Next Major Update - Rumor Round-Up & Discussion (Part 1)

Game Discussion General Discussion
883

Wait till I found out?
I literally called it before we even knew it was being added.

And you’re the one that seems to be “upset” im only calling out hypocrisy.Nnot complaining about the name specs or cockpit, I dont care about it.
Gaijin is lazy beyond belief they couldn’t even be bothered to get the few known aspects correct. Ive given up way back i dont care anymore.
But Gaijins and the CM’s hypocrisy is laughable and I will call it out.

Anyways this is moderately off topic so no point in replying anymore

884

this is because chinese stuff is highly classified, and gaijin is lazy yes, but you cant do much when the specs of the radar is classified, they can make a radar out of thin air but people will get mad, if they dont and use an existing radar, people will get mad, they cant win because its classified, all thats known its a 3 sided AESA radar, same as the J16

1 Like
886

Guy’s either move it to DM’s or leave each other alone!

887

Sure and my message gets deleted not the one spreading blatant misinformation lol

1 Like
888

Your post was breaching this rule here: 3.1.1 profanity, obscene and offensive language, words, phrases, and abbreviations (including their disguised forms);
Feel free to DM if you wish discuss this further!

889

You are more than welcome to submit your evidence for any corrections you believe it should have and the sources those are based on here: Community Bug Reporting System

However we are not going to just invent the name of a radar out of thin air.

2 Likes
890

Yet you literally did?

There are 0 sources on it. No name no specs not even what it looks like

891

but do you even have proof that the J15T radar is false?

892

We have used an existing known radar set with details that are known. Your suggestion is to change that to something entirely unknown and something you haven’t even provided anything to support your claims with.

894

We dont even have proof it has a radar in the radome it could be empty for all we know

895

Either way, whatever they do I’m good with. That’s just me, though.

A tech demonstrator… I mean, if we have the Yak-141 in tech tree, I suppose we can have that in the tech tree. It definitely wouldn’t work as an event or squadron vehicle lol.

IRL the EX succeeds the C, it wouldn’t make sense to put it under the Strike Eagle?

See, there is a place for an F-15E (AESA)/Late :D. Solves the no rank 9 issue instantly.

896

We have based the radar on a known radar set.

We are not going to change it, as the person who’s topic I was responding too, to an entirely fabricated made up name and radar set “just because”.

Again, if you have information to present, please do. Otherwise this is an entirely pointless discussion.

1 Like
897

im sure we don’t have any sources on the KLJ-10A either, besides deagel which is far than a trustworthy source, and can’t forget about the RWR of the J-15T which is the same rwr the A-5C, Q-5L, J-7E, J-10C, J-11B, J-10A, J-8F, all three JH-7s, and the J-15T share

898

and then i have another question, what’s going to be done for the avionics of the chinese 5th gens? is it going to use the same RWR from the 80s? same radar as the J-10C despite having completely different radome sizes?

1 Like
899

Cant wait for J-20 and J-35 with KLJ-10A :)

2 Likes
900

Again, any issues can be reported with evidence here Community Bug Reporting System

Nothing is going to change from claims alone.

901

The KLJ-10A is hardly a “known radar set” the only known parts is the name and there aren’t really any good sources for that either

902

As already explained, we are open to any public information for corrections. However its clear at this stage you dont have any intention of that.

2 Likes
903

hell there are no sources for any chinese aircraft post 4.5th gen at all, so it’s all going to be either made up or copies from other planes, im curious if we’ll see the same stock J-7E/A-5C RWR on the J-20 or J-35 when it eventually arrives, i get copying the same avionics for planes near the capability/br/generation of the other one but if it’s stretched out too much it’s going to be bad

904

Same amount as Gaijin has on it, literally nonexistent. You make stuff up and expect us get have actual documentation on it.

You could literally just say “there’s no information available on it at the moment” its a placeholder

But you insist on pushing this report it agenda even tho you know there isnt any information to report with

2 Likes