- Community Bug Reporting System
- Community Bug Reporting System
they folded in 1 day lol
now they SUDDENLY believe it’s actualy incompatible and cant fit despite telling us the opposite yesterday
1 Like
Still not getting the AIM-26B which is a bust.
These reports have just been accepted. This doesn’t have anything to do with the developer response to the previous report that had already been forwarded a couple of days ago and answered.
The reports being forwarded doesn’t mean the developers have accepted them yet. It just means they have been passed along for review.
2 Likes
@Smin1080p_WT Will f-106 get AIM-26B any time soon?
also are there any plans for AIM-26A in Nuclear thunder?
little bit of an image dump, but from here it also doesn’t look like the super falcons can actually fit into the side bays of the 102
4 Likes
2 Likes
with all due respect, I see no reason for pessimism like this at this time, I’d rather we spend that energy hoping our reports actioned and finding more info to prove the daggers real characteristics
1 Like
So uuh, for god sake…
[DEV] F-102A incorrect Afterburning thrust
-
Different engines (P-21 vs P-23)
-
Source used to disprove is for F-100D, NOT F-102A
-
F-100 and F-102 have Wildly different Intake geometries
-
F-100 and F-102 have different Exhaust geometries
Worst part?
according to a Senior I have no chance at going anywhere with an appeal
Might try escalating to Smin, but that will have to wait unless someone else wishes to take that up
It’s a completely unacceptable response from the developers, the F-100 and F-102 are nothing alike, and their source does not even mention J57-P-23, or F-102A. It only mentions J57-P-21(A) and F-100D. and that data is invalid due to the above 4 points
This is the equivalent of using Spey 101 and thrust losses on Buccaneer to bug report A-7D/E with the TF41-A-1/2 as they are both “Speys”, or the TF30 Thrust losses from F-111 to bug report F-14A. the Data isn’t transferrable between the different airframes
8 Likes
Yet another questionable decision by the developers, coupled with their decision to keep the AIM-4F/-4G on the F-102A.
It’s good that all the other FM bug reports are getting actioned, but the denied thrust report is just a straight-up kick to the teeth.
BTW, I’ve updated status on bug reports.
*hope to see
They’ve only been accepted for now
Or the good ol “G.91YS =!= F-5A” regarding J85-GE13
this is ridiculous! they didn’t even use a P-23 J57 document for this… how on earth does this pass any smell test???
Is the f102 really being released with the same missiles as the f106 but no gun?
they even did a Su-27S != Su-27SK (export version) in a report about… roll rate…
3 Likes
we’ll see
It’s gaijin setting the idea in their mind and not changing it in any other way possible, they refused Mikoyan Gurevich spokeperson interview where they said no MIG35S has Zhuk-AE aesa radar and only mechanical Zhuk-M (indeed current one ingame is a mix of various elements of the mig35, they even changed the name from 35S to 35 only to “justify” it)
no matter what nation, if they don’t want a change to happen, you cannot do otherwise
that report answer to the F102A with source of F100D is hilarious tho
5 Likes
It shouldnt even be on the table
Best chance of a kill in f102 is ramming. Gaijin really do make me lose braincells
A new bug report by @Jadenbetter-live is up with data provided on actual engine duct loss.
[DEV] F-102A Engine duct loss incorrect
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/VoI1epg1Xk11
2 Likes
prepare for F-102 _late != F-102_greece
1 Like