Given we have some ahistorical implementations e.g. Yak141’s IRST (it never operated one), mig21sps-k having r-3r’s (wasnt used on the german variant), YAK-9K’s APHE not killing the engine when fired (realistically it can fire the APHE but as a result damaging the engine to the point it doesnt work) and so on
So it would only be fair to give a bit of ahistorical leanway and give HMD
Where is concrete proof of this? That is what Gaijin is asking for to treat it the same as Rafale HMD
I’d need to deep dive into finding it, as I was informed about the 501operating it. However given gaijin is pick and choose with what gets what despite it even not having it IRL. F-2A should be considered to get the same treatment
If there is documentation, then need to find and post it because that’s currently what Gaijin is asking for. Without it, there will be no HMD no matter how much anyone says they used it or not.
I assume on the Rafale side they have documentation which is why they were easily able to have
Well u could refer to the other examples I posted, and gaijin presented it as a “what if” rather than “we have proof with documentation”
I’m just saying, this is the current stance on it, so better bring it up to Gaijin/Smin if there is actual proof, otherwise no point in complaining about the HMD, in my opinion.
Then gaijin must provide proof as to the yak141 having IRST then ig
(these images are off topic dont get mad mods but im proving a point here)
cause it as Smin mentioned
Somebody fails to understand the difference between the Yak141 and a Vehicle that entered service.
Yes the Yak141 is “what if” vehicle
What if the Yak141 entered service?
But the F-2 entered service, so it is different.
Maybe we should ask gaijin about proof on the Ho-Ri production as well while we are at it
Closest thing I found (pic 1), helmet doesn’t look like standart japanese fighter helmet, which is HGU-55/E I believe (pic 2)
It kinda does look like one on pic.3. which I don’t know how named
But it is like next level cope
Standart one for reference again
Tried to search what it is, but couldn’t really find anything. It is definetelly not JHMCS, Scorpion or TopOwl so if anybody big specialist in helmets it’s your time to shine
It wasn’t, here is no proof that HMD was tested on any F-2
what is this part behind the sear? It looks like a sensor and its not present on “normal” F-2s
Helmet is HGU-68/P in it’s basic config, it is compatible with Thales Scorpion HMD tho it clearly not installed on both 501 and 549
It would make a pretty shit sensor for HMD considering it doesn’t has LOS on helmet
If not needed.
Good news, the DL channels will be corrected to 4. Thanks for your patience on this.
“What if” it recieved HMD in full service
