They should remove it’s 6x sidewinder loadout first, it only ever had 4.
Yes, I know that it has 6 positions to mount them in, but i have official documents claiming it only used 4 at a time. They simply swapped which pylons were wired for using said fuel tanks as far as i can tell.
if it can mount 6 and use then it should be fine, the option is there to have 4 or 6
Personally I mount 4 cause i like a more historical look n its cool
Shouldn’t the F-15JM also only have 4x ARH amd 4x IR loadout then? I have never seen a Japanese F-15 carrying AMRAAMs on the wing pylons. It’s always a mix of 4x AAM-4 on the fuselage and 2x AAM-3 + 2x AAM-5 on the wings.
Japan does have the LAU-128 rails necessary for them, as well as the necessary wiring to use AMRAAM. The AMRAAMs are just not used on the F-15Js operationally in favor of domestic missiles, which can’t be used on the wing mounted rails.
The only issue I’d really see with AMRAAM on the F-15J is that it’s the A variant, when Japan had the B variant instead. This is pretty weird considering there’s already the B variant in game, and they’re functionally identical to the A variant so it wouldn’t make a BR difference either.
I have seen x4 AAM-4 + x2 AIM-120 + x2 AAM-3/5 in a photograph somewhere I forgot where I seen it
Are you sure that there was this photo? As I know here isn’t any at the net but it is hard to say, I might miss it
another view of the mg port in the Fuji T-1
Correct
If the information in this book is accurate, at least one Kikka did have armament installed:
Says the allies discovered an interceptor model of the Kikka in development, with two 30mm cannons.
that 1 man who said no kikka had weapons wont like this
Unfortunately it’s not correct that the fighter model of Kikka was being constructed at the end of the war. The description in this book is rather vague and doesn’t really specifically claim such a thing either.
The state of each Kikka under assembly by Nakajima at the end of the war is known. The only variant construction underway was the prototyping of the two-seater training model. For this, two unfinished planes #6 and #7 were sent to the Kūgishō for conversion on July 8th, 1945.
The rest were special attack planes or strength testers and none had gun armament provisions, this can also be seen by the many photos of the Koizumi factory taken after the end of the war.
The planning of the fighter model of the Kikka only started around May 12th, 1945, and at the end of the war various different ideas on the design of the plane were still being considered. There was no actual construction work done. Furthermore, the engine is the Ne-20 Kai, not the much larger and more powerful Ne-130 or Ne-330. The information that Kikka’s fighter model could be equipped with the latter engines seems to be a “what-if” speculation.
I believe that the erroneous description that the Allies discovered several planes of advanced models of Kikka is most likely a slight misinterpretation or mistranslation of this excerpt from Robert C. Mikesh’s 1979 book on the Kikka (which is very good):
(from Monogram Close-Up 19: Kikka)
It’s true that there were variants under development, but only two-seat trainers were actually being constructed.
Hmm, that’s disappointing. This was the source quoted by wikipedia so I had to find this book to find out.
Our AH-1S Kisarazu, AH-1S (Late) and AH-1E’s should Receive Hydra 70 M247 instead of the FFAR’s which we currently have
Also another thing interesting, the Mitsubishi F-1 we currently have ingame currently uses the T-2 Cockpit
Source: walk-around of Mitsubishi F-1
Current Cockpit for the F-1 (Notice the lack of RWR display on the right panel)
Update: Found a bug report on it and it was accepted 3 YEARS AGO
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/VDhZVL5XoeDZ
Yeah, the F-1 cockpit being wrong is well-known. Didn’t know about the AH-1’s rockets though.
I’m doing a bit of research myself, from what I see it uses the Hydra 70 M247 (same as the AH-1F) instead of FFARs
however I am trying to find more concrete proof
It’s really sad within 3 years of major updates which Gaijin claim is when they fix cockpits. They really neglected ALOT
Big read about the AH-1S (Sorry for this lemao)
History:
The Bell AH-1 proved the concept of a small agile attack helicopter in the skies of vietnam supporting ground troops. The JGSDF after testing the concept of support helicopters with for example the UH-1B Hiyodori & H-13H Hibari ordered a pair of AH-1S Step II Cobra’s 1 for further testing. After these tests a slightly improved version was selected for licensed production in 1982, to be specific the AH-1S Step III Cobra’s already present in-game in a couple of variants. After 1991 all newly built AH-1S’s were fitted with the C-NITE system, a nose mounted FLIR imaging device. With multiple earlier built AH-1S’s also being refitted with the system. In 2011 one of these AH-1S’s for the 19th anniversary of the 4th Anti-Tank Helicopter Squadron (IVATH) was given special markings of Second Lieutenant Aoi Kisarazu, an original character created by members of the squadron. As earlier in the year there was the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami one of the markings that was added on the tail was “心をひとつに・・・がんばろう日本！” which in turn translates to “Our hearts together… let’s go Japan!”. The costs of creating these markings as well as applying them reportedly cost ¥150,000. (Adjusted for inflation, ¥159,190.97/1370.50 USD/1240.59 Euro) This was collected by the unit with a fundraiser as it was an unofficial celebration, in 2012 this was doubled but due to receiving so much attention this also was the last year the IVATH had the ability to create more Kisarazu sisters as the higher ups got wind of what was going on and even though it created a lot of good PR weren’t pleased. In the end 2013 was the last time the Kisarazu sisters were used but they still live on in model kits as well as in-game in the form of Leading Private Wakana Kisarazu & First Lieutenant Akane Kisarazu.
Specifications: Fuji AH-1S Step III Cobra «Aoi Kisurazu»
General characteristics:
Crew: two (Pilot, Gunner)
Length: 16.1 m (53 ft)
Rotor diameter: 13.6 m (44 ft)
Height: 4.12 m (13 ft 6 in)
Empty weight: 2,993 kg (6,600 lb)
Max. takeoff weight: 4,500 kg (10,000 lb)
Powerplant: 1 × Kawasaki T-53-K-703 Turboshaft, 1,800 SHP (1,300 kW)
Rotor system: 2 x primary blades, 2 x tail blades
Fuselage length: 13.6 m (44ft 7in)
Stub wingspan: 3.15 m (10ft 4in)
Performance:
Never exceed speed: 315 km/h (196 mph)
Maximum speed: 277 km/h (172 mph)
Range: 510 km (315 mi)
Service ceiling: 3,720 m (12,200 ft)
Rate of climb: 8.2 m/s (1,620 ft/min)
Standard Armament:
1x 20-mm M197 with 760 rounds
76x 70-mm Hydra 70 rockets
8x BGM-71C Improved TOW/BGM-71D TOW-2 Missiles
Other:
Engine exhaust infrared suppression
AN/APR-39A radar warning receiver
AN/ALQ-136 radar jammer
JAVN-V6 helmet mounted night vision
Added (Late production & retrofitted):
C-NITE Thermal imagingStandard Armament states 70mm Hydra 70 Rockets. Not mentioned FFARs
Hello, does anyone have any information on:
From what I know, one fuselage of the Nakajima Kikka aircraft was to be rebuilt into a training version
In 1943, one or more Mitsubishi Ki-46-IIs based at Rabalau were to be armed with a Type 94 or 98 tank gun along with the Ki-45. The gun was mounted in the nose, between the pilot’s legs. The aircraft could fire 3-4 shots per minute. However, the Ki-46s were not used in combat.
Anyone know why they didn’t shove a new motor into the aam-4b?
It gets an AESA seeker, which puts it on par with r-77m/pl-15/aim-260 in terms of seekerhead tech.
However, it range is much worse than all of those, why go through the trouble of developing such an advanced seeker head if it’s just going to be kinematically out ranged by basically every other modern fox 3?
If I recall right, it literally uses the same body as the normal aam-4 (might be wrong on this), or it uses the same motor.