There are still early enough vehicles like the Cavalier Mustang II that would make the jump from the B7A2 a little jarring. If you throw in things like the Thai Hawk 75N or ID NU-22Xs it makes it feel even more strange. I think its pretty easy to move over the single engine bombers as the B7A2 is really the only big outlier of a single engine bomber being higher than many of the twin engine bombers.
I think there are a handful enough of domestic TH/ID planes to fill up the early ranks instead of just putting a bunch of fighters after a line of dive bombers. It would also fix the current situation where the heavy fighter/interceptor line ends in some of the smallest and lightest 3rd and 4th gen jets/ground attackers. It’s a 180 switch in roles.
For gameplay? Sure. But the issue with copy paste is that this M60A3 is now identical to the one in the U.S. tree, and as such only serves to make the Thai subtree look more uninspired and lame.
It doesn’t have era, Gaijin literally just copy and pasted and didn’t even bother to LOOK at a picture of the damn thing… same with the 163, its not the actual unique Thai TVADS Super Vulcan
Some people prefer not to see copy paste when applicable. If the standard M163 was foldered under the TVADS it would be acceptable but knowing Gaijin I’ll have to research the former for what will be the third time now (US and Israel) just to get to the actually interesting unique vehicle below it.
It is possible that the improved IR guidance would have it be ~8.0 rather than 7.3 of the standard M163, of which there is currently a spot for SPAA in the 7.3 lineup that is not currently filled.
Though there is also a spot in the 8.3 lineup that could use the IR guidance VADS as well.
If it’s in development, I can only imagine that it’s not ready for this update.
If it’s not in development, I hope it gets in development soon.
The TVADS doesn’t really seem 8.0 worthy IMO. Even with such upgrades as IR tracking, an LRF, thermals, unmanned turret, and APDS, at heart it’s still a lightly armored box with a fast-firing 20mm on it, so pushing it past 7.7 would be too much I think.
And while yes, the 7.3 lineup is a bit more appealing than the 7.7 one (unless Type 99 gets moved up that is), I don’t think that Gaijin would be generous enough to put the TVADS that low, and so I’m willing to accept it at a less ideal BR.
And besides, even if it’s unlikely to be on Gaijin’s radar, the prototype M61-armed truck would still be a good pick in place of the original VADS.
Speaking of the Ho-Ro, an interesting new article from TE suggests that 1 or 2 went down with the army transport ship “Aoba Maru” of Hi-85 convoy after an American air attack while it was docked in San Fernando Harbor, Philippines on January 1st of 1945. Issue is, many spots in the harbor seem much to shallow to allow any real shipwrecks to last, so I’m not sure any remain today.
There is also a claim that the ROK Army used Chi-Ha in the Korean War, based on a book written by Fu Chongbi, commander of the 63rd Army of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army, but this is difficult to trust.
People use this photo
Chinese Communist Soldier Posing at Knocked out South Korean captured Chi-Ha Kai during Korean war, 1952.
Thailand is already accepted and implemented as a subtree and there is already a sub tree suggestion for both ID air and ground. As for when we can expect it, no one knows. The first Thai vehicle was the squad F-5E FCU added in March 2024, the 2nd was the premium AV-8S in November 2024, and the full air subtree came in December of 2024. Maybe 9 months to a year, but that’s assuming we don’t get a bunch of misc additions to fill gaps instead of a dedicated ID subtree update.
At the very least I would hope for an Indonesian Rafale F.4 in the December update even if it doesn’t bring a full tree. Japan is really struggling without a 14.0 and there really isn’t a good one to fill the gaps domestically and the Thai Gripen E sale just went through which is too early to add. Meanwhile the ID Rafales are getting ready for delivery.
Reading up on it, there does seem to be a lot of scrutiny of that book and its claims, but of course only more information will confirm or deny them. I am however wondering what the markings on the turret of that Chi-Ha are, as I don’t seem to recognize them at all.
