F-4J(UK) Phantom II. Historically Accurate Missile Loadout and Quality of Life Improvements (PART 1)

[HazelPam7769]

I know that because I preordered the aircraft back in 2022.

The AIM-7Fs will probably never be accepted since the British Phantoms were modified to use the Skyflash instead. However, asking for improved survivability through additional countermeasures is completely reasonable. Other British Phantoms in the tech tree already have them, so it’s hardly an unrealistic request. That’s very different from asking for weapons that never entered UK service, which, knowing Gaijin, simply isn’t going to happen.

What we’re asking for is the AIM-9L, more countermeasures and the Skyflash SuperTEMP. I know these missiles could be added without changing the aircraft itself because I’ve said that multiple times, and that’s the whole point of this suggestion. At that stage, it comes down to how strict Gaijin wants to be. Whether we like it or not, it’s ultimately their decision. That said, I think most players would happily accept a gameplay improvement over aesthetics if it meant making the aircraft more competitive.

There are plenty of ways this could be implemented. They could even keep both versions by making it a modification, allowing players to switch between the FGR.2 and the F-4J(UK).

As for trying other aircraft, that would mean buying another premium, which completely defeats the purpose of reworking the Phantoms. I’m not going to keep ignoring how poor this aircraft is. Many reviews actually recommend using it as a base bomber—a role reviewers almost never suggest for a fighter. Some even advise carrying only two Skyflashes in uptiers because the aircraft’s engines aren’t as powerful. That’s how bad the situation is.

[Flame2512]

@HazelPam7769

There are plenty of ways this could be implemented. They could even keep both versions by making it a modification, allowing players to switch between the FGR.2 and the F-4J(UK).

Or a simpler suggestion: just leave the F-4J(UK) with 60 CMs and adjust other aspects (weapons, BR, etc.) to make it more competitive. I really don’t understand your obsession with getting just 30 exta CMs. Sure 60 CMs is nothing special, but it is no worse than plenty of other aircraft around that BR, and is perfectly useable.

[HazelPam7769]

@Flame2512

Honestly it feels like your argument is verging on “if an aircraft doesn’t have more than 60 countermeasures it’s not worth being in the game

That’s exactly what we want. In the current state of the game, a lot of players would welcome an aircraft with more countermeasures.

Gaijin likes to present War Thunder as the pinnacle of historical accuracy, despite the many exceptions they’ve already made over the years. Because of that, adding something like this would be an easy change. Don’t be afraid to support ideas like this, even if they may not have existed historically, if they result in better balance and a healthier game. I think a lot of players would appreciate a change like this because of how bad the plane is.

There’s already a solution to the USN Phantom countermeasure issue as well, so this wouldn’t be setting a new precedent. Overall, this would be a completely inoffensive solution that improves gameplay without causing balance problems.

[Flame2512]

@HazelPam7769

That’s exactly what we want. In the current state of the game, a lot of players would welcome an aircraft with more countermeasures.

Cool, so we should just remove all vehicles which have 60 or less CMs from the game?

[HazelPam7769]

[Flame2512]

@HazelPam7769

if an aircraft doesn’t have more than 60 countermeasures it’s not worth being in the game

Not sure how that’s a strawman? I said:

if an aircraft doesn’t have more than 60 countermeasures it’s not worth being in the game

You said:

That’s exactly what we want

So if you “exactly” agree with the statement that aircraft with 60 or less CMs aren’t worth being in the game, it is reasonable to conclude that you want them all removed, because by your own statement none of them are apparently worth being in the game.

Spoiler

[HazelPam7769]

For the F-4J which they were charging people 70 dollars for it which is highway robbery, you don’t have to change the narrative. This entire discussion is about this aircraft, I might’ve not come across as clear to you but that’s what this discussion is about

[Flame2512]

It’s strange how over the course of a week we’ve gone from “more countermeasures would be nice if we can get them”

@HazelPam7769

If historical documentation exists showing that the F-4J(UK) could carry additional countermeasure systems, those options should be considered. Any increase should remain consistent with documented RAF service rather than being introduced solely for gameplay balance.

To “if we can’t get more countermeasures we may as well just remove the aircraft from the game entirely”.

There are plenty of ways to improve the F-4J(UK) and make it more competitive, as you highlighted in your own post. Why is an extra 30 CMs the one buff that absolutely must happen above all else? Particularly when many aircraft around 12.0 make do just fine with 60 CMs.

[HazelPam7769]

It’s not black and white thinking. There are multiple ways this could be implemented, and I’d like to see the missiles and the extra countermeasures added, even if it means replacing the current configuration or adding it as a modification. That way, the aircraft isn’t completely removed, and it gives players the option while keeping more people happy.

Only having 60 countermeasures on an aircraft like this is frustrating. Many aircraft at BR 12.0 and above carry more, and the ones that don’t usually make up for it by having better overall performance or superior missiles.

Buy the aircraft and you’ll see exactly what I’m talking about. I’m speaking from experience.You’ve got one guy who seems more butthurt about me than actually addressing how bad this aircraft is. Another is terrified of losing his terrible premium aircraft, even though Gaijin practically scammed everyone who bought it. His only argument is, “Well, I bought it because it’s a J.”

Then there’s the other guy, who doesn’t have a single valid reason why it shouldn’t get these missiles. He’s completely dead set against it getting anything and seems to be on a crusade against every post I make about it.

What’s even worse is that two of them haven’t even played the aircraft, so they literally have no idea how bad it is. The one person who has flown it is fully aware of just how shit it is but they hate the idea of it getting replaced by a better version that’s actually worth the money, they can literally add a modification for it so you’re still able to fly it by clicking on a tiny tick.

It’s pretty annoying. You try to do something good for the aircraft, but instead you end up dealing with people like this and repeating yourself over and over because they either can’t or won’t understand the point.

[Stockholm_Blend]

@HazelPam7769

Another is terrified of losing his terrible premium aircraft, even though Gaijin practically scammed everyone who bought it. His only argument is, “Well, I bought it because it’s a J.”

Wait what?

I said I am fine with modifying loadouts, no?
as long as it remains F-4J(UK) Phantom F.3

Because it is one of our Phantoms, which we bought from the US, and one of the versions that we operated.

As you said, there would be many ways of implementing buffs.

If we think about that cursed freakin F-5C
F-5C Skoshi Tiger in USAF service were only operated for a short period during some stage of the Vietnam War, and after test operations were done, the USAF retired these and just handed them over to VNAF.
It never fitted with AIM-9E and AN/ALE-40 countermeasure pods before it’s retirement.
Of course it is; how in the world USAF can modify F-5C when countermeasures pods weren’t invented at all during its USAF operating history?

But Gaijin granted them anyway because they knew that selling a premium jet without a flare would not make money, and ‘Some Export versions were capable of’ by using ROCAF F-5A bugreport.
(When F-5A in chinese tech tree originally has added, it didn’t had countermeasure pod, chinese reported about it, then Gaijin used it for buff american jet which even hasn’t added yet. pff.)

Just like that, if F-4J from USN service has a record of mounting an extra countermeasure pod, then we also can ask it in the same goddamn ‘technical compatibility’ standards.

It would be better to use AIM-9L and Skyflash SuperTEMP, but if Gaijin denies it, we can use a historical AIM-7F with Gaijin’s own rules as plan B.

I am fine with literally any suggestion from you about this plan except changing it to F-4M Phantom FGR.2(Premium-whatsoever).

I am seriously seeing no reason why we need to completely get rid of one of the Phantoms, which we used in our air force history, and swap it with a C&P version of another Spey Phantom, which can be found in our tech tree.

[BabySoEz]

I don’t want prem FGR2 either, I just want FGR2 to have slightly better weapons to be at pace at 12.0.

Moreover, @HazelPam7769 I fly the spey phantom with 90 CMs, it is nowhere near survivable standard due to atrocious FM.

• One notch you went slow then get tailed and die,
• One roll you went slow then get gunned down like a dog
• Paywall sparrows will hit you regardless your 90 CMs
• Compression made you dogfight with 20-years better FMs

[HazelPam7769]

@Flame2512

I’ve checked the F-4J(UK) Flight Manual

Royal Air Force pilots flying the F-4J(UK) Phantom II, operated exclusively by No. 74 “Tiger” Squadron, used the US Navy’s F-4J NATOPS Flight Manual (NAVAIR 01-245FDD-1) as their primary reference, supplemented by official UK Ministry of Defence documentation published under the Air Publication system as AP 101B-0903-15B.

[HazelPam7769]

@Stockholm_Blend

Just like that, if F-4J from USN service has a record of mounting an extra countermeasure pod, then we also can ask it in the same goddamn ‘technical compatibility’ standards.

It would be better to use AIM-9L and Skyflash SuperTEMP, but if Gaijin denies it, we can use a historical AIM-7F with Gaijin’s own rules as plan B.

Okay, my bad. I was starting to get the impression you were against giving the F-4J(UK) extra countermeasures because you were liking that guy’s posts, even though he doesn’t really know how bad the aircraft is since he’s never actually played it.

It’s a good plan. They might never accept the AIM-7F because it was never used operationally. I can see the HMD being added. The Skyflash SuperTEMP bug report has already been accepted, but that was almost two years ago, so they probably need reminding to actually implement it. The same goes for the AIM-9Ls, countermeasures, and drop tanks. I’ll probably need to submit another bug report for all of that.

[HazelPam7769]

Having 90 countermeasures is a huge improvement over 60. With the F-4J(UK), you have to spend most matches multipathing just to compensate for its painfully low countermeasure count.

The FGR.2 is more of a fallback option in case, for whatever reason, they refuse to add the extra countermeasures to the F-4J—which they absolutely should. Even then, there’s no need to replace the aircraft outright. They could simply add it as a modification, perhaps called “No. 74 FGR”, which would give you access to the improved configuration.

That said, I’d still rather they just update the F-4J itself, because in its current state it’s in a pretty rough spot.

[Flame2512]

The RAF produced the standard series of air publications for the F-4J(UK), a lot of the maintenance manuals, etc. were just the US manuals with the cover page replaced (going so far as to retain the NAVAIR document number on pages after the cover page). However the RAF flight manuals do seem to be more original with a different layout to the US manuals.

I checked all of these manuals, and unfortunately none of them suggest the F-4J(UK) was modified to use AN/ALE-40 dispenses.

Spoiler

[HazelPam7769]

This is why I mentioned the FGR.2 in the first place. The F-4J did carry the AN/ALE-37 in real life while it was in USN service, using Gaijin’s logic here, it should be able to receive it in-game. If, for whatever reason, the AN/ALE-40 can’t be added, then the AN/ALE-37 would be a decent second option. That said, the aircraft needs something to increase its performance because of how terrible it is.

I’m also fully aware that this sounds like it completely goes against the title, but these suggestions are really about fixing the aircraft within reason.

[Stockholm_Blend]

@Flame2512

The RAF produced the standard series of air publications for the F-4J(UK), a lot of the maintenance manuals, etc. were just the US manuals with the cover page replaced (going so far as to retain the NAVAIR document number on pages after the cover page). However the RAF flight manuals do seem to be more original with a different layout to the US manuals.

Copy&Paste which isn’t from Gaijin, but from Military /j

[Stockholm_Blend]

@HazelPam7769

Okay, my bad. I was starting to get the impression you were against giving the F-4J(UK) extra countermeasures

I am against changing F-4J(UK) to F-4M, not about adding extra countermeasures pods.
Glad that you noticed. ;)

@HazelPam7769

because you were liking that guy’s posts, even though he doesn’t really know how bad the aircraft is since he’s never actually played it.

Eeeeeh, even though he didn’t play F-4J(UK), but I reckon he probably knows better than me about british air tree generally.

He probably knows how bad F-4J(UK) is; he might just prefer to have a Saudi Arabian Tonka instead of the F-4M(Premium) idea, and dislikes the idea of ‘phasing out F-4J(UK) from tech tree’.

And well, who really needs to play F-4J(UK) when everyone can notice it is straight worse than F-4J(USN) and F-4S, and we can know about it just by comparing paper stats and loadouts. /j
It is just crystal clear.

Only Gaijin doesn’t know, and


Setting F-4J(UK) in the same 12.0 BR with F-4J/S in Air Sim.

While vastly superior F-4K/M (compared to JUK) is staying 11.3BR in air sim because of “lack of AIM-7F and such”

Quite frustrating and ridiculous status.

Gaijin probably believes that they just mindlessly C&Ped F-4J(USN) for JUK so JUK can access to AIM-7F, VTAS HMS, and other USA exclusive weaponry.
When truth is F-4J(UK) shares worst point of both F-4J(USN) and F-4K/M(UK)

J79 engine and 60CM counts from F-4J (Spey phantoms have slightly better thrust than J79 phantoms, and having 90CM just like F-4E does)
Skyflash(DF) is worse than AIM-7F, no napalm for base bombing, no HMS, and cannot use 6x Sparrow loadout from F-4K/M.
But still shares the same BR with F-4J/S in every gamemode.

As you already know and described before, F-4J(UK) in this game is nothing more than a bastard child of F-4J(USN) and F-4K/M(FAA/RAF).

Worse than F-4J/S(USN) and F-4K/M(FAA/RAF) in both fighter jet and base bomber, but somehow stuck in 12.0BR.

This is just pure nonsense.

Well, we can also talk about how Gaijin ruined Skyflash/SuperTEMP/AIM-7M’s inverse-monopulse seeker by making every SARH missile, including conical scanning ones, work as inverse-monopulse-ish standard (IRL, Skyflash were straight better than the original AIM-7E-2, and had better low-altitude accuracy than AIM-7F, but lost its main feature by Gaijin, thankfully), but this is just another can of worms, though.

“Gameplay improvement just like how they didn’t implement malfunctioning of APHE fuze. Nobody will likes when their SARH missiles act stupidly after nerfing these by making conical-scanning seekers” They probably make excuses. pff.

[HazelPam7769]

Have you tried submitting bug reports for the AIM-9Ls using all the information you’ve gathered?

YES. Have you received any news on this?

[HazelPam7769]

𝙏𝙤 𝙨𝙪𝙢𝙢𝙖𝙧𝙞𝙨𝙚 𝙚𝙫𝙚𝙧𝙮𝙩𝙝𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙙𝙞𝙨𝙘𝙪𝙨𝙨𝙚𝙙 𝙞𝙣 𝙩𝙝𝙞𝙨 𝙩𝙝𝙧𝙚𝙖𝙙 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙝𝙤𝙥𝙚𝙛𝙪𝙡𝙡𝙮 𝙧𝙚𝙖𝙘𝙝 𝙖 𝙘𝙤𝙣𝙨𝙚𝙣𝙨𝙪𝙨:

• 𝗞𝗲𝗲𝗽 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗙-𝟰𝗝(𝗨𝗞) 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗮𝗱𝗱 𝗶𝘁𝘀 𝘂𝗻𝗶𝗾𝘂𝗲 𝘁𝗶𝗴𝗲𝗿 𝗰𝗮𝗺𝗼𝘂𝗳𝗹𝗮𝗴𝗲.
  
• 𝗚𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗯𝗼𝘁𝗵 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗙𝗚𝗥.𝟮 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗙-𝟰𝗝(𝗨𝗞) 𝗮𝗰𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗻𝗲𝘄 𝗺𝗶𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗹𝗲𝘀, 𝗔𝗜𝗠-𝟵𝗟 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗦𝗸𝘆𝗳𝗹𝗮𝘀𝗵 𝗦𝘂𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗧𝗘𝗠𝗣.
• 𝗜𝗻𝗰𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘀𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗙-𝟰𝗝(𝗨𝗞)'𝘀 𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗺𝗲𝗮𝘀𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝗰𝗮𝗽𝗮𝗰𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗮𝘀 𝗮 𝗾𝘂𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗼𝗳 𝗹𝗶𝗳𝗲 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗿𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁.
• 𝗔𝗱𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗺𝗶𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗼𝘂𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝘄𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗱𝗿𝗼𝗽 𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗸𝘀 𝘁𝗼 𝗮𝗹𝗹 𝗣𝗵𝗮𝗻𝘁𝗼𝗺𝘀.
• 𝗥𝗲𝗱𝘂𝗰𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗙𝗚.𝟭’𝘀 𝗕𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗹𝗲 𝗥𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗼 𝟭𝟭.𝟳.

𝗙𝗶𝗿𝘀𝘁, 𝗜 𝘄𝗼𝘂𝗹𝗱 𝗹𝗶𝗸𝗲 𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗸 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆𝗼𝗻𝗲 𝘄𝗵𝗼 𝗵𝗮𝘀 𝘁𝗮𝗸𝗲𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘁𝗶𝗺𝗲 𝘁𝗼 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗿𝗼𝘂𝗴𝗵 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝘀𝘂𝗴𝗴𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻, 𝘀𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗶𝗿 𝗼𝗽𝗶𝗻𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗯𝘂𝘁𝗲 𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗰𝘂𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻.

𝗜 𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘀𝗼𝗺𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗿𝗲𝘃𝗶𝗼𝘂𝘀 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗰𝘂𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝗯𝗲𝗰𝗮𝗺𝗲 𝗾𝘂𝗶𝘁𝗲 𝗵𝗲𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗱, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗜’𝗹𝗹 𝗮𝗱𝗺𝗶𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗜 𝗵𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝗯𝗲𝗲𝗻 𝗳𝗿𝘂𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗰𝘂𝗿𝗿𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗣𝗵𝗮𝗻𝘁𝗼𝗺𝘀 𝗶𝗻-𝗴𝗮𝗺𝗲. 𝗧𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗳𝗿𝘂𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗵𝗮𝘀 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗯𝗮𝗯𝗹𝘆 𝗯𝗲𝗲𝗻 𝗰𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗿 𝗶𝗻 𝘀𝗼𝗺𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗺𝘆 𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗹𝗶𝗲𝗿 𝗿𝗲𝗽𝗹𝗶𝗲𝘀.

𝗛𝗼𝘄𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿, 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗴𝗼𝗮𝗹 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝘀𝘂𝗴𝗴𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗵𝗮𝘀 𝗮𝗹𝘄𝗮𝘆𝘀 𝗯𝗲𝗲𝗻 𝘁𝗼 𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗱 𝗮 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘀𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲 𝘀𝗼𝗹𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗿𝗼𝘃𝗲𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘀𝗲 𝗮𝗶𝗿𝗰𝗿𝗮𝗳𝘁 𝘄𝗵𝗶𝗹𝗲 𝗸𝗲𝗲𝗽𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗺 𝗯𝗮𝗹𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲𝗱. 𝗜 𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗿𝗲𝗰𝗶𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆𝗼𝗻𝗲 𝘄𝗵𝗼 𝗵𝗮𝘀 𝘁𝗮𝗸𝗲𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘁𝗶𝗺𝗲 𝘁𝗼 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗰𝘂𝘀𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘁𝗼𝗽𝗶𝗰 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗵𝗲𝗹𝗽 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸 𝘁𝗼𝘄𝗮𝗿𝗱𝘀 𝗮 𝗯𝗲𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗼𝘂𝘁𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗲.

𝗧𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗮𝗹 𝗿𝗲𝗽𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗯𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗺𝗶𝘀𝗲 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗕𝗿𝗶𝘁𝗶𝘀𝗵 𝗣𝗵𝗮𝗻𝘁𝗼𝗺 𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗲. 𝗜𝘁 𝗽𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗲𝗿𝘃𝗲𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗮𝗶𝗿𝗰𝗿𝗮𝗳𝘁 𝗮𝗹𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗱𝘆 𝗶𝗻-𝗴𝗮𝗺𝗲, 𝗮𝗱𝗱𝘀 𝘀𝗼𝗺𝗲 𝗵𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗿𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝗮𝗰𝗰𝘂𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗿𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗮𝗱𝗱𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗲𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗯𝗶𝗴𝗴𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗶𝘀𝘀𝘂𝗲𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗵𝗮𝘃𝗲 𝗵𝗲𝗹𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘀𝗲 𝗮𝗶𝗿𝗰𝗿𝗮𝗳𝘁 𝗯𝗮𝗰𝗸 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝘆𝗲𝗮𝗿𝘀.

𝗧𝗵𝗲𝘀𝗲 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲𝘀 𝘄𝗼𝘂𝗹𝗱 𝗮𝗹𝗹𝗼𝘄 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗕𝗿𝗶𝘁𝗶𝘀𝗵 𝗣𝗵𝗮𝗻𝘁𝗼𝗺𝘀 𝘁𝗼 𝗯𝗲𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗿𝗲𝗳𝗹𝗲𝗰𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗶𝗿 𝘀𝗼𝗺𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗹-𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗹𝗱 𝗰𝗮𝗽𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗲𝘀 𝘄𝗵𝗶𝗹𝗲 𝗮𝗹𝘀𝗼 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗿𝗼𝘃𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗶𝗿 𝗴𝗮𝗺𝗲𝗽𝗹𝗮𝘆 𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲. 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗺𝗮𝗷𝗼𝗿𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘀𝗲 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲𝘀 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗯𝗮𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝗼𝗻 𝗵𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗼𝗿𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗳𝗶𝗴𝘂𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀, 𝘄𝗵𝗶𝗹𝗲 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗿𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀 𝘀𝘂𝗰𝗵 𝗮𝘀 𝗶𝗻𝗰𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗺𝗲𝗮𝘀𝘂𝗿𝗲𝘀 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗙-𝟰𝗝(𝗨𝗞) 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗱 𝗮𝘀 𝗮 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘀𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲 𝗾𝘂𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆-𝗼𝗳-𝗹𝗶𝗳𝗲 𝗮𝗱𝗷𝘂𝘀𝘁𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝗵𝗲𝗹𝗽 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗮𝗶𝗿𝗰𝗿𝗮𝗳𝘁 𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗮𝗶𝗻 𝘀𝗼𝗺𝗲𝘄𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘃𝗶𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗰𝘂𝗿𝗿𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗲𝗻𝘃𝗶𝗿𝗼𝗻𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁.

𝗜𝗳 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝘄𝗮𝗻𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝘀𝗲𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗕𝗿𝗶𝘁𝗶𝘀𝗵 𝗣𝗵𝗮𝗻𝘁𝗼𝗺 𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗲 𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝗿𝗲𝗰𝗲𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗶𝘁 𝗱𝗲𝘀𝗲𝗿𝘃𝗲𝘀, 𝗽𝗹𝗲𝗮𝘀𝗲 𝘀𝘂𝗽𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝘀𝘂𝗴𝗴𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗯𝘆 𝘃𝗼𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴.

𝙁𝙞𝙣𝙖𝙡 𝘿𝙚𝙘𝙞𝙨𝙞𝙤𝙣: 𝙄𝙢𝙥𝙧𝙤𝙫𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝘽𝙧𝙞𝙩𝙞𝙨𝙝 𝙋𝙝𝙖𝙣𝙩𝙤𝙢 𝙇𝙞𝙣𝙚

• ✅ 𝗜 𝗦𝘂𝗽𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁 𝗮𝗹𝗹 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲𝘀
• ❌ 𝗜 𝗱𝗼 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝘀𝘂𝗽𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘀𝗲 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲𝘀