I was at 8k ft the other day, plodding along in the my FGR2 looking for bots when I got insta sniped by a SIDAM 25. Was very annoying. Those convoys need a retune
Australia and the UK are closer but go off, yank.
Regardless, commonwealth kit in the tree that gets commonwealth kit primarily is where it ought to go.
Sidams are a little fucked. About the only thing you need to take stand off range with a frogfoot.
1 Like
I really cbf explaining this to you. Even if I go over the nuances you’ll just point to “Look, Australia had to play nice with the US because they’re an Island nation who benefits from those with carriers in a defensive action” as your solution.
and economically as well
Gee, I wonder why the yanks would invest in a nation they couped. But go off. You’re unfamiliar with the political landscape or history of this region, but you do you. Not worth the time of day to argue with.
dont forget the F111C is an American aircraft, modified by an American company, for Australia. UK had absolutely nothing to do with it
2 Likes
So? Av-8A and AV-8C need to move trees then right?
I guess AV-8B as a modfied British aircraft also needs to move trees.
1 Like
- there is no commonwealth tree
- while i agree that any truly domestic australian or british vehicles used by australia should go to GB, the M1A1 AIM and F111C really have no relation to GB
1 Like
So if I go through the British tree, we aren’t going to find a glut of commonwealth kit? By convention, commonwealth nations belong to the British tree. Quite frankly they should make it official instead of fucking around.
Lmao “your plane”
Tell me how an F-111C is more british than the F-111K, which is what it should be
Should the Iranian F-14 have gone to the US or the Soviet Union?
If you said the US that is the same argument you’re just in the other side of it. The Soviet Union has no relation to the F-14 and GB has no relation to the F-111
1 Like
At its core. It comes down to this.
Why add an Australian version of a jet the US used themselves and could be added as the US version?
Why then add a second version of that exact same aircraft to the same TT?
Now Id much rather take the F-111K, TSR2, Jaguar Gr3A or Tornado Gr4 in place of the F-111C (heck Id much rather take a properly modeled Torando Gr1 over the F-111C) but the F-111C is a nice change of pace for us. Its not soviet and it shouldnt be so badly crippled by missing features/nerfed mechanics that its unplayable for teh first few years.
Its a nice filler. One of about 3 or 4 non-British or British exports (or native built/heavily modified Canadian/Asutralian) that i have no complaint actually seeing on our air tree
av8a, sure, av8c was modified by US and has direct connection to both US and UK
the MCDONNEL DOUGLAS AV-8B was a joint project and the whole harrier 2 thing was started by the USMC cuz they wanted more payload av8a
Right, but the existance if the F-111C pushes things like the 111K and TSR.2 into the realm of never coming. And good luck with a tornado rework, only 2 years coming.
1 Like
You are probably right, but Smin has already confirmed F-111K was never coming and TSR2 I think was already in the very unlikely pile. If nothing else, its difficult to place / balance.
F111K won’t come. Britain isn’t allowed plausible designs that had questionable documentation of existence. Only thing we’ll get in the British tree with a half decent dumb payload is either a Vulcan (they’ve denied) or the Australian F111 which belongs in the tree of account of Australia having closer ties to Britain throughout history than the US. Wouldn’t have gone to war for the US without Britain in almost all circumstances.
1 Like
they prolly would have ended up going to war together with teh US due to common threat of JP
Australia and Canada having a slightly more consistant home is nice as well.