Its already posted on Challenger 2 thread and explained countless times.
Feel free to check it whenever you want.
i mean, gajin still uses the 30 year old swedish armor trials for a lot of very new vehicles as well, it isnt to far fetched they would go low and use that document as well
The argument is if EFT was designed from the start with A2G in mind, Panther’s position is it wasn’t. Reality is it was.
8 Likes
ah confusion on my site, i was thouhgt u responded to the chally armor thing he said
1 Like
This is so painfull to read.
2 Likes
thats a clear marketing uhhhh i mean bureaucracy lie
7 Likes
Why are you bringing up the Challenger 2 in the Eurofighter thread anyways.
The image I posted back in the Rafale thread was from the British AST 414 requirements document dated March 1984.
The first image I posted in this thread was from the European requirements document personally signed by the Chief of Air Staff for each nation, and dated December 1983.
And here’s the design requirements from 1987 (after France dropped out), nearly the exact same wording has been retained as in the 1983 requirements document.
So an air to ground capability was part of the British requirements, it was part of the original European requirements (with France in the programme), it was part of the 1987 requirements (without France in the programme). Oh and for good measure the text remains unchanged in the updated 1993 requirements:
So I suggest you either accept that an air to ground capability was part of the Eurofighter programme from the very beginning, and remained so throughout development, or start providing some sort of evidence to the contrary.
Let’s start with this:
Where does your date of 1989 come from? As a reminder you’re the one who was demanding sources from everyone earlier, but have so far not provided any yourself.
11 Likes
So guys, I still haven’t dropped my attempts to find a 8x AMRAAM photo of Typhoon. Whatever you say - it’s pretty evident that asphalt slopfail has no competition because of 8x Michles. Soo, I’ve tried gaslighting GPT into thinking that Eurofighter can carry 8x AMRAAMs and then asking it to guide me to that photo - no success. However, I got some interesting answers from the new chinese NN and they’re much more clear, unfrotunately it’s unable to guide me to the photo directly through the link or something like that. Nevertheless, I got some clues and been looking them up yesterday, so maybe someone can help me with that.
Spoiler
It’s quite possible that it’s confusing ASRAAMs and AMRAAMs or hallucinating all together. But it’s the biggest clue I got so far, outside the schematics. If you’re feeling adventurous - you’re welcome on board.
How are you this good at cinematic screenshots lmao
1 Like
man I wish they would fix ray tracing on AMD GPUs
1 Like
Fixed it
2 Likes
Man. do we know if the Captor M is getting fixed, I’m tried of automatically switching to IR mode all the time and get killed. I haven’t been too active here so sorry if anybody has been discussing about it.
1 Like
most likely only getting patched to the next major patch
1 Like
I’ve decided not to use the TWS mode because it just won’t lock targets efficiently, even at sub 20 km ranges.
So instead I just use PD HDN when doing BVR. Not ideal, but at least I can get missiles off.
1 Like
God I hope they do (My Steam Deck shall burn as a worthy sacrifice)
thats not what i wrote in my orignal message.
AMD GPUs support Raytracing, they arent as good as Nivida GPUs at that but they still manage to do that