6x 65D and 4x 9L vs 4 total 65B (?) or 9L, plus the BRRRTT, rockets or bombs, and 8x the countermeasures of the A-4M.
I can definitely see the argument for 10.0, but not 10.3 when 10.3 has vehicles such as the AMX, A-10, and FRS.1(e)
If necessary, limit it to a pair of missiles purely for balance reasons.
We’ll see how split BRs pan out that would determine the Fightinhawk’s BR in that system
don’t bother with this guy he is oppressed with keeping anything that has a hint of USA in the USA tech tree
I had forgotten this. This probably considerably increases the chances of balancing these vehicles.
One of the sources listed vaguely mentions the AIM-7 as a potential armament option for the A-4AR. Argentina operates Asides. Is there any evidence of these being mounted even experimentally? If so Aspides and 9Ms would make an extremely unique top(ish) tier fighter.
Oh no, excuse me for wanting US equipment that only belongs in the US tree to STAY THERE instead of being handed out to countries that literally have nothing to do with it.
When the US starts getting other countries’ equipment, like the Leopard 2AV and Centauro they tested that they also need for those BRs, then I might stop complaining.
Don’t know why that is so irrational and unthinkable to you, but I find it pretty logical that nations such as Britain should not have Leopards in their tree, and Germany should not have Skyhawks in their tree. Simple as.
So only US stuff is not allowed to be shared then
In relation to weapons, things are murky. I can tell you that two contracts were signed, one for the planes and their modernization and another contract for the weapons. Then time passed, the devices were modernized and the weapons were never seen (as was foreseen in the original contracts of the project). The reasons? probably due to British veto, but there really is a lot of mythology about this.
What is certain is that the plane has the capabilities to fire modern weapons.
There are many sources on this, their homologation includes:
Cannons: Colt Mk 12 20 mm revolver x2 with 200 ammunition each barrel (400 in total)
Air-air and air-surface:
AIM-9L/M x2. (recently saw a photo of the A-4 with 4 limas)
AGM-12 Bullpup.
AGM-65 Maverick.
AIM-7 Sparrow.
AGM-45 Shrike (on external underwing pylon).
Bombs:
BK-BR PG 125 kg.
BK-BR PG 250 kg.
Parachute Delayed Bomb.
Rockeye Mark 7/APAM-59 or Rockeye-II cluster bombs.
General purpose bombs: Mark 80, Mark 81, Mark 82, Mark 83, Mark 84.
AGM-62 Walleye glide bombs guided by television (on internal underwing pylon).
Rockets:
LAU-10/A four-cell for Zuni 127 mm rockets
LAU-61/A with nineteen slots for 70 mm FFAR rockets
Matra containers with 18× 68mm SNEB rockets
LAU-5003 containers with 19× CRV7 70mm rockets
Some information about its avionics:
Two AN/AYK-14 digital mission computers similar to those used on the F/A-18C.
ARG-1 radar (an improved AN/APG-66V2)
AN/APX-72 Identifier Friend-Foe (IFF)
Litton EGI (Embedded GPS Inertial) GPS LN-100G navigation equipment
VOR/LOC and ILS) Rockwell Collins AN/ARN-147
AN/ALR-93 (V) Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) 1
AN/ALQ-126 Electronic Countermeasures (ECM)
Collins Radio Direction Finder (ADF)
AN/APN-141 radio altimeter
MIL-STD-1553B data bus
VHF/UHF
I have some interesting notes about this plane that I could share. The problem is that all the content is in Spanish.
they can carry triple rack Mavs on the center line, just like the Ayit
As far as i looked and asked about it, nope, the Aspides in Argentina are not “Air Launched” since they are used in the MEKO 360 Destroyers. I did saw some stuff regarding CITEFA making new engines for them, but nothing connecting the Air Force and the Navy in such a thing like putting them on the A-4s.
Sure in theory could be possible, since the APG-66V2 was compatible, but it never happened afaik.
The One used by Argentina Is the MK1 , the First version that Is alredy in game. So Teorically an aircraft could Carry It. But the question Is, does this A4 even get a radar capable of guide It and did the Argentinian Air force even evaluate It?
The radar on the A-4AR is the ARG-1, basically its a custom version of the APG-66V2, only with a smaller dish, in theory it could be able to do it. But i never came across anything that could prove that such thing was tested, evaluated or even proposed.
^radar btw
It is easy to know what weapons a plane that has entered combat can use. For example I can tell you everything that a Dagger or any other aircraft that was in actual combat could use, but the A-4ARs never saw combat and are still in service, so it’s very difficult to know that kind of thing.
Above I mentioned, as I was able to verify from various sources, what included the approval of the aircraft’s weapons according to the capabilities of its new radar. I never saw, nor knew anything, about them being able to ride or shoot Aspide.
Thanks for Both clarifications
+1 for WT.
on the Air RB side of things;
if it gets 4 9Ls than a BR if 10.3-10.7 makes sense, but 4 highly potent 9Ms would definitely warrant a 11.0 BR. It would just be a more effective A-10 late (which also should have its 9Ms)
+1
If it’s going to any country currently in the game, it’s gotta be the US… but then again, the US has (or SHOULD have) the A-4M.
How it hasn’t been added to the game yet is beyond me. The fact that the US only has ONE regular tech-tree A-4 variant in 2024 is outrageous, but that’s a different discussion…
Argentine vehicles going to Germany just because of the TAM is a really dumb thing imo
Argentinian vehicles going to Germany just because of the TAM, but the Pulqui II (designed by a German) not being in the German tree yet is truly stupid and dumb. It should have been Germanies top tier when Sabres and Mig-15s were top tier
That would have likely been the A-4K Kahu - the older, nearly identical, but better armed A-4 upgrade that likely inspired the A-4AR.
That depends entirely on the avionics and armament system wiring. For example, the Israeli Skyhawks likely only had the centerline station wired up to interface with the AGM-65. On others, like the post-KAHU A-4K, the stores management system could only be loaded with a single Maverick each on stations 1, 2, 4, and 5.
Well, finding a photo of the 4AR without its supplemental fuel tanks is very difficult. They always use them, by default, due to the size of the territory in which they operate (the same thing happened with the old A4s and the mirages).
According to various sources, there is a datalink connection in the 4 underwing supports, for LAU-7/A.
In some YouTube short I remember seeing the A4 with 4 LAU-7/A. But I couldn’t find the video and I don’t know any photos, so I put it in parentheses.
As for the A4K, I have no idea, I always knew that the A4AR are modernized from 4M cells, from the North American Navy.
I would like to clarify that the problem with the A4AR’s armament is a political and geopolitical issue, it is not a question of the aircraft’s capabilities. On the other hand, Gaijin chooses to select the armament of an aircraft based on being able to balance it with other aircraft.
The only thing that Gaijin never does is give an aircraft weapons for which it does not have the necessary hardware and software.
So, the story goes that in the January 1993, 2 Sqn RNZAF - based at HMAS Albatross (the main shore base of the RAN FAA) on a long-term fleet air defence training exercise - had a visitor from the Argentine Air Force. Said visitor was Captain E.M. La Torre, who was a Skyhawk pilot and had seen combat during the Falklands. While he was there, he assessed the assorted upgrades made to the A-4K - including the wide-angle FD4510-series HUD, a pair of large display units, and the AN/APG-66NZ radar - and flew on a ship strike exercise, then returned to Argentina.
Then a little over a year later, in 1994, the proposal that became the A-4AR emerged, involving a nearly identical upgrade on slightly newer airframes.
The Strikemaster from the last battle pass has SURA rockets, which the particular in-game version likely lacked the armament system wiring to use, as it was manufactured to function with Mk 80-series bombs and the assorted 70mm FFAR pods
wow, interesting story dude!! thanks for sharing. You made me want to know more! I will see what more I can get.
Yeah… I think you’re right. Maybe I should have said “generally doesn’t” instead of “never does.”