Thanks for putting in the game! However, I am a bit disappointed that a modern Romanian decal didn’t come alongside it. Now, besides the Osa, there’s the IAR sporting it. Do you guys think we’re going to get it?
1 Like
if I remember Gzabi’s data mines said its gone to 9.0 ASB
1 Like
No countermeasures makes this a no from me. Mid event, I hate when we get Event Aircraft that can barely do air to air combat…
from what ive noticed test flying it is probabally gonna fly like a Hunter F.1 with missiles
In general I am very happy to see this plane in the game, although maybe that’s unfortunate of the Italian TT for whatever reason (looking how poorly it’s treated, still without a single Aermacchi jet or Caproni prop since 2017, rare unique models additions in general, despite enormous potential especially in terms of WW2 aircraft), but why another Romanian plane in its best variant, actually in even worse way than IAR-81C, which can be added in multiple variants to bolster TT with unique designs instead of only copypasting models from big nations, gets hidden behind paywall/limited event this time.
Ok, nevermind best variants.
IAR-93 could be added in at least 3 variants (2 non-afterburner A and MB + the best one, with afterburner, B), but looking at this plane as a user model, with all respect to @NovA29 it seems we won’t get any researchable variants of 93, unless he desides to make them (correct me if I’m wrong, if Gaijin can use B model to get other variants).
So my feelings are mixed, I will do event of course, because I like Romanian stuff, but I’m sad to see another missed opportunity for this country and look how its vehicles are used only for premiums/events (the only exception is Romanian OSA-AKM, it’s copypaste though).
1 Like
I feel you. Ok. Yes any other variant not hard to create. But im as a player and as an artist want create something new every time. If GJ wants they can easily remake models to another versions. But. How they know you need it? Not you one person… maybe you can gather more players and ask them to hear you out. You can softly force them to go ahead to you. So find point where your energy be more sufficient and use it. Write in here only allows you feel a little better but do nothing to the world around you. I gladly create more unique plane models.
2 Likes
This gives me a hope, I just thought that there could be some issues with author rights.
1 Like
You don’t need flares at this BR (9.0) if you have even an ounce of situational awareness.
2 Likes
It’s nothing special, even at 9.0
The missing flares were just the anti-selling point for me.
completely underwhelming for 9.7. It only has r3s (if only it had an r13m1 copy), and no r60, poor flight performance (abysmal acceleration), poor armament. I don’t see why i would take this over the jaguar gr1 or the t2. this plane is at best worth 9.0 in ARB
It’s 9.0 (for AAB, ARB and ASB) and 9.3 for GRB
Well, it only has, what it had and used in real life
Why would I have R-60s if it never had them in real life?
At the current moment yes.
It still missing:
-
Option to mount 5 x 500kg bombs
(currently you can only mount 3) -
The missing quad bomb adapter
(is uses the soviet one already in game, MBD2-67U)
Which would mean 4 x 100kg per wing pylons, for a total of 16 x 100 kg bombs
-
The option to double mount the 16 rocket pod launchers
A more funny way of having 32 rockets per pylon than using the 32 rocket pod launcher -
Incendiary bombs (ZAB-500)
But I’m working on preparing some bug reports about those issues
2 Likes
it was 9.7 when i tested it, i didn’t nkow it was adjusted.
at 9.0 it’s ok
everyone screams how it should have r60s so i thought it had them (or at least could mount them).
Its 9.0 in air and 9.3 ground, perfectly fine for a decently fast plane at those BRs.
Gotta say, this plane looks really awesome. Very good loadout for air and ground. Well done on this one.
I agree, not only technically one of my favourite aircraft aesthetically (Technically as im a J-22 Orao enjoyer)
1 Like
submit as bug report
R-60s on this bird would just make it less useful imo, R-3S is fine at 9.0/9.3, R-60s could mean 10.0 or more, where its speed and lack of CMs would be very harsh.
3 Likes
100%, it should not go higher unless it gets flares, because a flareless subsonic at 10.0 would be genuinely awful to play.
3 Likes
How many times do I have to repeat myself…
THE AIRCRAFT NEVER HAD R-60s
Those “4 x GA ADAPTORS” that you highlighted are for the rocket pods, not for the air-to-air missiles
3rd party website are not trustworthy sources
And for the INCAS website, that’s the only “official” source which mentions 8 air-to-air missile. A single source is not enough to prove or even convincing. Even from the image on the website, which is taken from one of those presentation books/pamphlets, doesn’t mentions 8 air-to-air missile.
Also, how the the hell, would the aircraft have 8 of them, when even the 4 of them, was rare to have considering that the missile were tested in the last year of the aircraft service and not all of them managed to get access to them.
So once again…
The IAR-93B never had R-60s