It’s still a Leo chassis used by Canada with assistance from Germany for modifications. The other guy really doesn’t seem to understand what I’m getting at or is just being obstinant so I’ll stop replying to him.
The F-111C was never used by the USAF, the Canadamobile was tested by the German army after the modified it in partnership with canada
You’re right tho it wasn’t a reskin I forgot lmao
The US (USAF) retained an airframe for technical assistance, and pilot onboarding & Maintainer training as they do, at least while they still operated the F-111. (if you want to go further, the Airframes in question were on loan to the USAF while they were being operated in the US)
And There was no second run of F-111C airframe manufacture, all attrition replacements, were remanufactured from existing airframes (First lot of F-111As, with the second comprised of F-111Gs)
It’s in your post man, the USAF never operated them, they were flown by US pilots but so was the Draken, should the draken go to the US?
Its good enough for the Mi-28A to go to Sweden.
The Japanese never even touched #72-1568 (F-16FSD Airframe #2), the closest they got was in the back seat of an F-4E chase plane, and yet is acceptable for the F-16AJ-10, which isn’t even the same configuration.
Wanna know what they did test fly though? The Su-27.
This opens up a whole bunch of “well X tested Y” that really we don’t need
That we already have, if needed to make things fit. You mean.
And anyway its specifically addressing the claim that the US never operated the F-111C airframe (The F-111 were handled by the 4527th CCTS) that is wrong.
Not that the US needs the airframe.
I should have specified, the US never adopted them into service, they did fly them but never adopted them. Most people consider operated as adopting into service but it could be interpreted as never flew. I apologize for the confusion.
To late that has already happened. Heck there is a number of suggestions based around tested vehicle.
There is but really nobody except a few people want that. Some of the Swedish ones are a bit weird and I don’t rlly agree with but we shouldn’t have US MiG-21s or Su-27s
how much can each of them carry JDAM?
Weren’t the F111C built and designed in America
Definitely a win, I’ll take it. Fingers crossed they come soon, and hopefully some top tier Israeli SPAA someday as well…
Yeah but it was used by Australia, and Britain needs it more than the US. That’s ultimately what decides it, which nation Gaijin feels needs the vehicle the most.
wish it was a UK or US sqaudron vehicle so regarless of what tree its in ppl can enjoy it without having to grind throgu it all
Not to mention the Tiger I and M47.
There are many instances of singular test vehicles being added to trees but the US tree is one too far.
Depends on the size, though a general rule of thumb is that if the station mounts the AGM-65 it can take at least one JDAM.
For the 500lb class warheads (GBU-38) can be carried on ITER (Improved Triple Ejector Racks), But is Navy only (AV-8B & F/A-18) [USAF derived STAR rack for the A-10C and Late F-16 (Blk 40+) is in development] so go three per station in a direct 1:1 replacement for each; so if you don’t need the targeting pod (or gun)
for the AV-8B;
The A-10C should get 6x in total, on stations 3, 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9, as they are equipt with the necessary 1760 wiring (As above The A-10C probably doesn’t have the correct mounting rail in service to utilize TER config (the STAR rail as mentioned above), so the 17x on the Dev server is certainly erroneous, and will likely be significantly reduced), also allowed to carry the GBU-31/A, 2000lb class JDAM so there isn’t much of a reason to download the stations, outside Weight considerations.
The F-16C block-40+ (includes Block 50 & -15AM, -20, ect.)has access to the BRU-55/A ( USAF version of the -57/A) which permits carriage of two 1000lb class or smaller JDAMs per station (Or JSOW / WCMD, can be differentially loaded), on the Mid wing station so allows for 4x GBU-32 / -38 (unknown if it can use the inner wing station but probably can’t due to space constraints and unsafe release considerations during G loading / jettison).
F-15E has the Conformal stations so can carry 12x GBU-38 or 8x GBU-32 + TGP & NVP + existing LAU-128 loadouts (4x Sidewinder [ + LAU-138 BOL] or AMRAAM) and (conformal ) + external fuel / 3x GBU-31 .
The F/A-18A+ / -C / -F or equivalent uses the BRU-57 (as referenced above) so can take 8x(BRU) / 12x (ITER) GBU-32 or -38, or 4x GBU-31 on stations 2, 3, 7, and 8 and a conformal + tipwinder A2A loadout .
I just report the fact that the A-10C and the F-111F are not in a folder with the A-10A and the F-111A in the dev server. I know it’s not definitive and because Gaijin cares A LOT about the comments of the playerbase saying the grind is too long, I am convinced Gaijin will remedy to this issue by putting them in a folder for the release of course 😉. I can’t imagine they would increase the grind by 700 000 rp, They’re not cruel enough to do that.
Oh, well, it feels like they’re replacing GBU-12, and they hang themselves as much as they do
Its not a straight 1:1 replacement in most cases as the PGM (JDAM in this case) requires an additional data uplink to the aircraft to allow for in flight re-targeting / prompt-strike / GPS alignment updates, as such drastically degrades precision / utility if not mounted with on a MIL-1760 compatible station though still permits rudimentary functionality if pre-programmed and not all stationed are wired as such in most cases.
(As Seen in Ukraine, there are workarounds to restore some capabilities, but they are very much a kludge, and so unless field expedient are avoided).
Non-GPS assisted LGBs don’t have that requirement. Though in exchange are less accurate and are not entirely fire and forget and are limited by the Source of the designation as to their effective standoff (offboard designation allows for range extension similar to that of a basic JDAM). Though are basically obsolete now that the L-JDAM (DSU-38/B nose fuse) exists. (with the solid Nose plug, basic JDAM has better penetration for a fortification / bunker target set).
