laughs in AMRAAM ER
1 Like
Unfortunately I don’t I tried to find it for ages even before embt was added.
That’s all I could find about EMBT and it’s connection to 2a7+
I frankly don’t know, I’m doing research now. In fact Italy was probably the most prolific user of cluster munitions in practice for the tornado.
Britain has JP233 standard
BL755 was technical compatibility, but never used (I don’t think they even had it in inventory for the tornado specifically)
During the gulf war they used CBU-83s ad hoc for the Gr.1 and then of course the JP233.
Germany as far as I know had MW-1 and that’s it, and of course never used in combat.
As they didn’t deploy air force to gulf war they never had the chance to use it or jury rig other weaponry on.
BL755 is an option but it is for all tornados because of technical compatibility
Italy was the nation in charge of weapons integration for tornado program, so they integrated BL755 for the tornado and actually kept them in inventory.
They used BL755 during the gulf war, and like the UK had an ad hoc integration but with Mk. 20 Mod. 3 Rockeye II
They also had MW-1 in inventory but never used it as they were developing the more advanced CASMU sky shark, which was essentially a cruise missile/loiter munition
The skyshark could use cluster munitions or unitary warhead, it would fly to an area and then drop it’s payload. It was never used because by the point it was gonna be ready cluster munitions were being banned and in general phased out
3 Likes
Regular pillboxes are a thing as well, but there’s no reason at all to bother with them at all
The amraam er is hard capped at around 3200 km/h despite having a ton more propellant left when it hits it btw
Also here is a plug to the tornado report thread: Tornado MLU + other variants missing features - #268 by SoyBeanInhaler
Reports for BL755 and rockeye II are already accepted
And die to a GBU-31 with a DSU-33 mounted to the nose… 😠😠😠
1 Like
Interesting stuff, thanks :)
1 Like
Hey,
Can we see more realistic models for mbts in the near Future?
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/1eYOWMuJWJ3n
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/RdPqGI4rvDzp
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/u1eWnPupv39Y
Like Gaijin did with the Abrams for example.
Have a wholesome day!
Was more looking towards the APU mention :3
1 Like
This part is by far the thing that irks me the most irrationally about WT. DSU-33 should not be on the GBU-31 if it is not going to behave as if it has one mounted. Ever.
Bruh
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/BrC1Oi4PqKll
Can’t ask players to use the gun sight or first person view to aim, I guess
1 Like
It’s a huge ass warhead why the hell does it need CCIP 🤣
It’s hard to learn how many degrees downwards from the crosshair the Mistel would impact
1 Like
it is also very hard to bind a key to get into cockpit view
1 Like
Unfortunately that won’t help if your looking for the case of EMBT as they don’t want to believe it’s from the 2a7+ demonstrator but I can always try to dig up some stuff if you want
Gotta use the V key for something else, I guess
Can anyone recall when the GBU-31 was even added to WT? If it’s sufficiently long ago there may be enough information publicly out there now these days to be able to submit a bug report to get the DSU-33 removed from it come to think.
What are the update icons people have on their profiles for I’ve never understood that
I mean, the Model itself should speak for itself, looking as its Litarally a 2A7 Hull