Why even care? Wide ACM does literally same job
the F-2 is in full service
no
1 Like
nope
1 Like
HMD not F-2A please read what was written and not around it
1 Like
virtually everyone has HMD at this BR (13.7+) except the F-2A even if its HMD for IR, giving them all an edge
What no? For more or less all situations you want HMS this wide ACM mode basically works as good as HMS ACM.
The edge is so minimal because of how good the ACM mode is though
in a dev server sense, not in a day to day basis
I’m talking live server too. I play both the AJ and the J(M) and the AJ is very similar to the F-2 in that regard. For the role that the AJ fills, I’d rather have the ACM mode and no HMD. I actually don’t like the HMD as it makes it cumbersome to cycle through extra modes to get to ACM, especially when turning radar off to be stealthy. Plus ACM is better in dogfights. HMD is useful but for very niche circumstances that I think it’s not a big loss overall and that’s before considering the really awesome ACM
1 Like
So do I
The pilot’s helmet has your name on it, just ask the pilot…lol
Its for mounting a camera I believe, i recall once seeing footage from that POV on that aircraft on a JP mod site.
I’m fairly certain my surname is not Matsushima and I’m not a woman :)
1 Like
Kikka and Yak-141 are not service vehicles, nor are combat prototypes, thus are not comparable to service vehicles and combat prototypes.
And your post admitted SPS-K is correct. F-2A isn’t limited based on JSDF, it’s limited by what Mitsubishi Heavy Industries says.
F-2A would be compared with F-4J.
Probably a general mount for a variety of things, including camera.
Yak-141 is a technology demonstrator in a what if scenario
Based on what MHI says or what is cherry picked to not let the love child USSR get all the good stuff?
it dosent if the Yak141 would get everything it could have gotten, it would have the r-77 and the r-73
which btw gaijin said, it would get once those missiles enter the game
OMG… text interpretation and context are lacking here.
But come on, if I’m referring to the “rider in the photo”, I’m not referring to you, when I say “your name on it” I’m referring to the rider’s helmet, so when I say “your name on it”, I’m referring to the rider in the photo… that is, the helmet has the name of the rider who is wearing the helmet.
Well, pharasing left a lot to be desired, next time I advise to you “his/ her” when refering to person on photo