In the Tornado Gr4s case, the primary A2G weapon it would receive (or at least I hope it would receive) is Brimstone, Normal operation it could carry up to 12, but I think 18 is possible. To balance that kind of A2G loadout, I see quite a high BR, maybe too high for Aim-9L/i to be even remotely suffecient. It is why I suspect it will get ASRAAM. With a max of 2 missiles and limited intergration, they would not be as strong as they would be on something like the Typhoon. They would not be able to lock at extreme angles for example. An ideal candiate for an early adopter
The A200C has a very good Number of weapons to be on the level with GR4 and ASSTA3. The Tornado that is lacking in the weapons department Is the ASSTA3, since It only have GBU24, GBU54, unguided bombs, Taurus and IRIS-T
True, though A2A and A2G need to be at least to a certain degree, in balance. Brimstones could be very powerful for A2G, which is why I assume a high BR and thus ASRAAM as a result as a result of that BR.
As a result, the A2G power of the A200 might be restricted to help keep it at a more managable BR for its A2A weapons
Though it is difficult to judge currently as the Tornados we have are so incomplete
Well as the Tornado alredy work in game, the air to air Is Just defensive and not a priority
And even If a Better air to air missile will be required there Is Always this picture
Tranche 1 is cool. Everey series produced Eurofighter is.
F-106 is cool F-11F-1 or -2 would be cool. Vought 507 Vagabond probably woiuld be.
But a Eurofighter prototype would be somewhat underwhelming. Same programme but a less capable aircraft just to bring in the type earlier.
DA2 would either be very close to a Tranche 1 Eurofighter or far off the mark where I would rather fly a Mirage 2000, MiG-29 or F-16 because the DA-2 would fly with Spey or TurboUnion engines lacking radar etc.
When Eurofighter comes I want it to perform. A late DA2 likely would but then Tranche 1 would be more reasonable.
This is totally irrelevant to Gaijin’s decision making but to correct some misapprehensions here.
Officially the monarch appoints on advice of the Prime Minister. Which sounds like the monarch is in charge. In reality the monarch signs off on whoever is publicly put forward by the PM. Doing otherwise risks causing pro-Republican sentiment.
Not since the partition of the Australian constitution. In the UK Parliament is sovereign. In Australia the constitution binds Parliament. Prior to the partition the Australian constitution was an act of the British Parliament. So in theory Parliamentary sovereignty was preserved. After the partition that was no longer true, which meant the crown was no longer fully sovereign in Australia. Elizabeth was apparently not happy about this and didn’t want to grant royal assent. But at the time the Australian PM was a republican, so he just called her bluff and moved forward anyway and she chose to sign rather than hand the Australian republican movement a smoking gun for why the monarchy should be removed.
Its two crowns held in personal union. Similar to how the English and Scottish crowns worked before the Act of Union. Australia can change the law of succession at any time to result in a different monarch. There was a bunch of diplomatic cat herding to get the Commonwealth to all change their succession law at the same time to make it so first born women would be first in the line of succession.
Still utterly irrelevant to Warthunder but theres the day’s lesson about Australian politics and constitutional history.