The pylons now also don’t clip with the flaperons anymore.
Zero of those vehicles are service vehicles, thus not comparable to F-2A.
The eye of sauron is nothing against this combination XD
6 Likes
What is and isn’t a valid source can vary depending on what Gaijin wants it to be. Sometimes it’s just a ‘‘obvious marketing lie’’, sometimes it is a worthy source.
Double pods truly Japanese technology XD
2 Likes
question: does the F-2 have a missle approach warning system?
That is why I criticize 6 ASM and argue for 6 MRM: it is arbitrary after all.
By what can be found online J/ASQ-2 IEWS is capable of detecting, classifying and autonomosly defending from incoming threats but since system is classified there are not “enough” proof for gaijin
3 Likes
JASDF is pretty strick on technical markings, even when it comes to limited time liveries in absolutely most cases all markings are kept in place so I doubt marking for ASM would just randomly be on a pylon that not supposed to carry it. I know you can argue that IRL they never seen carry ASM on stations 5/7 but I have counter argument called operational necessity. Like Su-27 is not supposed to carry AIM-120 or Hammers yet Ukrainian flankers do and it is far from carrying 2 more missiles that are normal weapon for aircraft in question
1 Like
only reason Kh-38MT is in the game (iirc) and now has GNSS
3 Likes
Well, Х-38МТ is Russian missile, you know how it works
2 Likes
Spoiler
spaded stats in case anyone was wondering (with full aa loadout)
1 Like
In this way, the pamphlet is adopted as a historical document through a counterargument that is not a refutation.
Yeah, but unlike brouchures this technical markings are linked to maintenance and pilot manuals
1 Like
Any reports accepted
It is not a historical document to interpret it however you like.
Right now M61A2 weights only 102 kg, for comparison M61A1 is 500 kg
2 Likes