ASEAN Founders Aviation Sub-Tree

Should Thailand’s F-5 and F-16 jets get KGGB 500-lb glide bombs (or any Thai high-tier jets capable of carrying Mk.82 bombs)?

According to Thai sources, the KGGB has a glide range of up to 100 km and can be deployed without requiring aircraft modifications. It’s launched using a bomb control device that looks similar to a tablet. Thailand reportedly possesses around 20 of these kits.

7 Likes

Yes, the only ASEAN tanks to achieve that would be the Leopard 2SG and Leopard 2RI.

Looking outside ASEAN as well, I think Iran is the best bet (I’d rather see them for China than USSR), mainly since I doubt the North Korean tanks being quite 12.0 worthy. Arguably we also haven’t seen the peak of Chinese tanks yet, though Gaijin is used to mismanaging those.

This I agree with, one way or the other, China needs a subtree to match other nations getting theirs. I also understand the need for an MBT, seeing how poorly the Chinese ones were implemented.

Yeah, ROC isn’t a good comparison, but I just meant to say I am not arguing for pedantic west/east separation.

I even recall an idea for a combined North/South Korea subtree for PRC/ROC.
While I don’t know how serious that was to begin with or what Korean players think (if you are Korean that’d be an interesting thing to hear), it does at least seem like a reasonable “technically combined Korea tree” in case Gaijin decides against an independent tree.

I don’t mind western tech in the Chinese tree, I simply advocate for an ASEAN Founders subtree in the Japanese tree.

4 Likes

Iran seems to be too far out of reach honestly.

This actually is a running joke between me and my friends, that SK to go along with TW and NK to go along with PRC would be hilarious to see. Can’t quite comment on the technical possibility of it though.))

Neither do I mind the Oplot or the VT-4 in the Japanese tech tree (that much). I’m again saying I just find the overall amount additions too much. Not their origins, not whether they’re eastern or western. It also isn’t a concern of developers.

Spot on.

3 Likes

Thailand I can still see in japan because of them in ww2(even though I am chinese and have grandparents living in thailand) but rest of them not really.

3 Likes

The su30mkm is effective for China, which has few flankers with TVCs. mig29N also does a good job of filling the BR gap that China lacks. Indonesia’s su27 and su30 are well suited for China’s military weapons and premium. The F/A-18D is suitable for Japan and China has enough domestic fighters to fill the F/A-18D gap. Indonesia’s F-16C is best not implemented, and Japan will eventually implement Thailand’s F-16A(e)MLU. China has Taiwan’s 16V, MLU with AMRAAM, and Pakistan’s 16C. As for tanks, both countries want new top class MBTs. I understand that many Chinese want the Leopard 2SG. But many players forget that Indonesia has the Leopard 2RI, so a similar tank can be implemented in both Japan and China. The PT91 is indeed based on the T-72, but it is very far from the T-72 in terms of transmission and ERA changes.

North korea should be in a united korea tree, iran in middle east

1 Like

I think eastern weapons like su30mkm should go to China and western weapons like F/A-18D should go to Japan, F-16D+ and Leoparad2SG/RI are best implemented in both countries as there are two similar ones but Indonesian F-16C should not be implemented,If there are more C&Ps, there will be people who will be furious lol.

To be honest people saying this would save japan’s CAS problem are wrong.
Japan’s CAS problem extends further than top tier. I sometimes play japan(rank I) and I must say, the CAS is HORRIBLE. The bombs require a direct hit(sometimes direct hit won’t work) and each plane can carry only one, the machine guns are bad and overall the planes aren’t that great at low tier ground either.

3 Likes

I agree, but Gaijin doesn’t seem to.

It might be an option for united Korea with the united Chinese tree as well, where Korea could be combined and has a good amount of space compared to SK as US subtree, while also solving China’s MBT issue. For air it’s even very similar to Singapore, with the KF-16s and F-15K.

Though I would want to hear more opinions from Korean players before considering to suggest it.

Also fair, I just name it because it seems to be considered for USSR subtree and I think if it does end up a subtree China would be better.

3 Likes

Just a reminder:
Please make sure to follow all Forum rules when making comments on suggestions.

6 Likes

But the Japanese aircraft were very capable of air combat, and their turnaround performance was particularly good.

1 Like

Arguably Japan does have domestic CAS to fill the earlier ranks. But of you need it to be subtree CAS, there’s Japanese aircraft operated by Thailand and Indonesia specifically. Thai Ki-30 or Indonesian Ki-51 would be very nice to see.

Otherwise domestic ASEAN aircraft like the Thai RTAF-5 or Indonesian NU-225 would be interesting as well. Alongside that maybe the AT-28D-10 for a nice lower BR CAS aircraft that could also come with a JASDF T-28 camo.

While the subtree does have a lot less Rank 1-4 aircraft options, they also are a lot less needed. Keep in mind Japan has a 5 line air tree, only 3 of them end at rank 4 (assuming R2Y2s are removed).

Yeah their dive bombers are better as fighters than CAS or base bombing

1 Like

I would urge everyone who has an opinion on the implementation of a future ASEAN tree to the appropriate topic, this one pertains only to the Aviation proposal

1 Like

I should point out that the creator of that Polish suggestion stated it was a joke

1 Like

So you liked my suggestion

I confirm

2 Likes

You may be correct that Japan mains desire the “juicier” tree that may be Singapore, however, I think this is completely fair. China has a huge arms industry and export market that ensures they will receive a constant influx of vehicles. Japan does not have this option, even including prototypes. China getting subtrees (which is fine) on top of their already incredible amount of domestic options is just not at all equivalent to Japan’s situation. Look at how the Japanese tree has changed over the decade, while Chinese tree is already beginning to exceed it. Can you really fault Japan mains for wanting more for their tree?

8 Likes

I should clarify that Gaijin has stated they will not be adding tech of Chinese origin because of certain reasons. They explicitly denied VT-4, which is kinda ridiculous

1 Like

Doesn’t China already get the better Flankers anyway? J-11B, etc.

1 Like