ohh shii. my bad
Wouldn’t surprise me if they’ve decided getting a Sabre at a BR that’s desirable to fill a gap, is more important than being accurate to which type Greece actually used.
Similar example is the Spitfire IXc, which has a Merlin 61 engine and is modelled as a 1942-era Spitfire Mk.IX exactly the same as the one in the British tree: Israel operated Mk.IXs with the C type armament, but not in this configuration - but if they gave Merlin 66 engine which most likely all Israeli Spitfires had coming from 1944 production and being transferred after the war, it’d be a higher BR.
It doesn’t have slats, it wouldn’t end up staying at 9.0 anyway. The only thing they got wrong for sure was the engine.
If gaijin really want a CL-13 Mk.6, there’s always the trialed Israeli one.
1 Like
It had it on dev stream with SEA modes so i assume we just wait for next dev patch
P-4 would honestly be fine for the F.1CG, especially if it lost its ahistorical flares
It would be awesome to see the Greek F-16C Block 30 in the Greek subtree. In terms of lineups, it could perfectly fill the gap between the F-16A Netz and the F-16C Block 40. This early F-16C could serve as a counterpart to the F-16A ADF, but with slightly better flight performance thanks to a more powerful engine, while carrying the exact same armament (AIM-9L and AIM-120A).
1 Like
Thanks to @urmom_xD that he noticed that the Greek Helldivers didn’t have rear guns and other things.
it will be a nerf to the plane but in the name of historical accuracy and making it more unique its worth it.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/YrJ6xF7gjdEV
3 Likes
I said it in private but I’ll say it here too:
There should be nothing preventing the mounting of the machine gun. It does not appear that any changes made were permanent.
2 Likes
im surprised we aint getting the turkish f102 for italy
Turkey isn’t a Subtree of Italy.
2 Likes
Not quite needed when we have Israeli Block 30s to add still, but I wouldn’t mind them with the HAFs later obtained AMRAAM loadouts (but still not quite needed). I’d much prefer the Block 50s as they feature the Ge129 engine, something no Israeli faction features.
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
how does that matter in any way? why devoid something of its uniqueness? and actual slight different gameplay it can offer, every picture/source i can find of a greek helldiver is with the rear gun removed
theres only one, photo with a guy at the rear sit and still no gun in sight. which is what gaijin based it of off even to the number to avoid doing minimal effort of modeling.
while you can still see the one right next to it is completely empty
havent found any source claiming that.
only the removal, as well… they were deadweight to the HAF.
3 Likes
im genuinely trying to find a SINGLE photo with the tiniest bit of the gun sticking out, nothing. (if there ever was one)
even the museum one is still as it always the greeks intended it to be
so youre simply just wrong here.
1 Like
I’d rather not have it become the worst Helldiver at the same BR. Removing the gunner wouldn’t make it drop in BR.
The gun being removed doesn’t mean there’s anything preventing it from being readded. Unless there was a permanent change to its mounting, which cannot be determined from this photo alone. Regardless, the seat and back canopy remain present and functioning, as you have shown. The piece it’s typically mounted on appears to be present in the photo as well, but again the image is low quality.
As you noted the gun was removed and not used in HAF service, that does not mean the aircraft is incapable of fielding it. My argument is not that the HAF may have used it, it’s that it could have used it as nothing was done that could prevent such a case. We have many similar examples from other aircraft ingame, knowing gaijin I’m willing to bet this case will be no different.
3 Likes
not for me personally, i wouldn’t mind flying a worse plane than other in other TTs if it makes it more unique and historically accurate the same goes to the F-102 or the Rafale without IRST that makes them worse than their counterparts but not complete copy paste
2 Likes
i still see no valid logic on why it should be implemented with it. i aint wasting my time on a more complex answer cause i know ill get the same irrelevant logic of “it could so i should” which is pretty flawed, if anything make it a modification so people like you are happy with their copyslop.
how? if anything it gives it new life, it loses weight, it should be able to carry heavier payloads cause of that weightloss, and without said payload more maneuverable, cause again, its not just the rear gun.
1 Like
Don’t mind that at all, great reason to have it this way.
I’m simply playing devils advocate here when I mention this, as it’s gaijin’s logic not mine. My stance is simply adhering to that. I am personally in favor of it retaining the MG, but if it got removed I wouldn’t complain.
The weight reduction would equate to a very negligible amount (for instance the MG removal on my spitfire suggestion, sure it sounds cool and is worth mentioning, but it’s so negligible that it will handle almost exactly the same).
As for the “larger payload” claim, you probably need better sourcing for this if gaijin is consistent in handling those kinds of claims. The payload limitations are for the aircraft itself, and are not related to aircraft weight (ex, fuel differences can drop the weight). This is a naval aircraft ofc, and the known specifications and limitations are based on carrier operations (ex, the F3H-2 can use 2x 3000lb bombs realistically, but as a carrier aircraft it could never take off from a carrier with that payload and is limited to one). I’m not saying gaijin won’t accept that claim, but I wouldn’t be too hopeful personally. Once you’ve been around long enough you know what to and not to expect from gaijin. Always a chance ofc, and doesn’t mean you can’t hope for it!
3 Likes
fair, took it more personally than i should.
i only see wiki bringing up the increased bomb payload and doesnt even include an amount increase, which that kinda sums it up i guess.
also since the rear canopy is closed and the tailhook is removed, shouldnt it get better aerodynamics?
i mean youre swapping your gunner for over all slightly better performance in some criterias
Which is worth it in my opinion