Usually I end up being more excited about the bug fixes and new additions/changes to old stuff than the new stuff anyway. But if the US (and UK, France, Italy) end up not getting some new toptier SPAA, I will actually be pretty sad. The list isn’t final so there’s definitely still a good chance.
2 Likes
I agree.
New mechanics and bug fixes are very nice but if other nations get those spaa’s why can’t the rest of them get them?
@sudo_su1
Looks like they went with the real FoV (over real magnification), so huge zoom as predicted.
I hope these won’t be the only Maverick changes though.
3 Likes
Everything else is also adjusted based on FoV values so it makes sense for the sake of consistency …
1 Like
That’s mostly true and fair I suppose, but I think, or at least I remember somewhere, that zoom/magnification values are preferred over FoV. I believe the AN/AXX-1 is the only airborne sight with real magnification modelled over FoV (at 4-10x). Pretty much all ground vehicles have actual zoom modelled.
I wonder if they are going to change the thermal quality on the F-4F KWS and Kurnass 2k now though. Pretty funny if not, because the Kurnass 2k would be running around with essentially a Litening II pod then with its gen 2 thermals on the Mavs.
1 Like
how do you find channel loss just curious like how do we know its accurate how much channel loss there is ?
To know exact channel loss you need documents.
Most NATO jets have installed thrust amounts at mach 0.9 in unclassified and unrestricted documents, so most of the time knowing exact channel loss isn’t necessary.
what about F-111B with phoenixes (at lower br than f14a)
Sounds like the other mav changes will be in the upcoming update, according to the leak list.
Is there a source for its magnification?
NAVAIR F14AAA-1 1984
Goes to show you that FoV is not a good indicator of magnification (same as zoom in-game). In-game with real FoV, TCS would have 52-168x zoom. But irl it has lower magnification than the AGM-65D despite smaller FoV.
2 Likes
Do you know how it’s calculated?
Because I can’t understand how projecting 1.42 deg on a display results in 4x magnification while projecting 1.5 deg on a display that’s around the same size results in 16x magnification.
Let’s move it to F-14 thread:
F-15E AGM-65D no thermal:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/eELhl1XXHBEl
(It was supposed to be “Fixed in 2.45.1.105” but it’s not)
2 Likes
When can we get the BOL pods for the F-15A and C, at least??
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/B9Uo8bUeoD5X
The E could get them, although there is no solid evidence of the Strike eagle actually using them. You could’ve slapped a few pods on it and it would’ve worked
Looks like a strike eagle to me ngl
2 Likes
actually… it could be!
probably if you can find info about that specific squadron - you can report it as evidence that 15E had them
It’s the pretty shade of gray, I think that’s enough right?
well, i think that worth to try
also maybe argument that USAF F-15C mostly dont use CFTs, especially with bomb holders
1 Like
Hey what about that yellowish white strip thing on the nose
1 Like