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.
1 Like
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
2 Likes
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.
Not having document showing increased scan speed while everywhere being mentioned to be very quick doesnt mean its same as decade older set.
Do you even see what you are writing. Hypocrisy at its greatest.
So the Countermeasure on the Yak141 or the missiles
You know, marketing lies
3 Likes
“very quick” sadly isn’t a metric we can change anything with. Radars are all created equally and by the same standards in game.
1 Like
Yak-141 was provided with its standard planned weaponary load that it would have had as it did not progress beyond a prototype. This is the same for several other aircraft access all nations like the Horton 229, Swift F.7 guns, Kikka and others.
Eurofighter very much did and has all of its standard operational wepaonary.
1 Like
And what about the Countermeasures?
No mention of weapon in manuals isnt metric for weapon to be added just because “It maybe can be added to it”.
No meantion of countermeasures at all isnt metric for them to be unhistorically added.
Remove all countermeasures then. There is NO evidence for them and you guys made them up and their placement.
There are standards for russian TT and then standards for rest. One is fantasy and making it up. Rest needs concrete facts.
1 Like
As we already detailed at the time, Countermeasures were also planned for the Yak-141.
I would remind everyone that this is a Eurofighter Typhoon topic and not a Yak-141 topic. This seems to be getting very much off track. The topic will be closed if this continues.
“planed” Is the keyword here.
Who said that it wasn’t planed for the EF to take Amraams on the inner wing pylon?
Eurofighter is not a prototype aircraft and has all of its known loadouts. There is no need to introduce possible planned wepaonary when it has a more than sufficient real weaponary loadouts of it’s own.
Well iam gonna stop now this is going nowhere anyways