The ETPS Gripen should not even be an option and Gaijin probably never considered it either, based on how they view stuff like QinetiQ or Top Aces owned aircraft.
The SAAF Gripen was the best option for that particular update. If they had put in the work to model a Hornet the RAAF F/A-18 A would of course have been the better option, however, that didn’t happen.
That would only have left planes that didn’t fit the bill of a 12.7 plane at the time like the Hawk 200, Sea Harrier FA.2 or a later Tornado F.3, as without AMRAAMs they wouldn’t have been worthy of that BR.
The Gripens radar can’t even guide Sparrows/Skyflashes. Neither the SARH missiles, nor the R-Darters were added based on historical facts, but rather for balance reasons.
And, as Phoenix tried to prove (A-Darters and R-Darters are different things), the R-Darters are cleared for use on Gripens, they just happen to not have been entered actual service as the SAAF has been facing massive funding problems for years
Technically yes but not in service
I’ve heard that ealy a gripen could but later versions of the radar couldn’t, tho gatting actual manuals etc to prove is not feasible
There is no clear evidence for the first Gripens being capable of launching and guiding Skyflashes. There are articles and brochures that mentioned plans for Skyflashes to be integrated, however the radar that they ended up using lacks the ability to guide SARH missiles.
For Sweden it would make sense that the gripen a would to be able to guide their old stock of skyflash other than that no need for it
As for evidence yeah not much if any
So when i make report to remove 9/I-1 from swedish gripen its just gonna move goalpost to 9M because its integrated by someone other then Swedish air force?
Thats really stupid when there are real alternatives we just gonna copy paste (as sweden used SAPHE mavericks but with different guidance section)
The 74(M) is the 9M
rb74(M) is quoted by mod to be 9L/I-1 based on report that specifically mentioned 9Li
Im currently working on corelating dates that this report could not mention 9L/I-1, but only recently added 9Li on f4f ice
What’s the difference between the L/I-1 and M anyway
Do you have the quote ?
Again, the main reason the Skyflashes actually got added to any of the Gripens was balance. Once the update drops none of the Gripen Cs will have Skyflashes available to them, only the Gripen A will keep them.
Even if the articles and brochures claiming Skyflash compatibility didn’t exist, Gaijin would have added SARH missiles to the Gripens, just like they added ahistorical missiles to the J-8F
If you have any sources regarding german sidewinders (i can read german so those are okay) would love the help to correct this mistake (since apparently we have to prove negative now…)
J8F didn’t get SARH
and idk the skyflash is a worse option than BOL + RB 74M
Skyflash definitely isn’t worse, it’s an alternative to let people use the Gripen as a BVRAAM platform if they want to. In the limited time I have used the SAAF Gripen I had way more success with Skyflashes than with the 9Ms because they fit my playstyle better.
About the J-8F, yeah, I misremebered which missiles were chosen
Just like how they gave Aim-9M,R-Darter and AGM-65G’s to SAAF Gripen even tho it never used them, but i dont see any complains from you.
Best thing about this even if you manage to prove that Swedish Gripen C didnt carry Aim-9L/I-1 its not gonna change anything, because it is compatible with all Nato munitions which includes Aim-9M’s.
Seems like you love double standarts.
2 Likes
I agree JAS39 Gripen A lose Rb 74(M) only. and including lose HMS mode from PS-05A radar
I hope gajin add AIM-9L/i-1 on Tornado ADV from italy tech tree and Tornado IDS ASSTA 1 in germany tech tree for third major update or fourth major update this year
Oh you sure do, you made this personal chase.
Its getting AGM-65G because it is compatible with all Nato munitions, which is another point that Gripen C is also compatible with Aim-9M.
Not really, so far you’re the only one who acts like this, most people i know actually care about balance rather then nerfing certain vehicles for personal interests.
Im not the one who acts like kid and claiming Swedish Gripen’s didnt have Aim-9L/I-1’s nor its not compatible with Aim-9M without solid evidence.
Thanks for proving that you’re on a personal vendetta, not for balance.
1 Like
So in this case, countries don’t need to have the specific weaponry in the inventory. As long as it’s compatible with the vehicles we could have it in the game right?
Just to make sure that it’s a common standard that’s not restricted to Swedish tech tree, and our players can browse through other tech trees to see if weaponries could be added
Yes it can, and i have sources to prove it. But i’m away at the moment so I dont have access but i would gladly send them later if you want them.