Excuse me but... that's a government website

“Firstly, such sites cannot be a reliable source.” you mean to say that a website run by the United States navy, the operator of the aircraft is not a reliable source?

6 Likes

Rarely does the aircraft designation line-up with reality. Like the Sea Harrier is classed as strike aircraft. In-game it rarely means much. At least for now. The only example of a vehicle being kinda screwed over by designation is the ADATSs

1 Like

Something something game balance…

Would you trust a government website talking about their own vehicles if it was a Russian one, or a Chinese one, or a North Korean one? I wouldnt, and would apply the same logic elsewhere. Just because a government says something doesn’t mean they ar unable to lie…

2 Likes

if it’s the only source available I’d say it’s preferable

1 Like

The official F3D-1 Skyknight Pilot Handbook (AN 01-40FAA-1) calls it a “model F3D-1 Night Fighter airplane”. But that’s before it’s subjected to the over ruling law of Gaijin logic…

F3D-1 used almost exclusively as a fighter, rarely even seen with suspended stores = Attacker.

Meanwhile planes such as the F4U-4, or many late variants of early British jets used frequently as CAS mud movers remain forever stuck as pure Fighters like their early models despite real life role shifts as they approached obsolesence.

That’s life in WT land…

And beware of official military forces public facing websites, the RAF apparently is still confused when it comes to using US aircraft designations instead of the official British names.

3 Likes

Websites aren’t considered as sources - that’s the rules for everyone.

Because those can be modified, never get precise information,… ect.

Even more since it’s Gov.website,… Gouvernement of any nations controls every bit of information they’re giving.

Bug report should be made by the rules, that’s all.

F3D-1 might be a Night fighter, you still need to prove it ^^"

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

What does it matter in such a silly unrealistic kids game as Warthunder? Just attack the D point and dont worry about it.

If you can find the pilot’s handbook for the Skyknight, it might be worth trying again.

It is already public iirc.

Government websites are secondary sources.

Same with tanks. God forbid they change ELC to be a light tank as it should be or give it scouting like AMX-10P/M18. Even wiki and wot agree its a light tank.

Complaining that the F3D is in a buffed state is a new one.
Also last I checked F-4Us have their ordnance.

and the same goes for every bit of information that goes to the public, with at least semi-modern weapon systems. Everything else is secret or restricted, so unuseable here.
Also you can save a website to preserve its state… Like books can also have multiple editions, just that you need to save the book yourself.
Something being published as a book or on the internet doesn’t say anything about objective truth.
Most scientific papers, that are by design the closest we have to objective truth, are mostly published online and then just people write about it on secondary things like magazines, books, other websites etc.

And with your example of the F3D being a Night Fighter, it has airborne radar to spot enemies, making it functional at night.

Btw it is a shame, that we don’t have night battles in air, since every fighter and some bombers even, have radar, making them “all weather fighters”, but most weather is sunny and just a bit of clouds. No fog, no storms etc.
Also unimplemented radars, like the terrain following mode the F111 has, enable that for bombers and such.

1 Like

and still the best we get, since the primary sources (engeneering documents) are secret.

What? Nothing to do with buff or nerf, and I didn’t say anything about lacking ordinance. Gaijins role choice for vehicles is a dice role and doesn’t always match with official type documentation.

class of vehicle in game doesnt make sense in many vehicles so it doesnt really matter
but bruh that dude has a skill issue and should be fired
how can a literally military website that operated the plane not be a reliable source? IT WAS THEIR PLANE

And still require at least 2 secondary sources saying the same thing independently.

@LeonDasPro
Vehicle classification is 100% subjective. Gaijin’s is just as legitimate as any military’s.
USA used M18s as light tanks just as much as they used them for their primary “Tank Destroyer” branch purposes… In other words: It’s semantics.

Just a rewording of what I already stated - "Gaijins role choice for vehicles is a dice role "

They get to choose as much as the military, but some of their decisions are rightly questioned such as the ‘attacker’ F3D-1 which as a purpose designed Night Fighter is just arbitrarily change to give it a boost rather than consider altering it’s BR.