F-111F Nieprawidłowości - #4 by LuftMaus things i digged about f-111 gunsight and what it can display
and i would like this green cross implemented …
3 Likes
still no else 9L ,also the GBU-15…
1 Like
Not all changes are made to the Dev server. Some stuff is only on internal builds until it hits production. It’s likely the internal build that the Dev blog shots came from.
5 Likes
OK ,I understand
2 Likes
no,gaijin Lied to us.
nothing changed
1 Like
@Smin1080p_WT
We need you to explain your deception, and by the way, explain that the F-111 is much worse than the F-111F in Weapons it can carry and engine. Why are they the same BR?
5 Likes
Hello
There was no “deception” Dev blogs show work in progress aircraft and they are clearly labeled as subject to change and not final.
Regarding the shoulder pylon, it is under investigation.
1 Like
take this
It’s already known and submitted in a report.
2 Likes
the F111C was my most anticipated aircraft in warthunder, id love it to not have this much of a disparity to the F111F or at least be a BR step lower than it i cannot see anything that the F111C is equal to the F111F (CM count but the F has near enough makes no difference and it has Large CM’s) i even thought it might be an efficiency thing for Air RB where they both could take out as much bases but the F111F has a higher payload of bombs as well as being able to defend itself. long story short glad its in the game but disappointed in how it ended up
Why doas the f111f/c only have 4 hardpoints 7 including gun pod and missile racks
Wikipedia which even have separate articles for the f111f and f111c list it has heaving 9 hardpoints
So it can Carry about the same has f16d and f-14b
I think all the big bombs are also missing
I mean, Smin, you must admit, it does look very weird for the Devblog to advertise a Shoulder Pylon, then go “nuh uh” in game because Gaijin is not 100% sure. Especially there’s a report for it, and a (apparently) not insignificant number of photos supporting the 111C having shoulder pylons.
if you can dig up some evidence for it (photos, Manuals, etc, which especially considering it’s been out of service for some time, I’d be surprised if it was difficult to do) then report it. It does seem very bare.
here is a RAAF f111C note the size of the wings past the outer pylons
3 Likes
only trouble is that RAAF markings can’t be seen. which is a pain in the backside. I’ll try some digging of my own in a bit
i mean its easy to tell based on the wings but yeah i have no doubt it will be disputed
1 Like
yeah it seems every photo i can find you can place the aircraft in Australia but no RAFF markings visible (note the 6SQN based at RAAF Amberley)
1 Like
I mean if you wanted to push your luck? you might just be able to make out the tail markings.
Markings on the Hangar mightn’t be sufficient. Someone at Gaijin could go “well American F-111on exchange?” (I know it isn’t, but that ca’t be taken for granted.
it shouldn’t be that hard, it has the larger wings it can either be an F111C, F111B (prototype USN) or an F111G and this isnt that but i can see an argument from gaijin that this could be a RAAF F111G even though it isnt
1 Like
this is gaijin remember, the company that doesn’t understand that when a block is meant to stop 84mm, it doesn’t mean “you need three blocks to stop a round with 84mm of pen”
3 Likes