The T-4 is capable of carrying training bombs and rocket pods on the underwing pylons (2 on each wing). In emergency situations this could turn it into a light attack aircraft. It would have CCIP for it’s bombs and rockets, but would lack internal guns
Being able to carry Mk.82 500lb bombs, it could also carry them with a GCS-1 guidance kit, which is self contained and requires no modification to the aircraft. I am not sure if it can carry JM117 750lb bombs, but if it can carry them ot should also be able to use them with GCS-1 kit.
For rockets it would use FFAR Mighty Mighty mouse rockets in pods of 19. I am not sure about the use of FFAR Zuni rockets, as I have never seen them mentioned.
The XT-4 also tested a centerline gunpod, however I don’t know if the production T-4 would have retained that capability.
Given that they have AGM-65B’s to the F-5E FCU, without much evidence, I think they will give the AV-8S a flair pod simply so they don’t have to worry about having another weird GR.1 situation
It’s frustrating because there are interesting Japanese vehicles that have been suggested for years but not brought in. For example, where is the MMPM? Type 90 prototypes? CCV? T1? XF-2A (APG-68 or not)? Maybe even T-4?
We have all these vehicles that people are suggesting with information that is sourced from public documents. Gaijin also, from what I know, has their own consultants to get them more information that may not be publicly available. Yet, Gaijin seems to be dragging their feet on giving us things we ask for. Instead, it seems now people have bought into “Japan has nothing, so let’s dump some sub-tree vehicles to give them something”, which to someone who plays the Japanese tech tree for Japanese vehicles, it is very off putting.
I personally think that Gaijin should not commit to a full sub-tree and only use them to plug in specific BR gaps that Japan has nothing to offer, or unique vehicles. I do not want them to pull the same thing they did with the Hungarian air tree, for example, and throw in a bunch of copy and paste vehicles.
Britain seems like the ideal candidate of how I want them to handle it. Instead of committing to one dedicated sub-tree, it’s just a collection of vehicles from various nations that don’t have a home of their own.
I see India, Canada, Australia, and of course South Africa and AFAIK, the SA vehicles weren’t added as part of an update “Look guys South African tech tree wooooooo” and instead were added over time.
That’s ideal and I want nothing to do with how the Hungarian air tree was handled. If they want to add ASEAN stuff here and there, either because it fills a BR gap or because it’s unique and cool, sure. Otherwise, keep it out of the Japanese tech tree.
Yea, looks like I forgot, as I don’t remember, even though I was definitely playing during that time.
As for the rest, it does seem problematic if you wanted to play a particular sub-tree nation and find that you need multiple tech trees to have access to them. Is there an alternative then, to a sub-tree that’s not C&P like Hungarian air? Something perhaps another tech tree has done that I’m not aware of.