watch them bee BOL versions of the pylon and the Typhoon comes with the ability to run 6x BOL pylons xD
Edit: Actually, my funny guess might be right…
almost
its the ITSPL, not TMC.
they gave the J-10 the double rail while also carrying the single rails, they could give this here but again, i think its a balancing decision. 2+6 is the same as the j-10 and mirage, better than gripen, ig somewhat similar to f-15e, better than f-16…
the naming goes like this (left hand or LH and right hand or RH)
ITSPL integrated tip stub launcher - outboard wing pylon OWP - centre wing pylon CWP - inboard wing pylon IWP - FWD and REAR MRAAM Eject Launchers (MEL)
plus the centre under fuselage pylon
thats the naming from wing tip to fuselage
2 Likes
yea i am tired and corrected myself XD
@Gunjob I know Gaijin doesn’t like Janes, but if anyone has this book maybe there is more Striker 1 images there? Tagging you because I think you probably know all the Brit fans who may have a copy.
itsu is the station unit. the whole thing is the ITSPL
if they dont ungimp bol then we’ll need 6x of them lmao
1 Like
Nah, they have 2 built in bols if iam not mistaken, which is frankly, not enough given how poorly bol performs ingame.
Is there an any photo of MRAAM on inboard pylon?
no
yea sorry again i am tired
I know they have 2, but those double IRAAM rails really REALLY look like BOL as well…
Like, this is a better pic to see the ingame modelled double rails look MUCH thicker than the irl ones:
Wing mraams are launched from rail or ejector launcher?
Honesty I couldn’t say. The name “Striker” seems to have been applied to a few different HMDs (or at least different versions of a common HMD with significantly different functionality) over the years. Just to make things confusing.
No clue
rail
“MFRL” or MultiFunction Rail Launcher
It seems to imply that Striker II just adds color symbology similar to how the Abrams SEPV3 screens remained the same - but went from solid green lettering to colored;
The tank displays before and after color screen upgrade for those curious;
So maybe wingroot mraams are too close to intakes, so not used?
Im gunna guess we’ll have 6x IR and 4x BVR loadout. but we’ll have to wait and see
unless there is an aerdodynamic issue which we’ll never be told about its first and foremost a cost and necessity issue.
they dont “need” those extra amraams.
wiring, interface, mounting, etc is all there. space is also there.
if it actually does not work then it is an aerodynamic issue but i dont believe that to be the case
1 Like
Sad that there is no leaked development aircraft flight manual to look there
1 Like