I sure did forget the Abrams. I’ll try to put a comprehensive list together. I’ll mark all of the vehicles that are not developed by the UK or indigenously with *.
CAN and AUS (and the one cheeky NZ)Vehicles in the UK tree:
Beaufighter
Beaufort
Boomerang
Boomerang Mk II
F-111C*
Wirraway
ADATS M113*
Ram II
QF 3.7 Ram
Skink
AC I
AC IV
Centurion Mk5/1
Matilda Hedgehog
Haida
Nepal
Tobruk
Leander
Terra Nova
Brantford
Arrow
Fremantle
CAN and AUS vehicles in other trees:
C2A1* (DEU)
2A4M* (DEU)
M4A5 (USA)
Stuart VI* (USA)
Skink (USA)
M1A1 AIM* (USA)
So there are two non-UK or indigenous vehicles in the UK tech tree, and four outside of it.
While these numbers show a trend of export vehicles being represented in their manufacturer’s tech tree, as you suggest, it’s a gap of just two vehicles. That’s not exactly the kind of ironclad evidence that guarantees a specific trend from Gaijin going forwards.
If anything, the fact that there’s more than double the amount of AUS/CAN vehicles in the UK tech tree than outside it would seem to lend a lot more credence to the idea that they are an “unofficial” subtree.
it just shows that gajin is consistent with the rules they did set
all we want those to be followed, we have no problem with indiginous australian vehicles to be gathered at one spot, but importet stuff should go to the manufacturers nation as its the case how they followed the rules
and there is no such thing as un official sub trees, if we start that again everyone and anyone starts claiming the slightest nations again, oh look argentinia is a german sub tree (not the case)
italy has spanish and brazilian sub trees out of nowhere (not the case)
If you start with stuff like unofficial subtrees everyone goes crazy
fact is UK has 2 sub trees already, and has no gaps that would be filled by either canada or australia
most of those imported vehicles would give canada an unfair advantage, steal their core gameplay away, uk loses its uniqueness and so on
“It can be installed on any MAU-12 or “Aero 27” Bomb rack”, "Aircraft like F-4, A-7 and F-15 "
Is that not enough to prove that it was possible? The A-7E has access to the GPU-5/A even though it was only trialed by the USAF, and the report to remove it was refused due to the A-7D & -7E being identical outside the engines.
Is the F-15A somehow not an F-15 with MAU-12 Bomb racks?