It never had flares in real life, as simple as that. And for some reason you cant even lock this thing with IR missiles unless you are very close, this thing has 0 thermal signature for some reason.
Than it can be reduced in BR to 10.0, since its barely supersonic and does not have god tier missiles it should not be a problem.
Mig23Bn hasn’t gotten flares :(
did it have em irl?
i wish it did
F-5C did not have flares IRL, and this is a well known fact.
Yes but never in East German service.
It’s just another case of the 9.3-10.3 compression painfest
nah was talking about the mig 23
That is also a thing yea. Or they should just rename it to the MLA
The MiG-23ML had such countermeasures and radar modifications in Afghanistan in the 80s.
Yea, unlike the F-5C. Its always unfair when some planes get stuff they never had and for others its denied. Especially the F-5 airframe is very maneuverable and could do without.
I don’t know enough about the F-5C history to say whether or not it had flares. What I do know is that the flares mounted on it were totally available during the time period, and if used in US service would easily have been able to incorporate them as needed. Likewise, the MiG-23MF/MLA got countermeasures and missiles they never actually received in real service. They do this quite often and almost explicitly refuse to add such stuff to aircraft when it would unfairly increase or decrease their efficiency. I understand why they did it, and I accept it. You should too.
Going to quote Flame2512 on this one but;
The F-5C was withdrawn from service in 1966. The AN/ALE-40 flare dispensers it has in game didn’t exist until the 1970s. Ergo the F-5C can’t have used them in real life.
They could however convert the F-5C to a South Korean one where the ALE-40 conversion is more plausible.
This came up on the old servers as well. I think the conclusion was that it could in-theory equip them, and may have done so in test and therefore it was given them. It came up a lot in disucssions about CMs for the Harrier Gr1.
Now whether it should keep them is another discussion altogether though and i remember it being a pain at that BR in ARB.
Norwegian F-5As had ALE-40s mounted
COUGH COUGH Turkish camo on the US F-5C COUGH COUGH lmfao
That is irrelevant, other variants carried them as was shown many times. This has been done a multitude of times as previously mentioned for other aircraft as well.
The fact of the matter is, there are aircraft in war thunder that frankly never even existed or saw service, or would ever see service of any kind by the slightest chance possible. There are other things we could point and cry about, the F-5C doesn’t need to have it’s countermeasures removed. Especially since it was the community crying about it that got them added in the first place.
What they should do, is make the aircraft less tanky. There is no reason the lightest weight jet fighter to my knowledge should survive half a belt of 23mm or 4-5 R-60s repetitively.
Thats also true, just had one which survived a full R-60M hit.
Just go to Reddit , and everyday there is a post about how the SU-25 survived a missile hit , so it has to be “rUsSiaN biAs”, but the F-5C survives even more hits yet nobody cares. We live in a society. This doesn’t only happen to enemy F-5Cs. When I used to play the f-5C , it used to happen to me a lot as well. The things DM is busted as hell for a lightweight paper plane.
I live in Türkiye btw , you can see Turkish F-5s in this (relatively) recent AD by Turkish airlines. But I do not think they are F-5Cs.
I think the reason why people complain about the su25s tankiness is because the A10 is lacking all of its tankiness/redundancy. (And having seen an Su25 survive a direct hit from a red top before, i get it) Though yeah, F5C is definetly a bit of a pain. Been a while since i touched arb at that br, but i do remember more than a few surviving 9Gs