What would constitute proper sources? Would range charts( plural ) for known size targets suffice? Would these sources/ figures have an above priority over “range figures” from 3rd party documents, for example figures in magazines, theses without citation from where they come from, that aren’t directly connected to the manufacturer/RAF/GAF/ItAF?
That’s not what was said at all. I explained using a manual as proof something can’t carry something doesn’t always work. Because things can be tested and used yet not documented in manuals.
But can you confirm that captor-m radar is bugged, not just for sim, but for TWS, HMD, ACM
In that case thats double standart, i dont like it when that happens.
does it matter?
gaijin clearly doesnt only implement things that have been cleared.
the mechanical and electrical compatibility is there, as evident by the standards that they adhere to as published by the manufacturer of said pylon equipment:
here it is for the outboard wing pylon where MFRLs are typically mounted
and here it is for centre and inboard wing pylons where its disputed
you can also make an educated guess about there being enough space to fit the rail and the missile:
the rail ends pretty much at the same point as the missile:
compared to a bomb:
it simply sticks out a bit to the front so its not interfering with the landing gear
the only thing that would remain is aerodynamics which neither you nor i can judge
So TLDR i think this is perfectly acceptable for war thunder
HOWEVER i think gaijin choses to not implement this as means for balancing
1 Like
Fitting missiles something giving clearance to use it as for A2A role is something.
This kind of discussion has been made countless times for other vehicles on this forum, without solid evidence Gaijin will not accept this and we both know this very well.
Im more than happy to recieve additional missiles for my EFT but this decision is not up to me and by the looks of it Gaijin also doesnt support this idea. It might be balance decision or they simply refused to believe those pylons are cleared for A2A missiles.
Maybe in future we can recieve additional A2A missiles but as for now they will not change their mind.
way to waste my fucking time
next time just tell me you’re not actually interested
Im actually more than interested, i’ll be happy to recieve additional missiles for my EFT and i already stated this.
So i dont understand what you’re problem is.
Pretty sure @Flame2512 posted a document saying the aircrafts systems dont accept more than 6 MRAAM and 6 SRAAM, tho it was an older doc.
Might imply it could carry it on the wingroot pylon but still limit it to 6 AMRAAM. The only advantage being it MIGHT mean it could carry a 6+6 load.
Doc might of even said 4 SRAAM was the limit, I cant remember 100%
I do agree that physically, theres unlikely to be any restrictions, but we dont have any solid proof it can carry them in those locations atm, and the closest thing I saw to “conclusive” seemed to point to it not mattering anyways.
its adding zero weight and complexity. The wiring already exists, all thats needed is adding it to the computer system.
The real issue is cost for testing that the missile will seperate in all flight situation and not get kicked into the fuselage by some bad airstream.
Which btw is the EXACT same with Tornado carrying GBUs on the wing stations, yet its allowed ingame
That didnt stopped Gaijin to give 8 missiles to Mirage2k5F, if that is the case then there is absolutely zero reason why EFT shouldnt recieve additional missiles.
They could just remove the M2K5F’s 8 missiles as well, but idk much at all about its missile capacities or why it got 8 if you claim it cant.
Because according to documents FCS can only register 6 missiles at once which means additional Magic2’s cannot be used with 6 MICA configuration.
People posted official documents to fix this unhistorical buff but Gaijin just refused to change it.
1 Like
So can we get a normal catcher m? Or is the current Catcher M a half-finished product or a finished radar
CAPTOR-M is pretty much unfinished but it seems gaijin doesnt wanna change certain aspect of this radar.
Well thats weird, I dont see why theyd be so adamant to keep it up at 8 either. Tons of planes only had 6 AAM’s when it was added, and the ones carrying more had the disadvantage of being much larger “heavy” fighters…
Not really unfinished if they dont wanna change anything.
Seems unlikely we’ll get anything much better than the current CAPTOR-M ingame unless someone finds a lucky unclassified technical document for it. Atm tho, from the looks of it, it seems pretty subpar.
If the Catcher M is now in a finished state, then I think Gaijin has messed everything up, and one of the electronically scanned radars that is considered to be the most powerful in reality is so bad in the game that it is not even as good as another unsuccessful APG65
My theory is that they wanted keep France in meta with 8 missiles configuration until Rafale arrived.
Otherwise i dont see any reason why it shouldnt be fixed.
Doesnt make a whole lot of sense since they didnt remove the 8 missile load once the Rafale was added. France was also not struggleing at all, the M2K’s have been strong since day 1 ingame.
Many decisions doesnt make sense in this game actually, im not even surprised at this point.
1 Like