Why does that matter? It’s still the British Military using it for training.
The gripen
1 Like
it depends on how the snail sees it doesn’t really matter if the raf use it or not as long as they see it being not a private company then it is possible
It’s been confirmed for Sweden? Mind sending me a link?
Isn’t a huge chunk of the current Russian army made up of private companies?
That doesn’t really matter the snails rules changes all the time so it could be done but highly unlikely
1 Like
i found this but it was confirmed to be the gripen somewhere
it was confirmed in the old forum
https://old-forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/546894-jas-39-gripen-for-sweden-gen-4/&do=findComment&comment=9626221
2 Likes
I am praying to god it is the South African Gripen for the UK. Another Harrier would be so boring even if it comes with AMRAAMs
2 Likes
rather cf18 but anything other then a harrier ill be happy
6 Likes
just wanted to leave it here:
https://forum.warthunder.com/t/next-major-update-rumor-round-up-and-discussion/40541/758
Boris Johnson
1 Like
I would say the only two possibilities for this update out of that list are the Sea Harrier and the Tornado CSP.
I’m aware. CF-18 (early) is also possible since it’s legacy hornet FM
Gaijin confirmed new fighter aircraft toptier rank 8 for sweden tech tree this year 97% but currently not sure that new fighter aircraft in rank 8 for great britain tech tree gaijin might considered CF-18/CF-188 Hornet (RCAF) or SAAB JAS 39 Gripen C (SAAF) or Tornado F3 CSP (RAF) or Sea Harrier FA.2 (RN) or BAE Hawk 200
I know I’m late with this one but SAAF JAS39C using weapons it could use but never did can’t be called as being “ahistorical”. Simply because these weapons were integrated and wouldn’t require any changes to the aircraft itself.
Yak-141 using any weapons, radar, or having flares is what we can call as “ahistorical” since it never mounted or tested any of these. Same with the whole F-16AJ existence…
F-16C and D case is different. These missiles could potentially be used by these F-16s since they used the same radar which allowed for non-CW guidance of AIM-7F+ missiles. Just because it never did doesn’t mean it wouldn’t be able to.
Closest term for something like this would be “semi-historical” but I don’t feel like we even need to name it since it’s just a game in the end and we have to keep things balanced to certain extent.
2 Likes
RAAF f-111 C and G. F/A-18 E and there was a special order mirage built for the RAAF but was never collected from France so it’s out there but unlikely.
You mean as ahistorical as the British F-4J(UK) having 9Gs which it never used in service, but we know it could do?
For balancing reasons there is no reason they can’t give the Gripen 9Ms and 7Ms. Any plane capable of carrying AMRAAMs is most likely going to be capable of 7F/Ms.
Yes
Debatable, depends if the radar has the capability needed for that.
Or a Tornado.
My shit list goes Tornado<Harrier<Gripen<F-14(UK)<CF-18
But also keep in mind the F-14 would be an F-14A/B. Although given its not an early model the UK were wanting to buy it would be capable of carriage of everything up to the AIM-9M as well as AIM-54C and AIM-7M’s. But no chance of AMRAAM as on Gripen and CF-18.
Gripen A (early) can use SKYFLASH. Any variant with anything but the PS/05 MK.1 radar cannot under any circumstances guide a SARH missile. If sparrows had data-link it could but there was no point in that given AMRAAM became dirt cheap after the US mass produced it. Gripen A (late) had the PS/05 MK.2 without a CW illuminator and the Gripen C’s all use the PS/05 MK.3 which also lacks one.
Its’s debatable in itself if the Gripen A can guide SARH’s because the only mention of SKYFLASH come from the initial project specifications and a magazine released just before the Gripen entered service but around 5 years before AMRAAM entered full-scale production.
1 Like