Where does the idea about rotating window come from? It seems very odd to me, specially when the gun itself is in such heavy mount. The window shouldn’t be too much extra to turn with the gun itself. I don’t see any kind of mechanism to separately rotate the window.
Do you mean it should function like this?
I can show you an example of the two-part motion that’s currently in-game if you want to know what I mean
Why doesn’t it just turn normally?
Watch the moment from 3:10
I am not an aircraft designer, but I will make a guess, this is due to the geometry of the fairing windows, if you try to give the machine gun a wide angle of fire from one fixed position, this will lead to a large hole in the window itself and unnecessary air disturbances. What is shown in the video is the optimal option, taking into account the technical development of that period, but it reduces the speed of targeting at targets flying diagonally relative to the turret - as usual, engineering solutions are always compromises.
Those are clearly mounted to the window. Probably Ki-67 also has to turn the glass with the gun, but the gun isn’t mounted to it. That’s why I think it should at least rotate faster.
The big problem in game is how the gunner always rotates the glass first, while it would often be far faster to turn the gun first and rotate afterwards or at the same time.
I’ve posted the videos here: Improving the Ki-67 Hiryū (飛龍) - Machinery of War Discussion / Aircraft - War Thunder — official forum
Tan-SAM Kai OP.
why are the aim 7ms different between the F15J and the F-2A premium… it loses 15k lock range between them
I wish Japan wasn’t a puppet to the US, and maybe then they would actually have a good military.
goofiest thing ive ever read, japan has an incredibly good military, their airforce is very good and their navy is incredibly good, they have great air defense and excellet ground forces for an island nation.
most of their equipment is domestic too
Some of their equipment is too good to be added to the game at this point because Japan would be too good compared to other nations in their current state.
The other are just Gaijin laziness because it’s easier to do ctrl+c ctrl+v than make something new
not to mention artificial nerfs on currently implemented vehicles
don’t even start me on those
tbh the aam4 thrust seems to be pretty crazy irl compared to ingame
There is nothing potential in Japan what would be bias and could not be balanced using BR system
AAM-5 quick example of equipment that would leave other nations in their current state behind
But other nations would be able to get equal if not better missiles not to mention AAM-5 would go to old F-15JM and slow F-2 platforms which will get their BRs raised and just perform worse against better planes
AAM-5 is literally same in its performances in compare with IRIS-T, AIM-9X, MICA-IR and any other IIR short range missile with nothing outstanding.
AAM-5 has less capabilities than AIM-9X Block 2, for example, because of missing Datalink
The range, maneuverability, and seeker capacity are likely better than 9X Block 2 given the increased size, newer tech, and I’m fairly sure the missile still retains Lock After Launch as well as part of the configuration as far as I recall.
The IRIS-T and MICA-IR also have superior qualities to the 9X on the whole from my understanding as the 9X family is somewhat limited in range primarily due to the small body chassis that’s been used since the early sidewinder programs
Even now AAM-3 has better performances than AIM-9 and it is not “outstanding bias”. It is just better and in balance and with AAM-5 will be same story.
Good question how long range it has because AAM-5 sizes not the biggest between IR missiles
And it is worse than 9X Block 2
AAM-5:
Dual-band
LOAL
9X Block 2:
Dual-band
LOAL
Datalink
They both has it
So returning to the first person who said “AAM-5 quick example of equipment that would leave other nations in their current state behind”.
What is in AAM-5 so better in compare with other missiles?
The AAM-3 is not massively better than a 9M, it is slightly to moderately better in some specific features, but otherwise it isn’t all that much different in game. There is a relatively slim edge case where in an AAM-3 will hit a target that the 9M will not.
Data link is not a seeker function, and is not inherently going to be better just by having it if it’s in an EM disrupted space
Again, the AAM-5 would potentially have longer range than the 9X similar to the MICA-IR and the IRIS-T while also being more agile given the longitudinal strakes, and something like the Python-5 would almost certainly beat it in shear agility and all-direction attack capabilities at some range limitations. The 9X also has a smaller blasting charge compared to the other missiles listed, though the AAM-5 does not list one on the wiki article as of now.