This was one of the many, but they truly got either hidden or removed
https://www.reddit.com/r/Warthunder/comments/dbttqf/please_fix_the_current_j7w1/ (One of the newer reports that was made in past)
Kyushu J7W1 Shinden Interceptor Fighter | Old Machine Press (Article that mentions the engine and slats and flaps systems)
J7W1 Shinden | Aircraft of World War II - WW2Aircraft.net Forums (Mentions of slats on canard wing)
Kyushu J7W1 Shinden/J7W2 Shinden-kai | Page 2 | Secret Projects Forum (Lots of pictures and data, mentions of double flaps and slats)
4 places were existence of slats or double flaps were mentioned and proven with citation to sources or by pictures/blueprints
Link 2 (year 2020) and 4 (2012) Mention same parameters, meaning they have same source
Link 2 is very convenient as it given quite the source material to back it’s claims
I could not found the old stuff tho, i’m afraid that forum got removed (i’m not talking about wt forum)
sigh, there were some good stuff there, but nothing lasts forever, true shame, all pictures and data down to drain.
And yet still, where are those flaps and slats? Nowhere.
With engine power curve it’s actually harder to prove, but flaps and slats? We have picture of real thing on which we can see loosen slat minimally falling out of canard wing.
That, and all that documentation and evidence with citations from books ranging from 1980 to 2010 and yet they somehow made it without either flaps or slats, and then they persistently avoid addressing this issue.
God da*n it, i always get angry even thinking about it, how tha fug can you get something this wrong with this much data all around? With N1K2 Shiden Kai it is more understandable as obtaining data was very hard (from what i dig out it had better, later version of engine, and bigger propeller, hence, i’m guessing, later version of engine increased it power enough that older, smaller propeller got inefficient)
But i f*cked up big time, as i did not saved any evidence of that and then when they magically reached me after 4 or more months i could not even use my search history to try to dig it up again.
Therefore we are stuck with fictional N1K2 J and Ja copy paste as they did not had same engine power and neither same size of propeller but yeah… I guess i did not thought about saving data on that one as i kinda assumed they wont give a f about it anyways, and well, even if i would give them data, they would apply stamp “acknowledged & passed to developers for consideration” as they did with J7W only to nothing ever to be fixed
And let’s be real, evidence on N1K2 was much weaker and more uncertain than solid data of plane like J7W1 that is still not fixed so like, yeah.
Also did you knew Ki-44 had bulletproof glass? 40mm if i recall, so yeah, but it’s pointless to look after this feature in game, its absent.
Same as Hs-129 had bulletproof side glass, cockpit armor of different thickness than it is in game and different armament + ammo loads.
When they fixed and added Ki-61 armor i nearly dropped from my chair from disbelief, like, now way man… they fix stuff?? (To this day i do not know what kind of royal treatment Ki-61 got to be fixed and what caused it)
Ta152C3 has bugged 3D model of engine block.
Do335 A series has incorrect drag model (worse flight performance than those of Ta154 despite being equal in power to weight ratio, but i honestly forgot the details so i do not remember any more what was what)
Ho-5 cannons and their lack of bullets
Ki-84 wrong G thresholds
And many more, but, since i can not provide wikipedia of citation or sources to those (or rather i’m not willing) those things will remain “fictional”
I would not mind seeing prototypes of vehicles in game to be honest, war thunder is as historically accurate as new battlefields with black women in “SS” with drum magazine Mp40 with reflective sight.
And when it comes to new stuff, at least there is hope they will get it right.
Old stuff? Nobody cares.
