wait is this thing getting gunpods or not?
Yeah, like a Sea Harrier FRS.1 [L] but with 2 more missiles and usable radar, 11.3 is probably the best BR for it, I think they don’t know how to balance it because it must also be completely overshaddowed by every other thing at the BR because G@yjin
Edit: At 23:03 in the Dev stream, Oxy says that the onboard cannons are removed. How would that be? Surely that can’t be right, can it?
Yeah.
Or a Viggen C but instead of supersonic, an internal gun and TWS, armed with 4x Aim-9Js and 2x Skyflash its instead subsonic with no internal gun, no TWS (I think) and armed with 4x Aim-9Ls and 2x Skyflash.
It balances out quite well.
Yes, it is. The guns are located in the nose, the radar is in the way. It can get external 30mm ADEN gunpods, but it is a missile truck. I imagine like the F-104 though, you can pick your setup. So instead you could have 6x Aim-9Ls and the 25mm ADENs
Radar isn’t in the way. The guns just didn’t work (same reason Harrier GR.7 never got a 25mm Aden gunpod IRL), so were removed from the design before the radar was fitted.
The first Hawk 200 customers Oman and Malaysia were buying Hawk 100s that would still be using the 30mm Aden pod, so by 1992 it probably wasn’t worth pursuing the 25mm gun on ZJ201.
Production Hawk 200s still have the bulge under the cockpit where the cannons would have been. It’s just where the muzzles were going to be either side of the nose gear well, has been faired over
1 Like
I thought 4 SkyTrash not 2
I didn’t think they were wrong but having to rely on only missiles is a bit concerning, having the same aiming problem as the Harriers as well
Ah… interesting…
My bad then. I assumed it was a physical confliction.
I dont know. 2 seems to be what most mention
Gaijin logic… don’t even attempt to understand it because there really is no such thing.
They’ve been drip feeding AShm’s into the game for a couple of years… either do it or don’t, and if they are going to then give them a purpose.
That aside, there is simply no valid justification in not making them available to all of the Sea Harriers.
2 Likes
I’ll give you their justification:
“Nuh uh”
To be honest. They’ve had a purpose for years.
We’ve had naval targets in ASB this entire time and they’ve added a few to ARB. Would be trivial to add some more.
What I find frustrating though, is that they dont seem to see airmodes as standalone gamemodes anymore. If it cant be of use in GRB. Then its not added, which is just infuriating
2 Likes
not to forget these :)
didn’t mentioned earlier about the 208 does sling AIM-9P too, though as the F-5E withdrawn from service later they subsequently transitioned to AIM-9L/M I assume
both 208 and 209 has FZ rockets, though 208 could also utilize CRV7s (I aware of that dummy BAT-120 but doubt that it does have in our inventory)
also as I said on the other topic, if gaijin could go crazy to give them IRCCM maybe 12.7 or 12.3 like the GR.7, though at cost of not having BOL amount of countermeasures and less A2G variety (yes, no AMRAAM, if it does that’s 13.0 territory)
Speaking as someone that could not possibly care any less about Tanks, yeah, I completely agree.
The game has been stale for years, any maps that had unique interesting quirks got removed in favour of CTRL C/V gameplay over a differing backdrop.
2 Likes
Yep. Ground mains complain about aircraft this and aircraft that. But if anything. Aircraft have been more neglected.
No new maps, no new gamemodes, worsening gameplay. lack of new mechanics, massively nerfed weapons, denied features.
Its beyond annoying now
1 Like
They added ASM-1 with the excuse of attacking carriers added to air rb. They denied exocet because “ASM can be used for multiple game modes” (It can’t, you can’t target ground targets). They add this, I ask them about exocet. “We are adding ASMs slowly because of limited gameplay use” in spite of the fact that the ASMs for Japan were added explicitly because of new naval targets in Air RB. Reading between the lines, it seems they don’t even want to proliferate Sea Eagle across compatible platforms from the spat I had with them earlier.
Even Russian weapons are kneecapped on account of this. Platforms missing ordnance because “It wouldn’t make sense for the rating in ground”. Which is an indictment given how they treat the rest. We could have so much cooler munitions if they just limited or restricted weapons from ground modes. Or y’know, make the SP cost for those weapons extortionate. The whole point of air payload SP costs.
1 Like
Honestly? I don’t think it’s able to run more than 4 AAMs, the wing is based on the Hawk 100 wing iirc which is limited to 4x AAMs. The whole point of the wing tip rails was to free up the inboard pylons for fuel tanks and ordnance
Would be nice if they’d start leaving 1 major update a year for the introduction of a few maps that actually had been worked on thoroughly for the rest of the year to create interesting gameplay. In current maps, not sure how the addition of the hawk will function given the state of it at the rating.
Though doesnt necessarily mean those hardpoints cant still be used for AAMs.
Like I said, Gaijin “Logic”, don’t even try to comprehend it, you’ll just give yourself a headache.
Give it’s a Hawk we’re dealing with I doubt it would have the fuel/endurance to actually make use of 6x missiles, even if it could technically carry them. Almost makes the Lightning look like a marathon runner.
1 Like
Honestly given that there’s the chance for two, I think the 209 at ~10.7 with 9Ls and the 208 at ~12.0 with 9Ms or something would be fair, give people both options. (In a folder of course)