / 6500 SL Tier I mod costs – GE lowered Tier II mod costs – repair cost coefficients lowered, RP increased, SL increased, GE increased Tier III mod costs – repair cost coefficients lowered, GE lowered Tier IV mod costs – repair cost coefficients lowered, GE lowered removed the Adjustment of Fire mod Centurion Mk. 5 AVRE – added Dozer Blade as Tier IV mod Chieftain Mk. 3 stock repair cost – 4500 / 7400 / 7270 → 4500 / 7050 / 6920 SL Tier I mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, GE increased Tier II mod costs – GE increased Tier III mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, GE increased Tier IV mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, RP lowered, SL lowered, GE lowered added Dozer Blade as Tier IV mod Crusader AA Mk. I 54.000 → 26.000 RP 180.000 → 110.000 SL crew – 52.000 → 32.000 SL expert crew – 180.000 → 110.000 SL ace crew – 480.000 / 710 → 320.000 RP / 480 GE stock repair cost – 6400 / 2290 / 3400 → 6400 / 1570 / 1700 SL RP multiplier – 1.66 → 1.42 mod costs – RP lowered, SL lowered, GE lowered Type 74 (E) stock repair cost – 4170 / 3600 / 7690 → 3920 / 3600 / 7260 SL Tier I mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, GE increased Tier II mod costs – GE increased Tier III mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, GE increased Tier IV mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, RP lowered, SL lowered, GE lowered added Dozer Blade as Tier IV mod Type 90 AB stock repair cost – 2960 → 2780 SL Tier I mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, RP lowered, SL lowered, GE lowered Tier II mod costs – GE increased Tier III mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, GE increased Tier IV mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, GE increased added Dozer Blade as Tier I mod PTZ89 Tier I mod costs – RP lowered Tier II mod costs – RP lowered, SL lowered, GE lowered Tier III mod costs – RP lowered, SL increased, GE increased Tier IV mod costs – RP lowered, SL lowered ZTQ62 stock repair cost – 3600 / 5680 / 5460 → 3380 / 5350 / 5140 SL Tier I mod costs – GE increased Tier II mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, GE increased Tier III mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, RP lowered, SL lowered, GE lowered Tier IV mod costs – repair cost coefficients increased, GE increased added Smoke Grenades as Tier III mod Vietnamese language removed. New hotkey texts: Switch NVD mode [for planes] Next shell type [for ships] Sight stabilization [for targeting pods] Disable sight stabilization [for targeting pods] Entrenching: Enable / Disable [for tanks] New control text – No external fuel tanks. Text changed – SERVER IS NOT RESPONDING → CONNECTION TO THE SERVER WAS LOST. New trophy – Pack of universal backups. New unlock condition, possibly for BP S5 – A series of X players is defeated. Ikoma – max field repair time lowered. North Dakota (BB-29) – max field repair time increased. New damage model parameter – ' "groundArmorThicknessEquivalent": 0.05 '. Ship superstructures – radius scale of fire increased. Destroyer compartments: fire damage – 20 → 16 fire now has a penetration of 3 Cruiser compartments: fire damage – 30 → 20 radius scale of fire increased fire now has a penetration of 3 Battleship compartments – fire now has a penetration of 3. Ship engine room: fire damage – 30 → 112 radius scale of fire increased max fire time lowered fire now has a penetration of 3 Ship boiler room: fire damage – 40 → 60 max fire time lowered fire penetration – 7 → 3 Ship heavy turrets: fire damage – 50 → 51 max fire time increased fire penetration – 10 → 5 Ship barbettes: radius scale of fire lowered fire penetration – 30 → 5 Cruiser barbettes: fire damage – 50 → 51 radius scale of fire lowered max fire time lowered fire penetration – 30 → 5 underwater extinguish time – 20 → 10 Ship auxiliary ammo rack: radius scale of fire lowered max fire time lowered fire now has a penetration of 3 Changed a lot FX's and sound FX's, removed the cartoon and Vostok effects. Added the Halloween hangar. Raw changes: https://github.com/gszabi99/War-Thunder-Datamine/compare/2.9.0.99..2.10.0.14 The version shown in the launcher / client is often incorrect, as it doesn't take into account the "hidden" updates, downloaded in the background. Current dev version – 2.10.0.14 Current live version – 2.9.0.98
    14 points
  33. 14 points
  34. The Situation How many times has this happened to you in the last 6 months? You queue up a 5.3 aircraft, click "join battle" and within 30 seconds you queue into a game that is a full up-tier into a 6 vs 6 game with 4 bombers and an attacker on one side and mostly fighters on the other team? If you attempt to play Germany, especially at later hours on weekdays...this is an all too common experience for you. You end up in a small lobby, on a large map, and you are the only fighter plane on your team in an up-tier. At best...you might get another fighter on your team to help reduce some of the burden...but there is a greater than 50% chance that your 2nd fighter is going to be a Do-335 variant that will full commit to a head on and die. If you play USA, you have probably ended up on the opposite end of this line-up with varying mixes of fighters, attackers, and bombers...but probably with a bias towards teams predominantly made of F2G players. Why is it this way? The basic problem is multi-faceted, The most viable way for a lot of players to grind through a tech tree and earn silver lions is to load up a Ju-288 and bomb bases in Air RB. The fact that the Ju-288 is basically the easiest bomber to make a net positive is just due to the fact that where it currently sits in battle rating makes it virtually impossible to intercept before it drops it's bomb load. The only skill set required to grind RP and SL in the Ju-288 is to fly straight at a base, and press the bomb release button when the bombsight crosses a marker, and then make a 180 degree turn towards your base to get more bombs. The skill floor is actually so low that it can be automated with a script. That is exactly what happened with automated T-18 accounts that were grinding Sweden's tech trees to claim the golden eagle referral bonus. The matchmaker prioritizes finding games quickly, and Ju-288 spam has a disproportionate effect on the number of lobbies that are created. Here's how the matchmaker basically works, It takes all of the players in the queue and tries to put them into matches as quickly as possible. Over the past year the parameters for what is considered a viable match-up have been relaxed to the point where it's a potpourri of seemingly random nations facing each other. The other thing that Gaijin has done to the matchmaker is enable 6 v 6 matches if a full sized match cannot be found quickly. There is also a hard limit on the number of bombers on a team, which is capped at 4. Due to the fact that the 6.0 range has a disproportionately high number of Ju-288s, it means that often times the quickest way to find a match for them is to create a bunch of small lobbies. For every 4 Ju-288s in queue at any one time...that is another lobby that the game has to create to minimize the amount of time they spend in queue. And when the game creates all of these smaller lobbies, it is searching for everything else in queue to make a game that confines to the BR limit. However the BR limit only considers the upper and lower ranges, and is extremely loose. The BR limit mainly limits the number of planes that you can have at the maximum battle rating for that particular match-up, but that balance doesn't have to be symmetrical in any way. But at any one time there will not be any more than 4 planes at the maximum battle rating. This means that in a 5.0 - 6.0 match the Ju-288s on your team are occupying the top end of your match, and if you have 4 of them...it means your team cannot have any Ta-152Hs. Also due to the fact that the matchmaker looks at everything below 6.0 as being the same...it means that your team can be nothing but 5.0 planes in the worst case scenario and nothing but 5.7 planes in the best case. Remember how I just said that the max BR doesn't have to be symmetrical? Just because the enemy team has a 4 planes at max BR does not mean that your team will also have the same number of planes at max BR. This problem can become especially prevalent in 5.3 - 6.3 games where you have the possibility of being dragged into a game where your team composition is primarily Ju-288s facing off against a team of only 6.3 - 6.0s. What problems does this create? The most obvious problem this creates is that an entire battle rating range just tends to be non-competitive without a dedicated team. It ruins the game for both sides as well because typically these smaller games will result in one side being stomped due to a simple numbers game. And the propensity for one side to be on the receiving end of a stomping means that players will leave that bracket. Small 6 v 6 games are not fun for either side...but the ultimate result is a dwindling population which further exacerbates the problem. Less people to fill up full games means that the matchmaker creates smaller games more often. These smaller games that suck fighters into up-tiers also has the negative effect of reducing battle ratings for planes that are normally viable when they are primarily fighting with a roughly equal proportions of up-tiers and down-tiers, and planes that are more viable in full games. In the last 3 months we have seen every single Do.335 variant fall in BR in spite of flight model changes that were drastically positive. The only puzzling exception is the rise in battle rating of the Bf.109 G-10...but this might be due to the fact that it is a foldered plane so there might be a tendency for more experienced players to play it, or people that primarily play while squadded will skew the statistics. Similar Problems Across BR Ranges The tendency of grinders to effect the matchmaker and balance of the game is not solely just Ju-288 spam, but it is the most prevalent example of it it. Any place in the matchmaker where there is a popular vehicle that is spammed by lower skilled players, or players that are basically not playing competitively is bad for the game. Planes that were previously balanced like the Spitfire Mk.22 and Mk.24 are moving up in battle rating partially due to the ease of stomping premium F2G players on one side, and Ju-288 bases teams on the other. While the F2G has moved down 2 BR increments since it's introduction, and I doubt anyone will hardly be surprised when if it moves down to 5.7 BR. It is not limited to prop planes or bombers either. We can see in the latest balancing decisions. Planes like the A4E are going to be below their technologically inferior and less capable counter-parts because they are spammed out in Air RB by players trying to bomb a base as fast as possible, or making minimal reactions to fighters around them. And the imbalance that planes like the A4E creates means that the rest of the team has to try harder to win. This means that US teams around 8.7 BRs have to try harder relative their opposition to get the same results. We also saw the exact same consequences with the introduction of the F4F-Early that completely tanked whatever team it tended to end up on once a bunch of players got it. Part of the reason, and part of the coordinated push to get the Cl-13 Mk.4 from 8.7 to 9.0 hinges on squadding up in a combination of planes that is more likely to face AFK grinders and lower skilled players in that range by guaranteeing a queue against USA players. What is eventually going to happen is that the Italian A-5 Sabre will be 2 full battle rating steps above the American A-5 Sabre. And as the A4E moves down to 8.7, it's going to be an easy frag for Ki-200s and Me-163B-0's...not because it's a worse plane...but only because it's primary opposition is going to be pilots that are basically AFK or might as well be AFK. Thanks for attending my TED Talk.
    14 points
  35. pretty much once the French get their fair share. the French tree have the potential to be one of the best tree in the game. yet we have a lot of nerfed vehicles and few addition. in the last up-date it got 1 single addition and it was a copy-paste that was uneeded and not even in the top 50 of the most wanted vehicles. i even doubt it was in the top 100. they did get the biggest fix since they was added but there still is so much bug and performance fix waiting about them. the SPAA line receive no significant up-date since the addition of the SAM system which added the Roland 1 who was a natural choice, but the ITO 90 was not needed and could be just removed without replacement and would create no complain. the addition of the SK.105 was also unwanted and was only making the AMX-13-105 less needed and unique. there is no potent SPAA before the rank 4 and nothing between the BR 4.3 and 8.3. while other tree receive unneeded SPAA to fill their rank since, such as the Sd.kfz 251/21 or ZSU-37-2 there is over 400 ground vehicles that could be added to france, of wich over 70 are SPAA. there is also a huge number of aircraft that could be added. and what France got? the F-8E crusader? rare event vehicles that was mass produced and saw long service? but it's fair, they removed the rounds those vehicles had really used to give them those that was showing poorer performance for the Sake of the balance... in the game, and that was an acknowledged fact by the statistic and some from Gaijin's moderator and developper, the French players have the Highest average skills of the game, while the German have the lowest. that fact is a indirect indicator of higher average age. more experimented player have the tendency to be more mature making them having a higher average age. meaning more purchasing power. while at the opposite the German player have the tendency to be less experimented and less mature meaning they are likely younger. the difference can be just by a few years, but yet there is much more chance for a player to own a credit card if he is 21 than if he is 14. meaning the French player can actually afford more premium but to justify more premium, they need move vehicles in their line-up. that is a missing occasion for Gaijin to exploit the potential of the French TT who is by far the most negligated. even the Japanese and Italian received more vehicles than the French in the last year
    14 points
  36. Introducing the next major update teaser for War Thunder - 'Ground Breaking'!
    14 points
  37. Guys stop with this topic! This is not funny at all! For such an action you can go to jail. The dissemination of such documents is usually followed by prosecution and up to 14 years in prison as punishment.
    14 points
  38. The only advantage my Mig 21 had against the Phantom was the delta wing, with luck I could out play a Phantom and get a kill, but the fur ball now is lasting no more than few seconds, and the Viggen has delta wing so we have nothing, meanwhile the Phantoms were upgraded and we don't have tools to fight back.
    14 points
  39. The Su-9 and Su-15 were the backbone of the IA PVO until the 80s when the MiG-23P, MiG-25P/PD/PDS and variants of the MiG-31 began replacing them. Before replacing them, they were the main capable interceptors of the Soviets, designed to replace the twin-engined Yakovlev jets (Yak-25/27/28) and the MiG-19PM. Despite the efforts, the Yak-28 showed more promise as an interceptor since it had more reliable engines and better range than the Su-9. The Su-11's production run was actually cut in favor of the Yak-28. The Su-15 came to remedy the issues of the Su-9 and Su-11, and it really did. After several projects such as the Sukhoi P-1, T-37 heavy fighter, T-49 etc, what would become the Su-15's prototype was favored. This is a continuation of the previous topic: Origins (T-37 heavy interceptor, a promising project to replace the Su-9 and Su-11 which was unexpectedly canceled) As everyone knows, the 1950s was a very troubled climate for the Soviet Union, since the West had began fielding new airborne-strike systems and long-ranged strategic bombers. The PVO was comprised mainly of MiG-17A/F and Yak-25 jets at that time (later the Yak-27 and MiG-19PM). Such jets weren't capable of intercepting strategic bombers with inadequate performance and cannons only. This is why jets such as the Yakovlev Yak-28, Sukhoi Su-9 and Su-11 were developed: high-speed, missile-armed aircraft were needed to counter the threat. However, there was an issue... Nikita Khrushchev was the head of state at that time, and he had little respect for the military aviation. During his era, 35 aircraft projects were terminated, and 21 engine programs alone in 1958 - 1959. He had a soft spot for SAM systems instead to defend the country, and when it came to desgining new aircraft, only conversions or upgrades of existing aircraft were allowed. Khrushchev's "missilisation" of the Soviet Union had a big blow on the Soviet aircraft industry that took six years to recover. Despite this climate, favor was still found in OKB-51 (Sukhoi OKB), since the Su-7 tactical fighter had been put into production and then converted to a fighter-bomber under the designation of Su-7B, while the Su-9 had just completed its acceptance trials, entering production henceforth, and the Su-11's trials had begun. Now, there was an issue with the Su-7 and Su-9. A very BIG issue. The Lyulka AL-7F and its derivatives suffered from reliability issues, mainly the AL-7F-1. In the first 1 year and a half of the Su-7's service entry, 20+ Su-7 and Su-9 examples crashed. More than half of the accidents were attributed to random engine failures, and the time between overhauls was just 25 to 50 hours. The engine was very expensive to produce, thus was available in short numbers. Moreover, the very promising and nearly complete T-37 heavy interceptor with the more reliable and powerful Tumansky R-15-300 and forming the T-3-9A interception system was very unexpectedly canceled alongside the K-9 missiles, a sad end to what was going to be a remarkable aircraft. It was obvious in 1961 that the situation was not good. Sukhoi faced yet another setback in the early 1960s: the PVO began leaning towards the new Yak-28P twin-engined interceptor, as it showed more engine reliability and safer flying. To this end, MAP (the Soviet Ministry of Aircraft Industry) demanded that the Su-11's production be cut short in heavy favor of the Yak-28P and the new Tu-128. Even more, the promising MiG-21PF from MiG began its trials. This was a blow to the Su-11, and only 108 examples were produced in total. Now Sukhoi was facing the possibility of being closed altogether again. Considering Khrushchev's attitude towards the military aviation at the time, chances of developing all-new manned combat aircraft were close to zero, and all Sukhoi could do was modernize existing designs, with hopes of them being accepted only if state-of-the-art missile systems were incorporated. (Fun fact, this is why the Su-24 was actually at first a delta-winged interceptor with a 150 - 170 km-capable radar with different proposed missile designs! When Khrushchev was ousted and replaced by Brezhnev who favored the military aviation, it was no longer disguised as an aircraft derived from the Su-15 prototype family under the designation T-58M and then became its own thing; Sukhoi finally freely explored the tactical bomber role) This is exactly the situation which led to the start of the Su-15. At that time, they weren't quite aware of it yet though. They started developing a new single-engined interceptor at their own risk under the in-house designation of "T-58". To win the support of the higher ups and avoid possible negative consequences, it was disguised as a further upgrade of the existing T-3-8M weapons system, the system which was formed by the Su-11 (see the previous thread). It was to be armed with a radar offering longer range than the RP-11 Oryol of the Su-11, and missiles with lethality increased in the kill probability and range department. OKB-339 offered the Oryol-2, a further upgrade of the RP-11, and an all-new Vikhr (Whirlwhind), a scaled down version of the Tu-128's Smerch. However, both of them were too bulky to fit inside the axisymmetrical air intake of the Su-11 so the only option was to use the entire nose section aft of the cockpit for the radar and to use lateral air intakes, which OKB-51 had gained experience in from the P-1 and T-49 experimental projects. Still, the T-58's air intake design ended up differently, featuring two-dimensional with vertical airflow control ramps, found on the F-4 Phantom and F-106 Delta Dagger. But in the Soviet Union, this design was not yet fully explored. It should also be noted that the sector-shaped isoenthropic air intakes found on the T-49 had a staunch support at TsAGI; Prof. Gersch Grodzovski, who once visited Pavel Sukhoi urging him to use such intakes on his T-58 project forming the seemingly upcoming T-3-8M3 weapons interception system, but he refused as it seemed risky. He then instructed his designers only to change the fuselage structure as far as the section after the cockpit, to ensure maximum commonalities with the Su-9 and Su-11, and minimizing production costs, to ensure the same No.153 factory would keep on producing his jets. Development was rapid, and as early as July 1960 the first piece of metal on the T-58's prototype was placed, and its forward fuselage assembly began. The project was still a private venture at that time, not being officially sanctioned by the government. However at this time the appetite of the military started growing. They demanded that the new aircraft has all-aspect engagement capabilities against targets flying at up to 27,000 m (!) and speeds up to 2,500 km/h. To appease the missile-minded leaders of the USSR at that time, they informed them that the upcoming design will only feature two air-to-air missiles. In November the same year, the Council of Ministers issued an order to equip the new jet with the Vikhr-P radar and the Polyot GCI system. The missiles were going to be 2 x K-40 air-to-air missiles in SARH and IR versions (what would later become the R-40R and R-40T of the MiG-25). In this configuration, the designation T-3-8M3 was used as the in-house designation and allocated as part of the Su-15-40 aerial weapons interception system. This is when the designation "Su-15" was used for the first time. Time passed, but the promising K-40 missile was nowhere near to be sighted, neither the CofM's anticipation of the project with the Vikhr-P radar. Hence, they continued the aircraft's development with the Oryol-2 radar and K-8M2 missiles; upgraded R-8MR and R-8MT missiles (which did not find success, however the K-8M2 was developed into the K-8M1P which came in IR and SARH, what became the R-98T and R-98T later). In the project's documents, this config was called the Su-11M, while the aerial intercept weapons system was allocated the designation "T-3-8M2". The T-58 was due for completion in September 1961, but work on it was canceled during that year's summer. Apparently, it was the specific related divisions within the government thought that hope was lost in an AAM-equipped fighter. Sukhoi struck back and proved them wrong. (T-58 blueprint from one of the ADP documents) Sukhoi T-58D - Pavel's Retaliation (T-58D-1 prototype, the first prototype of the Su-15, under final assembly) As previously mentioned, the AL-7F-1 was a very troublesome engine. It's why the Su-9 and Su-11 had a negative reputation at first, before they had the AL-7F-1 replaced with the AL-7F-100, -150 and -250 later on. As an insurance policy, Sukhoi decided in late 1960 to prepare a new project derived from the T-58, characterized by the installation of two Tumansky R-21F-300 axial-flow afterburning turbojets in the side-by-side fuselage configuration. This was an advanced engine type rated at 7,200 kgf on full power (afterburner). The new project was designated T-58D ("D" could stand for either "dvigateli" ("two engines") or "dorabotani" ("updated"), it is still unsure which is correct), but was still to be equipped with the Vikhr-P radar, Polyot GCI and K-40 air-to-air missiles, and officially known as the Su-15 at this point. This indicates how differently the Su-15 could have turned out had the missiles been developed in time! Though, the PVO was still adamant about the radar and missiles, despite MAP indicating that with the Oryol-2 and K-8M2s it would enter service much sooner. However, the R-21F-300's serious design flaws were eventually discovered. It was then decided to replace it with the R-11F2-300, found on the MiG-21F/F-13. OKB-51 already had experience with these engines in the twin configuration since they had meddled with them on the Sukhoi T-5 (see chapter 2 in the Su-9 and Su-11 thread). In any case, the twin-engine configuration significantly increased reliability over the single-engine design as originally planned for the older T-58. To speed up the development process, they decided to borrow the tail and wings of the Su-11. However, with all the new changes, it proved to be a lot heavier than the production Su-11. To redeem this, the designers resorted to installing blown flaps. The T-58D was enivisioned to become an interceptor that would have to deal with single, unmaneuverable targets flying between 20,000 - 24,000 m and speeds up to 2,500 km/h. Because it also seemed that it would stand no chance in engaging targets in pursuit mode since it didn't offer speed advantages due to the weight increase, they devised head-on tactics. The minimum missile launch range was limited to certain altitudes because the radar lacked LD/SD. To maximize the efficiency of the weapons system, they included an automatic flight control system (AFCS) with an AP-28T-1 autopilot with heading adjustment command modules and pre-programmed optimum climb profiles. The in-house reviews of the ADP and review commission were deemed unnecessary since at that time the T-58D was still considered to be no more than an upgraded Su-11. Wind tunnel tests were of course still held, as well as ground rigs were built to test the T-58D's electric hydraulic systems. After the AFCS was fully developed, it was designated SAU-58, and was actually tested on the seventh prototype of the Su-11 (T-47-7). (Here, the T-58D can be seen taking shape at MMZ No.51; Sukhoi's experimental shop at Moscow-Khodynka) Sukhoi T-58D-1 / T-58D-2 / T-58D-3 - Tests Execution (T-58D-1, the first prototype of the Su-15, properly coded "58-1" and seen with R-98R & R-98T missiles) In early 1962, the first prototype, designated T-58D-1, was rolled out of the factory. As an aerodynamic testbed, it lacked the intended radar and test equipment occupied the radar's place of installation. It was mainly intended to test stability/handling and performance to test top speed, acceleration, range, service ceiling and fuel consumption rates, with and without drop tanks. It was trucked to the LII testing airfield and on the 30th of May, 1962, after R. Yarmakov checked and passed the T-58D-1's ground system checks and taxying tests, it performed its maiden flight under the hands of Vladimir S. Ilyushin, a Sukhoi OKB test pilot and the son of no other than Sergei Ilyushin, the aeronautics engineer and founder of Ilyushin OKB. He praised the aircraft for its flying for the most part, except that it had poor directional stability in comparison with the Su-11, an issue that was fixed by installing a 400mm "plug" at the base of the fin. By the end of the year, the prototype had completed 56 test flights under the manufacturer's test program and its "58-1" code was changed to "31 Blue". It displayed good performance and handling, meeting the expectations for the most part. Suddenly, even during these early stages, MAP issued an order to fit the aircraft with the Smerch-AS radar and to arm the prototype with K-8M2 air-to-air missiles. This decision was going to lead to the outcome of installing the same radar to the three advanced interceptors at that time: the Ye-155P (MiG-25P prototype), the Tu-128 and the T-58D. Despite the order, it was clear that the forward fuselage design would have to be radically changed, and since there was no prototype radar available for fitting, Pavel Sukhoi and Matus R. Bisnovat (head of Bisnovat OKB, designer of the RS-2US, R-8 and R-98 missiles) worked together to prove their point to MAP and the Commanders in Chief for the VVS and PVO and were successful in doing so; to install the upgraded Oryol radar instead, at least only initially. On the 13th of March, 1963, Dimitri F. Ustinov, CofM Vice-Chairmain wrote back in agreement to Pavel O. Sukhoi but also highlighting that the Smerch-AS would have to be used later. The military also agreed to reduce the size of their demands, stating that it would be fine if the requirements were changed to a maximum interception altitude of 23,000 m for targets at speeds up to 2,000 km/h instead. The initial stages of the State Acceptance Trials were to be held with the upgraded Oryol radar, and were to finish in November 1963. Since the first prototype was merely an aerodynamic testbed, the second and third prototypes (T-58D-2 and T-58D-3) were tasked with radar testing. There was a "Sobol" radar in development but it was canceled, so once again they resorted back to the original option, now designated Oryol-D ("D" against standing for "dorabotani" which is Russian for "modified"). At this stage, the brake chute was also relocated from the rear fuselage to the base of the rudder, and the KT104 nosewheel was replaced with the larger KT-61/3, while the main KT-69/4 landing gears were replaced with the identically-sized KT-117s but with more effective braking. In early 1963, the T-58D-1 underwent modifications to match the same standards as the T-58D-2 and T-58D-3. Until the end of 1963, Vladimir S. Ilyushin alongside two other test pilots kept on performing test flights, reaching 104 in the modified T-58D-1. Because it took them too long to decide which radar model should be used for testing, the T-58D-2 / second prototype did not begin its test program until April 1963. On the 4th of May the same year, it performed its maiden flight under the hands of Ilyushin again. The second prototype differed from the first by having a longer and more pointed nose radome with a cone angle of 28 degrees but the vertical tail was still unmodified and the brake chute was accordingly located ventrally. However, it featured a complete avionics fit, with the Oryol-D58 (izdeliye 303D) radar installed. (Not only the only rare photograph of the T-58D-2 in flight, but also colorized!) As part of the manufacturer's test program, tests of the avionics suite lasted till June, and in August the second prototype was submitted for the State Acceptance Trials. The trials began on the 5th of August, and since the SAU-58 AFCS was running late in development, it was decided that another and separate trials schedule would be considered. To speed up the process, instead of the State Acceptance Trials incorporating two stages as usual (Stage A and B), it was decided to join them both together as one stage instead. The T-58D-3 (the third prototype) had its maiden flight on the 2nd of October, 1963. It differed from the previous two in the new AP-46 autopilot and a higher internal fuel capacity by 180 liters. The Air Force pilots were generally pleased with the T-58D-3, however they criticized it for the following: Decreased aileron authority at low speeds The engines ran roughly during certain vigorous movements with sideslipping High takeoff and landing speeds Deteriorated acceleration compared to the Su-11 1.5 tons heavier than the Su-11 (10,060 kg vs 8,560 kg) Instability during landing between 340 - 450 km/h (T-58D-3) Anyhow, on the 8th and 11th of October respectively, the second and third prototypes were flown to the GK NII VVS facility at Vladimirovka AB to continue the trials; more specifically to perform live missile launches against real targets. For starters, the radar's performance was tested against real targets such as Tu-16 and IL-28 bomber, Yak-25RV recon aircraft and a special Su-9L development aircraft (L.02-10) with an angle reflector to decrease the RCS. The State Acceptance Trials in general lasted from August 1963 till June 1964. They did not involve just the aircraft, but also the entire aerial weapons system built around it; designated Su-15-98, it comprised the Su-15 of course, the R-11F2-300 turbojets, the Oryol-D58 search and tracking radar and modernized K-8M1P air-to-air missiles which came in IR and SARH versions respectively; entering service as the R-98T and R-98R. Of course, the Vozdukh-1M GCI was also incorporated. The first K-8M1P / K-98 missiles were delivered in early 1964, and live missile launches were conducted. They met all expectations, except the inability to guarantee kills against high speed targets since at that time the fuse could not detonate the warhead in time at closing high speeds. The verdict was that in a head-on situation, the missiles were able to score kills against targets flying up to 1,200 km/h. The trials of the Su-15-98 system were so smooth, that the PVO expressed almost no criticism regarding it. A total of 87 flights had been made during the trials; 53 accepted "for the record", 13 training flights, 16 flights "off the record" and five tests for positioning and checkout. All of the aircraft's systems and equipment had been fully explored, meeting the requirements of the higher ups and the manufacturer's estimates. All three prototypes in total, under the trials, completed over 300 flights without malfunctioning, demonstrating the reliability of the aircraft design. It was quite well-made, to the point it received the acknowledgement of Air Marshall Savitskiy; a highly experienced WW2 pilot with strict standards. However, its range fell quite short in comparison to the intended estimate; 1,260 km instead of 2,100 km. In order to solve this issue, OKB-51 decided to eliminate the waist of the area-ruled fuselage to increase fuel capacity. The new modifications were tested on the T-58D-1, proving to be viable changes and were thus highly recommended; the internal fuel capacity had been upgraded to 6,860 liters, more than the original capacity with drop tanks(!). Also, to improve stability and handling, the aileron travel was increased from 15 degrees to 18x30 and the air intake ramp adjustment time was reduced from 12 to 5 - 6 seconds. On the 2nd of June 1964, till the 16th, the modified T-58D-1 underwent a special tests program and the T-58D-3 soon followed with the changes. The trials were officially completed on the 25th of June, 1964, after the last test flight was made by Savitskiy in the T-58D-2 on the 19th. The final report of the State Acceptance Trials (which referred to the weapons system as the Su-11-8M - stage one upgrade) indicated that the new aircraft offered significant advantages over the Su-11, especially in head-on engagement capabilities. It was recommended that the third prototype be the standard production version. And thus, the Su-15 was born. (The second production Su-15, "67 Blue", during trials) In early 1965, the first prototype was explored with a new cranked delta design with increased area and longer span to improve handling and stability. These changes were incorporated to the late Su-15TM. Moreover, the first prototype was also used to test short take-off and landing (STOL), much like the MiG-21PD and MiG-23PD. It was designated T-58VD . (T-58D-3, obviously the third prototype from the longer and more pointed nose radome and the taller vertical tail with an SPO-2 RWR) Sukhoi Su-15 Early izdeliye 37 - The Saving Grace Inducted (One of the first Su-15s produced, production code (c/n 031506), armed with one R-98R and one R-98T) In 1966, the Su-15's production officially began. The first pre-production example was rolled out of the factory on the 21st of February, 1966 and was code-named "34 Red". With the Su-15 finally in production, Sukhoi was finally relieved. The trials were quite successful that any possibiltiy of the OKB facing entire closure a second time no longer seemed realistic. With the Su-15 in production, the new radar was redesignated to RP-15 Oryol-D58 and the missiles bore the new designations of R-98T and R-98R (IR and SARH respectively). Actually, they came improved compared to how they were during the prototype stages; they received the PRD-143 rocket motor with a thrust of 13,400 kgf and a burn time of 2.5 - 6 seconds, an improvement over the previous PRD-141 found on the R-8s. They were Mach 2-capable missiles with a kill range of 2 - 14 km in pursuit and 8 - 18 km head-on (this head-on range was achieved only by the SARH version, the IR version on the other hand did have all-aspect capabilities still). The R-98T received a new TGS-14T seeker head with liquid nitrogen cooling and all-aspect engagement (limited), similar to the Red Top and the late R-60M. The plane came equipped with two pylons with PU-1-8 launch rails, and usually had one IR and one SARH loaded. Moreover, much like the R-8MR and R-8MT, both the R-98R and R-98T were capable of pulling 14G, and their pylon and target G limits were 3G. Their tracking rate was 12°/s. The RP-15 Oryol-D58 was a capable, non-LD/SD radar, with a detection range of 15 - 35 km at low and high altitude respectively, and a tracking range of 10 km at low altitude and 30 km at high altitude. Detection and tracking of targets were also influenced by the size of the engaged aircraft, scanning at an azimuth of +-60° and elevations of +31°/-15°. The rest of the avionics suite is listed as the following: RSIU-5 two-way VHF, MRP-56P marker beacon receiver, RV-UM low-range radio altimeter, ARK-10 ADF, SOD-57M distance measuring equipment, Lazour datalink, SRZO-2M IFF transponder, SPO-2 Sirena-2 radar-warning-receiver (RWR), KSI-5 compass system and an AGD-1 artificial horizon. (The first ever production Su-15, coded "34 Red", before pre-production examples were delivered) With the more reliable R-11FS-300s becoming available, the Su-15 was re-engined with those. No changes ocurred to thrust, only reliability was improved. The top speed of the Su-15 was 2,230 km/h at 11,000 m, and an unfortunate 1,100 km/h IAS at sea level. The climb rate remained more or less the same as the Su-11: 190 - 200 m/s. The maximum Mach speed was Mach 2.1. This early production model was purely delta-winged, unlike the later Su-15 sans suffix examples that were produced with cranked / double delta wings starting in 1968. Speaking of which, their limit was just 6G. No cannon armament was included. A later production example was used as a cannon testbed; the military kept demanding that the Su-15 should have at least one cannon. Sukhoi originally wanted the GP-9 gunpod, and ten aircraft from Batch 12 had the appropriate fittings, but none were actually equipped with them. By then, requirements were changed, and the UPK-23-250 gunpod was chosen with 250 rounds instead of 200. Game Equivalents: Su-7B, J35A, F-100 (suggested BR: 9.0 - 9.3) Pros: Fast at high altitude (2,230 km/h) with a limit of Mach 2.1 Good radar with decent range (15 - 35 km detection, 10 - 30 km tracking) Equipped with RWR Rocket-fast climb rate (190 - 200 m/s) Effective R-98R and R-98T air-to-air missiles with 2 - 14 km of range from the rear and 8 - 18 km from the front All-aspect heat-seekers (R-98T) Cons: Two missile pylons only No cannon(s) installed whatsoever Old, rear-aspect-only RWR Lack of dogfight missiles to remedy the cannon-less issue Non-LD/SD radar, reliable starting from 2,100 m Transonic at sea level (1,100 km/h IAS) Not capable of CAS BVR missiles with low maneuverability Low 6G wing limit ("01 Red", the first pre-production Su-15) Sukhoi Su-15 Late izdeliye 37 - Recommended Changes In 1968, it was recommended to incorporate the double delta wing design onto later production Su-15 examples. Moreover, gunpods were tested and officially inducted into service in 1971. The usual loadout became two R-98R/T air-to-air missiles and 2 x 23mm GSh-23 housed in two UPK-23-250 gunpods with 500 rounds in total. Despite the recommendation to produce the Su-15 with double delta wings, they were still produced with the older pure delta design for the time being. In 1969, from c/n 1115301 onwards, blown flaps were introduced to the pure delta wing design. The first Su-15 to be completed with double delta wings was c/n 1115331. Moreover, from c/n 1115336 onwards, all late Su-15s could be re-engined with the Tumansky R-13-300s with 4,100 kgf on normal power and 6,600 kgf afterburner, and from batch 11 all Su-15s had the SARPP-12V-1 flight data recorder. The new engines, while being more reliable, lowered the aircraft's ceiling by 400 m. Because of this, they were not widely used. In addition, a production Su-15 c/n 0615327 was tested with R-60 AAMs, and after testing was completed all late Su-15 sans suffix production models were retrofitted with them. The APP-50 chaff/flare dispenser with 50mm PPI-50 and PPR-50 flare and chaff cartridges was also tested, but it took the place of the gunpods. To summarize, late Su-15s usually came with two gunpods, two R-98R/T air-to-air missiles, two R-60s, blown flaps and with either pure delta or cranked delta wings. The cranked delta design had a wing limit of 6.5G. Production of the Su-15 late lasted from 1968 - 1971, and the production of the Su-15 sans suffix all in all lasted from February 1966 till 1971. It was succeeded by the more advanced Su-15TM. Game Equivalents: F-4C, F-100, MiG-19, F-104A/C/G, J35A, Su-7B/BKL (suggested BR: 10.3) Pros: Fast at high altitude (2,230 km/h) with a limit of Mach 2.1 Good radar with decent range (15 - 35 km detection, 10 - 30 km tracking) Equipped with RWR Rocket-fast climb rate (190 - 200 m/s) Effective R-98R and R-98T air-to-air missiles with 2 - 14 km of range from the rear and 8 - 18 km from the front All-aspect heat-seekers (R-98T) Gunpods inducted: two 23mm GSh-23 with 500 rounds R-60s introduced Countermeasures available Missile count increased from 2 to 4 Improved 6.5G wing limit with cranked wing design Cons: No internal cannons; gunpods increase drag Old, rear-aspect-only RWR Non-LD/SD radar, reliable starting from 2,100 m Transonic at sea level (1,100 km/h IAS) Only two R-60s No CAS loadouts Countermeasures pod took the place of cannons High energy loss in turns with pure delta design BVR missiles with low maneuverability Low 6G wing limit with pure delta wing design 6.5G wing limit with cranked design still underwhelming (Late Su-15 production model with two UPK-23-250 gunpods, one R-98R and one R-98T missiles, note the pure delta wing design) Sukhoi Su-15T izdeliye 37M / izdeliye 38 - Huge Upgrade Program Because the performance of the Su-15 did not fully satisfy the military, it was due for a mid-life upgrade. As a matter of fact, the reason why the Su-15 turned out the way it was is attributed to Sukhoi OKB being overloaded with work, as they were working on many projects at that time and the Su-15's prototype did not receive the most attention. It was supposed to be a lot more capable from the start, had it not been to the design bureau being overloaded with other projects at the time. In mid-1966, several months after the Su-15 entered production, they envisioned it with a Korshun-58 radar, the SAU-58 was finally ready and the RSBN-5S Iskra short-range navigation system had just been developed at that time. However, the new radar could not provide the intended performance, so all attention was directed towards the Smerch-A of the Ye-155P (the MiG-25P's prototype) and the project was canceled. Because of this, they decided to arm the Su-15 with the RP-26 Taifoon; a derived radar from the Smerch-A. The TP-26 Taifoon was a more capable radar than the RP-15 Oryol-D58, with a detection range of up to 70 - 75 km against bombers at high altitude and up to 60 km against fighters, 15 km and 10 km respectively at low altitudes. Tracking range was 50 - 55 km against bombers and 40 - 45 km against fighters, 10 km at low altitude for both sizes, scanning with +-70° azimuth and +30°/-10° elevation. Moreover, the new R-832M communications radio replaced the older R-802V, the Pion-GT antenna feeder system was introduced, the RBNS-5S Iskra short-range navigation system was inducted alongside an upgraded Lazour-SM datalink, a new SPO-10 Sirena-3 RWR and the long-awaited SAU-58. The military also demanded that it receives CAS loadouts to make them useful for the Soviet Air Force's tactical arm; to this end the Su-15T could be loaded with 1 - 2 500 kg bombs, or four 100 or 250 kg bombs, up to two UB-16-157U rocketpods each with 16 x 57mm S-5K unguided rockets or two S-24 heavy unguided rockets. They actually also considered an internal cannon, and it happened, but remained only a prototype configuration. The new and formerly tested R-13-300 engines also made their way. As they were more powerful than the previous R-11FS-300s, the top speed at sea level was increased from 1,100 to 1,300 km/h at sea level, and the climb rate from 190 - 200 m/s to 228 m/s. Despite the enhancements, the Su-15T had only 20 examples produced, mainly because of issues which protracted its development and deliveries. The Su-15TM replaced it in October 1971 in production (but did not see service till 1975). Game Equivalents: F-4C, F-100, MiG-19, MiG-21F-13, F-104A/C/G, J35A (suggested BR: 10.3) Pros: Fast at high altitude (2,230 km/h) with a limit of Mach 2.1 Vastly improved radar Top speed at sea level increased from 1,100 to 1,300 km/h Upgraded SPO-10 Sirena-3 RWR with more aspects Climb rate improved from 190 - 200 m/s to 228 m/s Has 2 x 23mm UPK-23-250 gunpods Equipped with R-60s and R-98R/Ts Countermeasures available CAS loadouts became available Cons: No internal cannons; gunpods increase drag New radar, but not capable of LD/SD Only two R-60s at once No CAS loadouts Four missile count poor in comparison to other aircraft No countermeasures BVR missiles with low maneuverability Improved wing limit from 6G to 6.5G, but still low Sukhoi Su-15TM izdeliye 37M - Finest Modernization The best and final version of the Su-15, the Su-15TM. With more than 400 produced, this is the most definitive and lethal variant. Following the comprehensive Stage A and B of the State Acceptance Trials, the Su-15TM with the new radar was introduced to service, and the upgraded aerial intercept weapons system was designated "Su-15-98M". The new radar was the RP-26M Taifoon(-M); while it had to be designed with an ogival radome which negatively affected its range because conical design of the previous RP-26 proved troublesome, it was more reliable. Range data as follows: Detection range at high altitude: 65 - 70 km (bomber-sized targets), 45 - 55 km (fighter-sized targets) Tracking range at high altitude: 40 - 45 km (bomber-sized targets), 35 - 40km (fighter-sized targets) Detection range at low altitudes: 15 km (bomber-sized targets) 10 - 15 km (fighter-sized targets) Tracking range at low altitudes: 10 km (bomber-sized targets), 5 -10 km (fighter-sized targets) With the new radar also came the improved R-98MR/T air-to-air missiles. These had improved kill ranges; 5 - 24 km head-on and 2 - 15 km in pursuit; improved over the previous kill ranges of 8 - 18 km head-on and 2 - 14 km for the R-98R and R-98T respectively. They were loaded under updated PU-2-8 racks. (Su-15TM firing an R-98MR missile) The SAU-58 AFCS was replaced with the modernized SAU-58-2, and the number of R-60s was increased from 2 to 4, as an Su-15TM example was tested with the APU-60-2 launcher (though it did not enter service with the Su-15 in general). In the 80s, it was retrofitted with improved R-60M AAMs. It also retained the possibility of loading the APP-50 chaff/flare dispenser, which unfortunately had to take the place of the aircraft's gunpods when it was to be fitted. Much like the previous Su-15T, it had basic CAS loadouts ranging from 100, 250 and 500 kg bombs, in addition to 32 S-5K unguided rockets or two S-24s. The fuel capacity was also improved. The Su-15TM stayed in service till the 90s until it was finally retired from service. It's infamous for the shooting of the Korean airliner. Game Equivalents: MiG-21MF, MiG-21SMT, J35D, F-104J/S, F-4C Pros: Fast at high altitude (2,230 km/h) with a limit of Mach 2.16 Vastly improved radar Fast at sea level; 1,300 km/h Equipped with SPO-10 Sirena-3 RWR Very good climb rate of 228 m/s Has 2 x 23mm UPK-23-250 gunpods New R-98MR/T missiles with higher kill ranges All-aspect heat-seeking AAMs (R-98T + R-98MT) Access to the APU-60-2 launcher providing up to four R-60 air-to-air missiles R-60M retrofitted Countermeasures available CAS loadouts retained Higher range than the previous models (1,380 km vs 1,260 km) Cons: No internal cannons; gunpods increase drag New radar, but not capable of LD/SD New radar with higher reliability but worse range in comparison to the Su-15T's RP-26 BVR missiles with low maneuverability Inferior to F-4 Phantoms, Mirages and other Western aircraft in speed at sea level Outmaneuvered by aircraft such as the MiG-21 and Mirage Underwhelming 6.5G wing limit Sukhoi Su-15bis - Lost High-speed Potential (The Su-15bis' sole prototype, a conversion from the fifth production Su-15TM "25 Blue", c/n 0306) In the early 70s, a new powerful engine was developed: the Gavrilov / Tumansky R-25-300 with a second stage afterburner (or a contingency rating/power boost). Shortly after the Su-15TM's Stage A of the SAT (State Acceptance Trials) came to an end on the 25th of February, 1971, the CofM (Council of Ministers) issued a directive followed by a joint ruling from MAP and the Air Force to re-engine the Su-15TM with the latest R-25-300s. These new changes offered a thrust of up to 4,100 kgf on normal power, 6,850 kgf on afterburner and 7,100 kgf on full boost. An Su-15TM coded "25 Blue" (with the production code c/n 0306) was used as the prototype of what became known in-house as the T-58bis (and Su-15bis as the official service designation). The conversion was completed in the first half of the year at the Novosibirsk No.153 factory (which is the one that mainly produced early Sukhoi jets such as the Su-7, Su-9 and Su-11) and the prototype made its maiden flight on the 3rd of July, 1971. Flight tests continued until the 20th of December the same year and they've proven that the Su-15bis had impressive and obvious acceleration improvements over the Su-15TM and a higher top speed, especially at low and medium altitudes with the contingency rating the engines provided. With the second stage afterburner, the Flagon could now intercept targets flying up to 1,000 km/h at 4,000 m in pursuit mode. Unfortunately, despite recommendation for production, it never received the status of a production aircraft. Instead, the Su-15TM remained the top variant, and the R-25-300 powered the MiG-21bis. Game Equivalents: MiG-21MF, MiG-21SMT, J35D, F-104J/S, F-4C Pros: Top speed, acceleration and climb rate vastly improved in comparison with the Su-15TM, thanks to the R-25-300 engines (the same engine type as the MiG-21bis') Decent, high-ranged radar Equipped with SPO-10 Sirena-3 RWR Has 2 x 23mm UPK-23-250 gunpods Access to the APU-60-2 launcher providing up to four R-60 air-to-air missiles R-60M available CAS loadouts retained Effective (range-wise) R-98MR/T missiles All-aspect heat-seekers (R-98T and R-98MT) Cons: No internal cannons; gunpods increase drag New radar, but not capable of LD/SD New radar with higher reliability but worse range in comparison to the Su-15T's RP-26 BVR missiles with low maneuverability Inferior to F-4 Phantoms, Mirages and other Western aircraft in speed at sea level Outmaneuvered by aircraft such as the MiG-21 and Mirage Underwhelming 6.5G wing limit Flight range reduced especially on second stage afterburner (Another view of the same Su-15bis prototype) Some variants are not included as they were trainers, such as the Su-15UT and Su-15UM, and testbeds with internal cannons, engine testbeds, avionics testbeds etc. Thanks for reading, I hope you liked this one. If needed, and I may do it on my own later, the post will get updated with even more information. Sources: Soviet/Russian Aircraft Weapons Since WWII Sukhoi Su-15 - Boeing Killer Sukhoi Interceptors: Sukhoi Su-9, Su-11, Su-15 Vol. 16 Sukhoi Interceptors: Sukhoi Su-9, Su-11 and Su-15: Unsung Soviet Cold War Heroes
    13 points
×
×
  • Create New...