Or the AH-64 and others, access to the AGM-114L or AGM-179 / AGM-187A.
2 Likes
F-15E can carry JAGM-F (187A) and GBU-53 (also MMW), so would generally benefit both US and UK
Hu… new funcitonality I think (at least i dont think it was on the dev server last time I tried)
Radar lock will queue both PIRATE and Litening III TPOD to lock onto the target (though IR lock doesnt appear to do the same at the moment, so that needs to be reported)
Probably needs buffs then, if we consider Mach 1.4-1.5 figures to be with standard A2A fit which I think is 2+4
3 Likes
1.5 is cited as clean in official documentation, so it’s not going mach 1.5 with ordnance ever.
Flame would have to confirm but I think 1.5 in the primary docs is with a standard A2A fit. But either way, 1.4 with clean is at a minimum 0.1 mach too slow clean and therefore needs buffs
4 Likes
Given that they do not properly model pylon drag and it has no use flying around in clean configuration it makes sense to limit supercruise speed in clean configuration to the maximum amount with air to air ordnance but that seems somewhat arbitrary.
He can’t even remember basic things
It was a feature of all TGPs slaving to radar lock, and even TWS soft locks for a while until they changed it for some reason.
I would argue just make it ubiquitous to all top tier smokes, just so that the BS excuse that exists to keep MMW out of the game is finally removed.
that is true, but then what would even be the point of MMW FnF
It won’t lose lock through clouds, allowing targeting with ground radar modes in bad weather, or foliage.
1 Like
Lol what is going on here with marketing lie?
Dev responses, indicate they are apparently ignoring / misinterpreting sources because they don’t directly state things, even though they make sense in context and as such supplant said context with their own to refuse reports. Even when additional supporting documentation can be found, even with said restrictions on what is valid supporting material.
Instead of refusing the reports on balance grounds like they reserve the rights to do so. It’s fairly obvious something is being lost in translation somewhere.
6 Likes
The meme comes from an actual dev response to a bug report with sources from the manufacturer.
Now to be fair, that dev did come back and apologise/clarify for the choice of words. However the sentence has since been added to the hallowed hall of fame that is ‘Gaijin Comedy Phrases’.
It is on-topic, since the whole tagline came about because of the Typhoon and Supercruise.+
+The actual term as recognised by every aviation company, organisation, Air Force, etc.
10 Likes
And? That’s not a requirement for supercruise, so it is completely irrelevant.
We are discussing the maximum possible supercruise speed.
The devs believe it is mach 1.3 at 9000m, but there is no available source for this.
The only other information we have that we can use allude that the maximum supercruise speed is mach 1.5 but there is no given altitude details and the devs refuse sources with incomplete data.
We have other sources with partial data, which on their own are not enough to satisfy bug report requirements.
I swear theres times where the devs are actually good and actually follow what the actual source’s say, then theres times that makes you think that the devs are bias and ignore actual given source’s and pretend that they do not understand it or that it’s lies/fake and they’ll say stuff like o theres no way it could actually do that even if you have every single source out there that says it can they would still refuse it,
They did the same for challenger 2 TES/OES add-on armour kit and stinger missiles now there doing it to typhoon super cruise. The devs need to realise that they are contradicting sources. Like the developers and the moderators tell us that if we are looking something to get changed we need sources to back it up which is absolutely fair but it’s things like this when you actually do have the sources and information that they completely ignore it are say its fake are give some other bs excuse.
They need to release they can’t do that. When a player makes a bug report and does there research find source’s from books, pictures, brochures e.g the developer’s need to accept that information until any additional information is unclassified in the future which could state otherwise are could confirm what all the sources originally saided at the start. But until then what ever information we currently have the devs should do as it says and give that vehicle are weapon its capability until otherwise !!
13 Likes
Gaijin:
“Why would you possibly want to able to see or use the cockpit HUD, just use third person view”
Community
“What about in ASB?”
Gaijin:
“What is ASB?”
1 Like