So guy’s devblog tomorrow?
1 Like
J-16 is essentially a more domestic Su-30 for China with more modern avionics, such as an AESA radar. The only thaing that really holds the Su-30 and 35 back is that they won’t have AESA radars, which is definitely fine since they are very strong multi role fighters, but when we start looking at more modern NATO aircraft, it will start too have an impact.
Probably gonna have to wait until the end of this week is my guess, or next even
1 Like
I think they will start on 27
2 Likes
They simply havent captured one. We would have seen pics of it in russian hands( like with Cv90)
2 Likes
Where New Leopard blog?
This was just me messing around if the “devblog” were to start in the first week of December.
Which by now looking at it next week seems like a good place to start
nah, still to early for the dev blog.
2 Likes
I see, that must be why the Leclerc proved to be significantly worse than the Leopard 2 Improved during the swedish trials. 60% of the turret face protected against Mango was truly an achievement. Are there any plans to integrage an APS on the Leclerc by the way?
1 Like
Ah yes, what a relevant discussion to this thread.
1 Like
Yes, both J-16 and J-11BG use the same technology, but one is multi-purpose, the other is air superiority, and both have AESA. I think the J-16 is benchmarked against the American F-15EX.
It’s almost as if the tank was still in early production and wasn’t fully developed yet…
French development now is focused on the MGCS project, but Rheinmetall likes lobbying and wasting everyone’s time.
1 Like
Believe it or not, Crossout developers don’t work on War Thunder and have absolutely nothing to do with it :)
So your friend or their friend is a pretty good troll.
22 Likes
3 Likes
Wdym D would have no gun, D is literally same as C except its twin seater. We have both C and D in our airforce and they all have gun.
I also think ARH would be more of a sidegrade, especially if contrast guidance is changed to CCD image guidance as it should, removing the current ground clutter.
The ARH would provide higher range, but at lower range the lightwave missile would be more effective by being harder to defend against and also not providing any launch warning unless MAW becomes common.
This is why I would want to have a mixed loadout of both as is done in reality, instead of being artificailly limited to one.
The reason I want the current one to receive both and not an older chassis Type 81 C is simply that I believe the variant that is the newest in reality should not be the one limited in game.
Then again if Gaijin wants 10.0 SAM for Japan when the Type 81 is moved up thy can always fix Type 93 G load and move that up to 10.0 BR. Maybe they can replace the 9.0/9.3 SAM area with a basic model Type 81 or Type 81 B that uses IR only and no IRCCM (if I remember correctly), which would be fairly high performance, but easy to defend against for the BR.
I really see no need for artificial and ahistorical limitations when this can be solved so perfectly without them.
1 Like
what is “the AJ” ?
yeah maybe next friday too
Nah it’s next Wednesday, that guys friend who works for Crossout told me
1 Like
