Where are you getting 77cm? I’m seeing 80cm from the 2016 Defense Panorama.
I’m not claiming there isn’t an indifference, just making a statement on that basis.
I just wish there was more open information as to what the systems of the AAM-4 are. We don’t even know the radar on the base model.
As long as it isn’t the primary topic, I don’t see it as an issue. It’s only a minor addition to our current debate.
I’d say it depends wholly on the duration of that speed… Which again, there doesn’t seem to be any information on.
Screw you japan.
It’s primarily due to the longer burning though slightly less powerful single stage motor, while the earlier 120A/Bs use a booster + sustainer. It reaches a lower top speed, though it holds that for almost all of the flight duration, hence the added maneuverability as well.
The wings slightly hampered it, though it decreased drag by a miniscule amount. That’s not entirely relevant, though.
Seeing as it’s the common statistics for most ARH missiles from the 1980s and 1990s, I don’t see it struggling with that.
The only thing that I find questionable is its sustained performance, seeing as there’s little known about the engine.
Given that the Gaijin is looking into the addition of more minor nations to bolster the Japanese tech tree, the proposed idea of an Indonesian Su-27 being in the Japanese tech tree isnt too far fetched.
Japan and Indonesia have good modern relations, both are relatively close and share history with each other.
The caviate to this is that the version of Su-27 that Indonesia fields is the Su-27SKM which I believe is far too advanced for War Thunder right now.
My stance is this, in time consider it please but right now it’s not needed. I’m all for making Japan more fun to play without having to try and justify something silly like the AJ.
The F-16AJ is made up and based entirely on the fact that Japan expressed interested in the fighter.
The Indonesian Su-27 however exists and if i remember correctly Indonesia procurred 5 Su-27SKMs for their air force as well as a few Su-30s. Indonesia is a fair candidate for addition to Japan just like how Sweden has Finnish/Norweigian vehicles. (VIDAR is even South Korean but dont get me started on that).
It’s absolutely not. It could been added yesterday and nothing would change in terms of balance. Just slightly upgraded Su-27 with ability to use R-77, still be useless due to crap fm. Only sensitive upgrade for game would be better RWR.
The AJ was only added as a stop gap prior to the F-15 and F-2, it’s really stretching the boundaries of a Japanese aircraft but I don’t see how an Su-27 Indonesian or otherwise fits the tree any better (or is even necessary since the game has moved forward into the F-15s, and Sweden is just it’s own special case at this point, hello totally Swedish T-80U/Mi-28 and now King Tiger)
I look beyond trying to keep Japan pure and focus on making it as fun of a nation as possible and the Su-27 from Indonesia is no more silly than the Hungarian Gripen for Italy in my eyes. For me this isn’t about “needs”.
A little bit of open minded thinking isnt poisonous when discussing theoreticals.
I dont agree to adding this when there are upcoming Thai vehicles that is going to be added to address this very problem. Its not real and was never in service. Moreso the cheeky posting it on the Machinery of War Discussions instead on the Suggestions must mean that there never was really any chance its going to be approved for Suggestions.
If its the AJ you guys are worried about, its more than likely to be replaced by a Thai variant. As for an Indonesian SU-27 to be added, its an alright suggestion to keep but it should be placed on the back burner until the Thai subtree is fully implemented and even then I would only agree to it on the basis that its either a premium or something.
As far as I am concerned, ASEAN vehicles COULD be placed as an expanded Thai subtree but that should be in keeping with Thai vehicles. If it were up to me, the tree development would be Thailand → SEATO → ASEAN.
