Make a bug report with those 2 pictures. If you don’t want to I’d be fine doing it
That appearance could be related to FOV. Notice how all the pilons are straight in the RL picture, But ingame they are angled if you use Nvidia ANSEL in hanger or something you could probably replicate the image properly.
Probably for the projectors
1 Like
from other perspectives its even more evident. Its very clearly a smooth transition like on the F-16, not the initial harder angle like on the F-2.
5 Likes
Give me 10-15
1 Like
reminds me of the various reports from su 39 where the answer was this the way we want it
Yes, that’s actually it. It cannot be seen that it is connected to the connector, and the same goes for markings. As I will explain later, it is impossible to combine 6ASM and 4MRM.
Missiles can accelerate more. However, staging seems unacceptable, what will happen?
The issue is that you need far more than that.
F-2 [green] vs F-16 [pink]. F-2 currently shares nothing with the F-16 model in wing roots.
wait, are you sure it is accurate to irl? bc in other screenshots you can see difference to real F-2
I didn’t say it was accurate, I just said it’s obviously not copied from F-16 for the game.
That real-life photograph was taken from 120 - 250 meters away.
No amount of in-game screenshots from even 120 meters away will give you a clean image of the F-2, which is why mine is blurry despite being from a 4k render of the game.
The only way to get a better screenshot is if we do a custom match with a tank as the photographer.
The top seems ever so thinner than it should be, but its transition is not that of an F-16.
This is a screenshot from 200 meters away via replay:
And even then it might be correct, cause if I get a more detailed 110 meter screenshot from a good angle for the top end I see this:
Which ends up telling me that the distance is somewhere around 200 meters for the IRL shot to get a better visual of both the top and bottom of the airfoil.
It is entirely possible the model is entirely accurate.
What we do know with 100% certainty is the wing root is not anywhere close to an F-16’s wing root, as the F-2’s is far-steeper in-game.
i have to say im absolutley no fan of having the usefull anti air missiles so far down.
If my math is correct, just to unlock the ability to research AAM-4s will take you 97.000 rp
5 Likes
I think it would have 2 by default
yeah thats at least something, also no Aim 9 to research luckily
2 Likes
Coming back into War Thunder after a bit of a hiatus but is the current state of the F-2A still at the mercy of Gaijin as far as features goes?
I feel like the following features could make the plane line up head and shoulders with something like the Rafale or EF2k or Su-30SM… if implemented
- HMD/HMCS (said to be tested with ADTW units but not standard issue)
- Possible x10 AAM loadout (depending on how the pylons are interpreted)
- ASM-2 mystery IR guidance, could be gimmicky for ship only or for tanks too?
Gaijin devs in the past have exercised a lot of leeway on other jets (flares for F-5C, IRST for Yak-141, etc) so I really hope that F-2A gets that treatment because Japan probably isn’t going to get anything top/end tier after this until the F-35
EDIT:
Also with the addition of AIM-120C-5, maybe the ahistorical nerf for the AAM-4 could be reversed too
3 Likes
"Maybe we need a suggestion thread for this. I don’t think bug reporting managers would even glance at it, if it’s a bug report.
I think the best place for now would be to make a thread advocating for the addition of more features in the dev server section but I’m not able to make a thread there for whatever reason.
I’ll still grind the F-2A, even if it comes really barebones, but it’d be really unfortunate that Japan’s iconic indigenous fighter came a few patches too late to shine as a meta powerhouse
2 Likes
Not kind of like that, I’m mentioning the NCTR like Rafale’s or Su-30sm’s, which could recognize the specific type of an aircraft. As a newer radar retrofitted in the 2010s, doesn’t it have this feature?
Not really. From what we’ve found out so far there is no indication of MRM compatibility on stations 5/7. The markings I previously thought said MRM, most likely say TER, which would imply that they don’t have the electrical connector for guided weapons (MRM/GBU) in the main electrical panel.
The F-2 was also confirmed to only have four MRM launcher adapters unlike for example the ASMs, where the capability for 6 missiles is also confurmed in documents.
So generally Gaijins loadouts seem to already be pretty much accurate.
7 Likes
I think the main problem isnt the missile loadout but rather the 60 Countermessures
2 Likes