Doesn’t matter, as long as weapon system is capable it can be added.
For example AGM65G’s on Swedish, Thailand and South African Gripen.
if this was the case than the F-15Js should get GBU’s and so on (but again “its capable” but u forget this is a licensed build not a buy from somewhere else and ship it over)
1 Like
You’d have to prove forward compatibility which no one has done on the bug report site at this time for AIM-7s, only a few other weapons such as Mavericks.
Saab was proven to make things universal to save money on exports, cause removing features cost more money than just one universal system for all weapons compatibility.
Do not mistake my post for anything other than a statement of what needs to be done to prove a case.
It is not opposition to anything.
Thailand actively uses the AGM-65G/G-2
Yet other two doesn’t and that didn’t stop gaijin to adding munition to those nations.
Both 7M and 7P uses same guidance method which means if x vehicle can use 7M it can also use 7P buddy.
I have used that argument of conjecture myself. It does not change that I didn’t have proof when I said it either outside the guidance type.
Have to prove that the wiring is compatible and that AIM-7’s wiring is also universal.
Our conjectures are not proof.
Sure lets pull a russia and give missiles it never carried and japan never had
We already have a bit with the addition of 9M’s on the F-15J’s (Japan never had 9M’s as America refused to sell thus the production of AAM-3 was born)
Sure which one do you want? R27EA for example? Never serial produced.
Oh wait they already got such missile, ts called KH-38MT.
You don’t wanna play Russian card buddy.
Yet capability still remained, that’s why it was added in the first place.
That was sarcasm “buddy”
Well it’s hard to understand when you not hint it enough, anyway mb.
You’d be surprised how many sources they want for that…
Really the whole “compatible weapons” rule only applies when Gaijin decide it does. Even if a report gets passed chances are it’d be stuck as a suggestion.
The Gripens for example aren’t implemented because players said it’s compatible, but because Gaijin decided they wanted a unified Gripen C loadout.
1 Like
Eh true, they ignored my report about Swedish one and on the next day they claimed that t he y found a source that states it’s compatible(even tho I put official Saab report on my bug report).
1 Like
just because compatibility is there doesn’t mean it operated. We dont want to be a USSR copy paste by receiving missiles we never operated
I mean they already did, KH-38MT, 65G and 65D on Israel F-15 already opened Pandora’s box.
But in the end it’s up to gaijin, not us.
Which is why I am against adding 7P’s for Japan… yes it would be nice but we would be no different to them
Buddy we already got Frankenstein F16AJ in the first place and Thai Gripen.
Japan already lost its uniqueness in that case.
Funny how Thai Gripen still remains best CAS option for Japan…
F-16AJ now with the implementation of the F-2 can be replaced by the F-2A Early (noticed in the datamines J/APG-1 was added as a text string aka the earlier radar for the F-2)
Thai gripen… yea i dont wanna touch that thing
Japan should get the GCS-1 however gaijin is holding it back for some bogus reasoning
Well I already did since it was the best option to gain F&F capabilities, unless you wanna use Frankenstein OCU.