If you are going to make a new suggestion, please specify that it should be folded with the one already in the game. In the end, it only adds a better laser designator, JDAMs, and improved laser-guided bombs. It’s a very similar situation to the Tornado RET.8 and the Tornado 1995 (which is basically a RET 3). There are no significant improvements in the game, so also the BR should remain the same.
1 Like
Yeah nope sorry I am not gonna make a suggestion, not in the near future for sure.
1 Like
I see you’ve made a report for this here AMX A11A is missing AGM65E // Gaijin.net // Issues
I’d like to see it happen, but I doubt Gaijin will accept this one photo. Is there no other sources?
1 Like
The original brochure mentioned the Maverick as an option, and there are some photos from fairs where it was displayed next to the airplane. However, those were purely marketing activities. It’s very difficult to obtain because it was never actually implemented—it was only an option.
1 Like
Well, I guess it depends what is meant by “option”
- “You can purchase AGM-65 and it will work on AMX”
or - “You can purchase AGM-65 and we will make it work on AMX”
If it’s the former then there’s no problem, Smin1080p has said that weapons didn’t have to be flown operationally or even used by operator nation to be added, it being technically possible is enough
1 Like
It’s not specified; it’s only listed among the possible payloads. We don’t know whether it was already compatible or, like all weapons, still needed to be implemented and tested. I’ve never seen a photo of an AMX with Mavericks either for testing or in flight. I’d say the photo found and posted in the request is the only one known with a maverick.
Moreover, the manual indicated the Mavericks on the inner pylon, but here they’re mounted on the outer one. It seems like just a marketing initiative, but it would still be really nice if they accepted it—though, given past experience… I have serious doubts. in any case let’s hope will be very nice to have it.
in the list you have to refer to AGM.
3 Likes
I suspect “AGM” refers to heavy air to surface missiles such as AS-30, and the reason why it’s restricted to inner pylons is that they exceed the 1000lb weight limit for the other two.
Meanwhile the AGM-65 is only about 600lb
1 Like
It has never been clarified.
After all, neither Italy nor Brazil has ever used the Maverick.
In Italy it was adopted only by the Navy for the AV-8B Plus, and the AMX was never exported.
It would be interesting to have anti-ship missiles. For that, besides the photos taken at shows, there are pictures of prototypes flying with the Kormoran, Exocet, or Marte—unless they insist on keeping the Kormoran exclusively for the German Navy’s IDS (Tornado) aircraft.
As for the Exocet, they didn’t even put it on the Super Étendard, so I doubt it.
1 Like
This is the photo OP used in bug report
However, among the photos attached in this suggestion post are also these:
In that last one, isn’t that a AGM-65 mounted next to the Skyshark
2 Likes
those are classified as marketing activities for devs.
1 Like
Correct me if I’m wrong, but weren’t pictures like these used recently for LMUR missiles?
Also KH38 (MT I believe)
1 Like
Just to clarify, I’d be very happy to have Mavericks for the AMX, but in the past all the weapon proposals shown at trade fairs—but never actually used, implemented, or included in a specific manual—have always been rejected at least for italy. Russia is another matter… do not know the KH38, i just know that a long discussion was held but I do not know the justification, if any, from devs. the guys form the forum suggested the pgm 500 and 2000 for the italian tornado, since showed in some fair, the result was that was implemented in the UK tornado that was used fro trials of the weapon. same sade outcome for the maverick for the german tornado, never implemented.
Anyway, I clicked on I have the same issue for the proposal and I hope it goes through, but we shouldn’t get our hopes up too much
2 Likes
This technically isn’t AMX A-11A, but the AMX International prototype.
Side note, no clue why A-11A suggestion is still up and A-11B is “in-game”. If the in-game version really is A-11B, I would love to see its JDAMs and LITENING pod. We’ve told suggestion mods this is wrong multiple times, and it is still like this.
Might file some JDAM and LITENING bug reports and see if we can get that on AMX, as well as the other ACOL upgrades.
Pictures only work for major nations, minor nations need actual proof. (And even when actual proof is provided, it is denied or just ignored).
The only way we could get the weapons like that in the picture is if devs added AMX International prototype.
The in-game aircraft is often mistaken for an ACOL, which is puzzling because the War Thunder wiki clearly identifies it as an A-11A. The ACOL upgrade is easy to recognize: it has a more rounded nose, a GPS antenna on the spine, and reinforced wings. The model in the game matches the A-11A’s nose, not the ACOL (or B-variant) design.
Regarding the CLDP pod: in 1999 the Italian Air Force’s flight-test unit integrated the pod on the AMX.
Although it was never used at the operational squadron level, it was successfully implemented and was already widely employed by the Tornado fleet.
When the ACOL conversion began in 2002, electronic upgrades made the CLDP incompatible, and the more modern Litening pod was planned—so there was no reason to purchase additional CLDPs for the AMX.
Laser-guided bombs were introduced in 1998, and that same year AMX aircraft participated in the Maple Flag exercise carrying them, with ground-based target designation.
A key cockpit detail confirms the version: the ACOL uses a digital clock, while the A-11A has an analog one—the same as in the game.
The only missing weapon is the IR-guided Opher bomb.
Armaments such as the Litening pod, JDAMs, and Lizard bombs belong to the ACOL.
The ACOL could be grouped with the A-11A in-game much like the Tornado IDS 1995 (RET.3) and RET.8 variants.
So, up to me the model in the game is correct and nothing have to be changed, while acol is a welcome future add.
3 Likes
Apparently they are not, a report with a picture of an aircraft with a weapon mounted on a pilon, regardless if it’s from an airshow, is valid. That is why I made that report, but from what I know a plenty of reports for weapons like the maverick were already internally passed, but we probably aren’t going to get any of these weapons.
1 Like
Already rejected, in game we have the A, but for some reasons it’s just in the Italian translation and not in the english one
1 Like
There are also a plenty of other weapons currently not implemented
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/01qzERTYG9yo
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/S63mMBIKDCk6
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/mqco8DYv05Yp
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/OoJYrd8Hg9xx
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/xfTrUN6sxbnw
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/79WMDIYakik4
Weapons like marte mk2, exocet, bl755 and other were also reported, but they possibility of having them in game is very low.
3 Likes
There is also the GBU48, a pretty powerful bomb that no ever mention when speaking about the amx (and the litening 4).
4 Likes
yes you are right, mine was just a brief summary not a full list
1 Like
we all know that unfortunately different rockets or gbu are often skipped by devs. The opher is something different and interesting but there are few info regarding how it works. you know we passed all the info available to smin more than an year ago.
1 Like