Finnish F-18C

[Pheonix_RX01]

Because they dont care?

[Cyno78FS]

really

[Cyno78FS]

they will no longer touch the Finnish f18 except for modifications on the FM in general because the other f/a18 have received modifications but that’s all, the rest we forget. The update is almost ready, so asked them to get moving for a little balancing for maybe 5 players they clearly don’t care anymore.

[Pheonix_RX01]

@quartas121 decided to have a look through some of the other bug reports and one of the mods explicitly mentions the Finnish F-18C cant get BOL while not mentioning the US. I think its safe to say its more added proof BOL will likely only be added to later Hornets.

Though if gaijin keeps their consistency with the Finnish Hornet as they’ve done with the US then maybe the US just won’t get BOL. Doubt it but its just a thought.

[quartas121]

Yeah that would make sense. But I think if enough people complained the US one didn’t have BOL then they could add it since there is apparently no technical reason why it can’t

[Pheonix_RX01]

Uniqueness. If the US is allowed HMD and RWR and A2G because they want nations to have unique models then the US shouldn’t get a F-18 with BOL since it would take away the uniqueness of the MLU 2.

Unfair F-18C Implementation - Why Must the Finnish Hornet Be Inferior?

This version is spesifically the F-18, differing from the F/A-18C in the US tree by being the early version Finland acquired that did not have the CAS packages and other upgrades that came later. Where its possible, we try to have the unique version of aircraft so its not just the same aircraft identically in multiple trees. Much like the difference between the German and British / Italian Eurofighters IRST. As we have mentioned, we plan a second later upgrade MLU variant which will come with…

So why should the US get it if we use gaijins logic? They only tested it, its not a standard service use item. Monkey paw type deal

[Pheonix_RX01]

Well if i said they were lying and that Smins response is a blatant excuse which isnt true like i did before then i and my post would be sent to the snail dimension. I think the main reason is so gaijin can sell the MLU 1 as a prem in a few years or because they actually hate the Finnish.

[Stockholm_Blend]

Well, if they send you to the snail dimension, reserve my seat for me!

I think I will follow you soon Xd

[MasterOfUltramar]

@Smin1080p_WT
Why doesnt the Finnish Hornet have a radar gunsight? What source does gaijin have for this?
Currently, its 100% work of fiction for it not to have it.

[Luftwaffle3]

The way the Finnish Hornet has been treated:
US will get it and the Finnish won’t, while still being at the same br.

[Luftwaffle3]

Yeah, no radar gun sight is insane.

[Demokrat4]

Why doesn’t Gaijin just add a helmet-mounted target designator? Why do some planes add it and others don’t? I’ve watched a lot of videos about the Su-27SM and have never seen a pilot wearing a helmet with a target designator? What’s the problem with giving other top planes an HMD then?

[Pheonix_RX01]

Unfair F-18C Implementation - Why Must the Finnish Hornet Be Inferior?

This version is spesifically the F-18, differing from the F/A-18C in the US tree by being the early version Finland acquired that did not have the CAS packages and other upgrades that came later. Where its possible, we try to have the unique version of aircraft so its not just the same aircraft identically in multiple trees. Much like the difference between the German and British / Italian Eurofighters IRST. As we have mentioned, we plan a second later upgrade MLU variant which will come with…

This is why

Just a reminder Smin stated there is currently no specific timeframe for the MLU so we could see it next update or 1 year from now

My bad, found out you thought both the US hornet and Finnish one didn’t get HMD and were just worried the US would suffer so why are you here?

[Pheonix_RX01]

Well to be honest i have three ideas as to how gaijin will go about it.

1. Ignore Finland like they already do and add BOL to the US model while keeping it off the Finnish Model.

2. both vehicles perform poorly and gaijin adds BOL to both or drops them in BR without adding BOL.

3. BOL was only tested on US aircraft and keeping their whole unique vehicle excuse gaijin only adds BOL to MLU 2 and the US F/A-18C’s go without BOL but stay at 14.0 while MLU 2 is 14.3 or 14.7

Either way this update is pretty much worthless and just straight up gaijin ignoring how bad the OCU was and yet deciding to repeat it because the US would cry if the F-18C was on par in A2A as the US hornet.

[Luftwaffle3]

US mains will cry no matter what happens, they already actually have CAS abilities, A2A abilities not being on par is ridiculous.

[Pheonix_RX01]

Some will, (the majority) but some won’t regardless it doesn’t matter since they aren’t getting screwed over for the most important aspects so who cares right?

[Luftwaffle3]

As long as we can sell our premiums, who cares about smaller nations. -Gaijin

[MasterOfUltramar]

I wonder if it was in this thread or where, but I remember someone claiming AIM-9M wasnt exported and it was AIM-9P4/5 used not M. Looked up on that and its load of bantha poodoo. AIM-9M was exported to Finland in 1992.

[Pheonix_RX01]

Finnish F-18C

No idea why all are complaining!? Fact is that the first deliveries of F-18C Hornets to Finnland did not have a HMD neither for navigation nor for radar use. GJ decided to give us the initial Hornet. Fine with me. We get AIM-9M, which is wrong because it should be AIM-9P5. M were not export. US Only. We get AIM-120B, as we don’t have C’s yet Me, i got a Swiss Hornet skin and have a an excellent air superiority fighter, better than my current AJ37DI which did not get the IRCCM RB74 Later we…

He continues to play off the Finnish Hornet like its similar to the Swiss model despite not being the same…

[Pheonix_RX01]

@Luftwaffle3

Heres the response. Essentially gaijin rushed the Finnish Hornet since they based it on the early and decided to give up after removing everything they deemed would take away the uniqueness to the US mains.