Whatever happens in June, I have a feeling there’s going to be a little something for the top gun fans, maybe a F-14, or maybe a hornet. Hell maybe the Yf-17 as a fun precursor to the F-18, it’s just a gut feeling. But who knows, it’s gaijin we’re talking about, anything could happen!
(glances at F-16AJ, Yak-141, Panther 2, E-100, etc)
Just hope we get more F-14 variation to let players choose the BR and playstyle they want from as many options as possible.
Yak-141 is real. People need to stop mentioning the Yak-141, it’s literally just the VB1002 treatment.
Not sure why you lump that with Panther 2 and E100.
Also Real, But in game configuration is wrong (schmallturm wasn’t going to be used and the Maus turret was found to be too heavy), and the VB10.02 is real and as far as i can find with a minimum effort google search correct in configuration, what we need to be looking at is the F-16AJ, R2Y2 and stuff like the Kronshtadt and (maybe the Shcherbakov) which are straight paper vehicles
It’s gun, armament, and irst aren’t tho :P
(I only mention it bc of the unrealistic standard for it)
They are real. And it’s to the same standard as all other real prototypes in War Thunder.
Ok so where is the pictographic / source documentation that would prove that they were in fact built?
Should the F-15 get its planned ATAR blister?
Various Airframes the AIM-95?
F-14A / F-15A / F-16A HMD?
etc.
Let’s say gaijin add F-14D with AIM-120 in summer major update
I assume maybe AIM-120C-5
I’m not surpriced F-14D coming to 2nd major update in june
I guess F/A-18C coming to june 2025 and F/A-18E Super Hornet Blk.1 (F/A-18E-1) in june 2026
Prove that F-14, F-15, and F-16 never entered production then.
Production and prototype have different rules that are consistent for ALL of that type.
The F-14"B" didn’t, it was a one off prototype to test the engine configuration. The “A+” did.
False, If that were the case;
Why does the M60-120S only have the 750hp engine and not the planned 1200hp variant, and yet has the planned Gen 2 Thermals not the as built Gen 1 system?
Anyway for the HMD(VTAS III, AN/AVG-8B) for example, I have sufficient sources that prove the F-14A / A-7E had it mounted and flew with it, the F-15A probably did, and if not, at least flew with an inert fit test / mass simulator article, and was wired for it.
Prototypes having relaxed rules for not being as built is so strange when they are bent all over the place for ordnance, and sometimes not for example the F-20 is basically the least advanced model they could have gone with and probably won’t be receiving AMRAAMs.
For example,
The GPU-5/A for the F-15A was rejected for being tested on the protoype F-15E [TF-15A airframe]. (the Same gunpod for the F-16A has also yet to be implemented even though it was reported on the Dev server) even though the brochure doesn’t mention any specific variant
GPU-2/A was rejected for the A-4E since it was inconclusive if the Airframe was an A-4E or A-4F even though the unit in question operated both at the time.
No podded GAU-12/A for the AV-8A yet either.
And yet the F-4F gets AIM-9J’s because they are listed in the manual? Can the US F-4E get the Pave Spike TGP & TISEO that is present on the Kurnass 2000? … Nope.
Cause it uses the default M60 hull with no modifications. The company didn’t produce a hull, AKA a tank, for the 1200HP engine, thus not only is the 1200HP engine variant, yes variant, fake, but there’s no reference material on how the hull is supposed to be modeled since schematics were also never released.
Gen 2 was the installed thermals.
AMRAAMs would make the F-20 unplayable, physically unplayable.
Your last paragraphs shows no disparity.
And yet the F-4F gets AIM-9J’s because they are listed in the manual? Can the US F-4E get the Pave Spike TGP & TISEO that is present on the Kurnass 2000? … Nope.
So how is the above not a disparity? The stores in question have been implemented in game, there is an airframe that was not revised and so did not receive them that could be equipt with them as is listed in the manual.
Similar capability exists at a lower BR (Buc S.2B / A-6E TRAM), the US F-4E is not equipt with the AIM-9L or AGM-65D in addition to the systems in question, so the lower BR should not sufficient to deny the revision to the stores on balance grounds.
Clearly someone has forgotten or never seen the evidence of the F-4F carrying the AIM-9J…
I want you to tell me what’s off in this image
And let me remind you, this is the same reason why the German F-104G has the AIM-9J as well
So if we were to break this down, you’re saying F-14D this June?
These are F-4Es, not the F-4F and at that one of the 10 F-4E-63, purchased by Germany but remain in USAF markings that Germany used for training pilots in the US. You can tell due to the Serial numbers starting with XX-6xx on the near airframe(For an F-4F in USAF markings theoretically you would expect either 72-1xx or -2xx) alternately, the presence of Slots in the Stabilator(leading edge of the elevator) makes it an F-4E, as they were reverted to the non-slotted version for the F-4F in order to reduce costs.
https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_fighters/f4_11.html
75-0628/0637 McDonnell F-4E-63-MC Phantom (USAF/Luftwaffe)
vs
https://www.joebaugher.com/usaf_fighters/f4_17.html
72-1111/1119 McDonnell F-4F-52-MC Phantom (for Luftwaffe, 3701-3709)
72-1120/1134 McDonnell F-4F-53-MC Phantom (for Luftwaffe, 3710-3724)
72-1135/1158 McDonnell F-4F-54-MC Phantom (for Luftwaffe, 3725-3748)
72-1159/1182 McDonnell F-4F-55-MC Phantom (for Luftwaffe, 3749-3772)
37+56 w/o Sept 13, 1995 in southwest Germany
72-1183/1206 McDonnell F-4F-56-MC Phantom (for Luftwaffe, 3773-3796)
72-1207/1230 McDonnell F-4F-57-MC Phantom (for Luftwaffe, 3797-3820)
72-1231/1254 McDonnell F-4F-58-MC Phantom (for Luftwaffe, 3821-3844)
72-1255/1285 McDonnell F-4F-59-MC Phantom (for Luftwaffe, 3845-3875)
I’m being satirical, since there is no F-14E.
Interesting thing with the aforementioned F-14C: it was a very real proposal.
Back in the early 70s, there were ongoing tests for what was originally meant to be the F-14B. Just like the F-14A+/B of the late '80s, it was mostly just going to be a re-engined F-14A. However, the F110 (or known as the F101 back then when in the prototype stage) wasn’t going to power it. Instead, the Pratt and Whitney F401 would, which was a parallel development of the F100. The F-14C was meant to be sort of an equivalent to the F-14D, as it would be a huge avionics upgrade. Unfortunately, both were cancelled due to major reliability issues in regards to the F401 (which also plagued early F100s as well).
I’m aware of this, I went off your joke to say your prediction of of the F-14D in June 2025 meant this June instead. The F-14E never existed as that name, the proposal was just Super Tomcat 21. Unfortunate that the project was never realized, the upgrades would have been an interesting addition.
Yeah. My Dad owns Gaijin and he told me the next major patch will introduce the Super Duper Tomcat F-140G
Cause we have an early F-4E for one before all that.
And it’s not 11.3 [AIM-9L].
Also the fact you want F-4F to be 10.0 with only AIM-9Bs… no thanks.
So yeah, no disparity.
I’d like an F4F early with only AiM9B FGW.2 at like 9.3-9.7
