F-5C Flares need to be removed. It is FICTIONAL

[Morvran]

That’s just not how Gaijin works though…

South Africa never purchased Aim-9, Skyflash or by all accounts BOL rails (I think). All 3 are present on the SAAF Gripen C currently

[TheArcticFoxxo]

@MajloActual

A quick look on the F-5 wikipedia page:

Twelve F-5A Freedom Fighters were tested by the US Air Force for four and a half months in Vietnam. Modified at Palmdale plant by adding removable, non retractable air-refueling probe on the left side, 90 lb of external armor plates under the cockpit and engine, and jettisonable stores pylons.

So… F-5A?
Refer to:

Can we get a decent tech tree Draken already?

Almost every Dutch F-5 had them, A and B. [image] [image] [image] Or Norway [image] [image] [image] Even Nigeria… [image] This seems like more than a one-off thing, no? It doesn’t matter if they did or didn’t, they were capable of it. F-14A crews often removed and welded the glove vanes, yet the F-14A has glove vanes. MSIP-I was cancelled, yet the F-15A in-game has flares. There are so many miniscule things to knit-pick, but it makes no difference. F-5A/Cs could mount flares, so …

These are only F-5As pictured, too.

@MajloActual

American F-5A and F-5C never mounted countermeasures. Even though technically possible, it doesn’t matter, it was never done. It should be as simple as that…

And Israeli Mirages never mounted Atars. Gaijin, remove Mirage 5F!

[MajloActual]

@Morvran

That’s just not how Gaijin works though…

I am well aware. It does not change how things should be working.

@Morvran

South Africa never purchased Aim-9, Skyflash or by all accounts BOL rails (I think). All 3 are present on the SAAF Gripen C currently

It is my opinion that ALL such errors/made up/fictional/whatever you want to call it, should be corrected. This current topic is of the F-5C, so we are primarily discussing it, instead of everything else.
Just because there are other errors in vehicle implementation, it does not excuse errors in others.

[Morvran]

Sure, I’m down for fitting IRIS-T onto the Gripen, but something tells me that would be worse currently.

[MajloActual]

@TheArcticFoxxo

These are only F-5As pictured, too.

And not a single one of them is in American service.
If the game wants F-5A with countermeasures as currently seen on the F-5A and F-5C in-game, then the game can add an F-5A from a country that actually mounted it.

[TheArcticFoxxo]

@MajloActual

I am well aware. It does not change how things should be working.

So you’re saying that it should be that the F-5C and any other F-5 in the American tree should be excluded from using flares, even though the F-5A, F-5B, and F–5C all had provisions to use them?

Ignoring the fact that ALE-40 was used widely in American service, should it also be excluded from the F-4E for the same reason?

[TheArcticFoxxo]

@MajloActual

And not a single one of them is in American service.

Could not care less.

@MajloActual

If the game wants F-5A with countermeasures as currently seen on the F-5A and F-5C in-game, then the game can add an F-5A from a country that actually mounted it.

Or, hear me out, the vehicle capable of a system is added with said system.

[MajloActual]

If a vehicle only ever used “too good stuff” for the current version of the game - then the problem is that they added it too soon in the first place.

[Mytho-GR1]

and then A darter im sure 100g is fine

Not everything is 100% accurate in war thunder as this is just a game and not a sim like DCS

[Mytho-GR1]

Balance

[MajloActual]

Yes.

[TheArcticFoxxo]

Cool.

[TyphoonCro]

@TheArcticFoxxo

These are only F-5As pictured, too.

Someone explained that to me but can’t recall who… Dutch F-5s were upgraded, Norwegian ones were not. So Norwegian F-5A with ALE-40s is closest to F-5C with flares in game

Also, French Mirage 3Es never had flares either but Swiss 3Es did.

[Cpt_Bel_V]

@TheArcticFoxxo

And Israeli Mirages never mounted Atars. Gaijin, remove Mirage 5F!

Wrong wrong and wrong again,…

All Mirage 5 and Derivative IAI Nesher used ATAR 9C engines, even if built “under license”

[TheArcticFoxxo]

@TyphoonCro

Someone explained that to me but can’t recall who… Dutch F-5s were upgraded, Norwegian ones were not. So Norwegian F-5A with ALE-40s is closest to F-5C with flares in game

As far as I can see, dutch NF-5s only had select things like engine improvements, changes to the wings, as well as avionics and radar suite.

[TheArcticFoxxo]

Boo hoo

[Morvran]

I can see 3 options for the F5C

1. they remove CMs without moving BR. But this would kill the aircraft and no one would buy it, Gaijin won’t do that
2. remove the CMs but drop it’s BR down. Nope again, they can’t do that. It would destroy everything at a lower BR, even if they removed the AAMs as well.
3. fix it’s heat signature, but leave CMs.

[TyphoonCro]

Kinda leaning towards option 3
What’s the EGT of J85 on afterburner, do you maybe know?

[Morvran]

I don’t, I have no idea, but when a F5C on full reheat is 60° colder than a sea harrier. Something is probably wrong

F-5C Flares need to be removed. It is FICTIONAL

I am surprised this F-5C debate is still ongoing. Gaijin wont ever remove the flares. So that is a dead argument. The better argument to fight for now, is to fix how IR signatures work in-game. Currently, they focus ONLY on the engine temp, not the exhaust temp. This means that an F-5C on full reheat is actually a colder target than many other aircraft at its BR

F-5C

[Screenshot 2024-02-07 034147]

Sea Harrier FRS1

[Screenshot 2024-03-07 040527]

This makes its flares more effective than they shoul…

[TyphoonCro]

That’s funny, Harrier should (well, not really sure but logic… Which might be flawed. Anyhow.) have colder exhaust because it should mix exhaust from both cold nozzle and hot nozzle, right?