Bug, F-5A have 2 dispensers that can have either 30 regular or 15 large caliber countermeasures. But gaijin for some reason thought that it is AND, not OR
hilarious
F-5E… the most agile?
Speed to outrun missiles? What?
I get it’s decent, but it’s no JH-7. It doesn’t even get good missiles like the superior airframe’d JH-7 does.
If I remember correctly, it’s actually accurate according to American & Soviet sources.
Tree wide decompression needs to happen rather than focusing on a single vehicle or single BR range
It could also create gaps for niche vehicles that can be foldered in with the rest of the tree
1 Like
Makes no sense since the P series of sidewinders was for export
eurofighter doesn’t use SPICE and i think it technically can’t anyways
F-14A IRIAF can’t use R-27
F-4F didn’t use AIM-9J
MiG-29 didn’t really use R-60s
plenty more, but “P series was for export” just doesn’t hold any water here.
remove the cryogenic coolant from the F-5s, give the F-5E AIM-9P-4s, keep it at 11.0, absolutely nothing wrong with that.
1 Like
it did
mig29 even entered service a year before R-73
“didn’t really”, which means there’s only a one year stopgap before the R-60 was completely dumped in favor of the R-73. never said they completely never used it.
USAF absolutely used 9Ps, not just export.
9Ps were an export variant of the 9J
The US has never used 9Ps in combat lol they’re literally designed as an export variant of the 9J with radar slaving for countries which can not afford or are not permitted to buy the 9L,M, and X
Who cares what militaries used or didn’t use in combat?
If you want to LARP, go for it, but militaries don’t dictate what vehicles can use; manufacturers of weapons & vehicles dictate capabilities.
1 Like
and the eurofighters ain’t use SPICEs, the F-14A is fully incompatible with R-27s and the F-4F never used the AIM-9J.
stop making a big deal of whether something had a weapon or didn’t. if its compatible (which it is) and would improve the aircraft’s balance, then add it.
Will you stop bringing your ridiculous LARP things and forcing everyone to accept them?
Gaijin cares when they want to buff or nerf something artificially.
F-5A/C in USAF service was never able to use the countermeasure pod and AIM-9E, but Gaijin gave them anyway because ‘Foreign exported versions can, Northrop said that’
Meanwhile, F-4J in RAF service were used ex-USN F-4J Phantom that theoretically capable of using AIM-7F and some fancy USN ground ordnance that they were used back in the USN era, but Gaijin pushed Full NO about it because ‘RAF never used AIM-7F and never had massive stockpiles of napalm. So it is historically incorrect, then no.’
Or F-100D of French Service were F-100D, so if we apply F-5C solution, then they could use AIM-9E but Gaijin also doesn’t care about giving them AIM-9E despite F-100D(FASF) sharing the same BR with F-100D(USAF) and F-100A(ROCAF). I heard it from the forum that the reason is ‘French’s sidewinder rail is not capable of equipping AIM-9E’
And there are also some examples of Chinese bombers such as Tu-4(CN) and H-5(Chinese IL-28) that lost their capability of carrying old Soviet ordnance because Chinese didn’t use those despite the fact that they are same plane.
Or there could be another example of British ground forces being stuck with the Solid AP version of 75mm M61 APCBC, because Gaijin never wanted to believe that British Force were used M61 APCBC-HE too, and wanted to nerf British tanks artificially.
Oh, then also there are other examples of JAS39C(SAAF).
It is a total abomination of this game because of confusing standards hopping left and right.
-They got AIM-9M even though South Africa didn’t adopt those, because SAAB said so
-They got R-Darter because SAAB suggested SAAF integrate it, even though South Africa said no about it.
-But they failed to get AIM-120A/B, which other JAS39C has, even though SAAB probably says full yes about mounting AIM-120 AMRAAM on their Gripen.
Gaijin cherry-picking their standards between military standards and Manufacturer standards.
And you are acting like Gaijin never cared about military standards and treating users who want to ‘historic loadout’ as LARP Yapper.
So, F-5E shouldn’t be able to use AIM-9P-4 if Gaijin want to keep F-4J(UK) suffering with skyflash
Or if F-5E need to get AIM-9P-4, then other cases also need to get similar treatments.
2 Likes
Dont forget HOSBOs being germany exclusive despite there being no obstacle for italian and uk typhoons to get them as well.
1 Like
Its only accurate to a soviet source and an in-accurate american one or something, But according to the actual USAF Flight manual, its overperforming by around 4°/s in STR
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/hIzLAh45I9sD
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/hqLuX2tQIZDa
Its been proposed quite a few times over the years and is planned for the EFT EK, but its primary reason for its addition is as a placeholder for our actual A2G loadout options which have thus far been denied, such as Brimstone and Spear
So theres technical reasons the NETz gets all the CMs while the rest are scraping 45?
Or what what stops the f16a using the f16Cs dispenser?
The chinese MLU gets 60 the other 13.3s get 45?
Actual reasons?