I have answered you twice previously on this. If there are further unreported issues that have not been forwarded, then they should be reported properly so they can be investigated.
Asking the same question 3 times is sadly not going to yield a different result.
All reported issues are being investigated.
You guys are gong to have fun when you try to add things like the F-22…Public data avilable is pretty sparse.
At that point will Gaijin accept they need to take a common sense approach?
Based on data - revisiting tracked targets outside of scanned bar means, it has to scan quick AF otherwise it PHYSICALLY CANT KEEP CONSTANT REFRESH RATE NEEDED FOR TWS… Guy programming this needs literally one braincell to realize it.
And flares on 141?? It was literally guess where they would have been. There was never indication of their placement. Its pure fantasy.
I kinda want to see source of scan rate of Su-34 radar.
Given the current state of CAPTOR and CAPTOR + PIRATE. should we make a dedicated CAPTOR thread?
Also can anyone make a comparison to the improved scanspeed on the UK and Italian TWS compared to Germany?
cough 30year old swedish armor trials cough
Its not scanspeed. It should keep tws track stored for 8 seconds instead of 4.
Is it just me or do the Fueltanks on the Screen are look more like the 1500L ones which the EF can also carry?
Its also scanspeed though right? This thing scans as slow as any old 60’s radar set
I’ve lost any confidence in Gaijin’s impartiality by this point.
One rule for thee but not for me…
The Captor-m should also have atleast 90° of gimbal
The MFDs were designed with the available information there is on icons. If you have info to show there should be a different tank icon for the current drop tanks, please submit a report and we can take a look.
I can make a report using Su-25SM3 documentation that shows all of its armament and lack of Kh-38 but in the end it will be just denied by the fact that “if something is not shown in document doesn’t mean it can’t be used or wasn’t added to armament later”. That already was discussed with staf. And gaijin has access to this document.
That would be correct. A document showing something isn’t there doesn’t mean it’s not technically comparable or was tested outside of manual / offical armaments lists. We have plenty of examples of this in game for all nations.
Off topic but Gaijin have smashed it with the unlockable skins for the German and UK typhoons yet to see the Italian ones! Good job Gaijin
Reminds me of the 2 extra amraam missles that were constantly denied. But thise somehow cant be true.
But eh whatever
Captor M have ±70 gimbal
So what is point in trying to report fictional weapons? You will just easily deny the report and can show zero sources because as DEV you don’t have to. Removing of straight made up things is almost impossible in this game.
Sadly they were not proven to be realised.
