Hopefully, would fit nicely between the Yak-141 and Yak-38M.
1 Like
The USA aviation tech tree lack early level jet trainer/light attack aircraft around 6.3 ~ 7.0 from USAF & USN to researchable vehicles
China tech tree no Pakistani and ROCAF light attack aircraft
I guess 3 countries receive MB-339
Japan tech tree no Malaysian Hawk 209
Unlike T.1 & T.1A ?
1 Like
Thinking is a T.1 with just rockets, bombs, and gunpod around 8.7 similarly to the Alpha Jets with a Hawk T.2 with 9L around 10.0 - 10.3. It would be flareless so pretty bad but still an option.
Pakistan operated Supermarine Attackers iirc?
Surely you mean Hawk 208? 209 is the Indonesian variant
2 Likes
At 8.7 basically nothing has flares. And the 9.7 and 10.0 ones don’t have any flares already, this one would actually do better at 8.7 lol
Honestly given the whole “hamster maintenance” I suspect the April Fools event will be more… lighthearted, or satirical, then anything serious like a test for submarines or ECM.
1 Like
Imo they aren’t going for subs, naval is quite unpopular, Silent Thunder was tested the same year as the Naval CBT begun. I am hoping for a mix of ECM/EW/SEAD this year, maybe with some added flavour (IADS, S300 Gargoyle is in the files, GBU53 MMW?), testing more modern SEAD (AGM-88E/G, KH31) with the legacy ARMs coming in later updates.
why would legacy ARM come after modern ARM, i know top tier needs it more but it’d make sense to add legacy ARM
- Making sure every nation actually has something of roughly equivalent performance (not every nation is going to have options for “legacy” ARM)
- balancing ARM at lower BRs
Does kinda make sense to start with AGM-88, ALARM, etc and then go back and add others here and there
I don’t really see ARMs as a way to add flavour to top-tier GRB, I hope they are aming for a full-scale EC RB mode, modern ARMs outclass SAM systems present in-game at the GRB ranges. Also more modern ARMs let them test other systems like terminal MMW guidance (as seen on the AGM-88E/G), HTS style pods with Pseudo-range multilateration, dual pulse A2G missiles.
That would be anticlimactic.
1 Like
Gaijin, where is muh hamster decal
2 Likes
Rise of the hamsters
Hamster rebellion
HamsterXGaijilla
gaijin wont add MMW guidance since they’ll have to give it to the brimstones they’ve also said how would the radar distinguish a milk truck from a t72 from a friendly challenger and not kill firendlies
SAR imaging + GNSS coordinates? A milk truck or any other vehicle looks completely different in a SAR image to a radar vehicle which is also most likely in the target database of the missile.
And if you have allied vehicles around an enemy radar station, something has gone seriously wrong for the enemy lol
Brimstone doesn’t have GPS guidance
I thought that was about ARMs?
Huh? Brimstone isn’t an ARM lol
Yes? But the comment I answered to, answered to a post about ARMs? :D
Brimstones 2 and later have an additional laser tracker, so it was solved by a “man in the loop” with a laser pointer to point the missiles active seeker to the desired target during terminal phase (as friendly fire was recognized as a serious problem with Brimstone 1). They also have SAR imaging with a target database AFAIK.
Brimstones with FnF capability would also be LOBL instead of LOAL ingame I presume, so it would just hardlock a signature like IR A2G missiles currently do.