“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?
Videos statements / claims alone are not accepted forms of sources by themselves. The brochure sadly is not specific. So those alone wont be sufficient.
Sadly yes. Something for example can state “Tornado” on a source and be referring to GR.1 / GR.4 and not F.3. The sources are currently not sufficient as I have explained. Further material should be gathered to confirm the information, then it can be submitted for reconsideration.
ASRAAM was the programme initiated in response to the R-73. The reason the US gave for pulling out was that the ASRAAM programme was behind schedule.
So they pulled out, to develop a missile with inferior performance, that entered service later than ASRAAM… Good job America!
The real reason America pulled out was likely political / lobbying pressure to develop an American missile instead of buying a foreign one, with the delay just being a convenient excuse.
Unfortunately, bug reports remaining unaddressed for such long periods of time eventually leads to palpable frustration among players, specially those who spent time and effort making these; this eventually leads people to end up expressing these frustrations and bringing out these bug reports in vain attempts at drawing attention to them in hopes that they may be fixed at last.
That is why, as long as bugs may remain unfixed for months and even years, it is pretty much inevitable that someone may end up bring them up even on this topic.
ASRAAM was the IR counterpart to AMRAAM, the US were to design a replacement for the AIM-7 and the UK and Germany were to design a replacement for the AIM-9 which both nations were meant to put into service, but of course the US pulled out of ASRAAM largely due to lobbying from the US defense sector and immediately issued a contract competition for a new IR missile, Hughes won and then got bought out by the loser Raytheon and we ended up with the AIM-9X
Germany pulled out likely for financial reasons as well which left Britain solely in charge, the Germans used their experience from working on the ASRAAM program to make the IRIS-T, which uses the same seeker as the ASRAAM and 9X however the missile body was designed to fit better with Germany’s aims for the missile, which was shorter ranged and a hell of a lot more maneuverable
Not really, no doubt the experience gained on SRAAM helped with ASRAAM (they are kind of the same shape aerodynamically), but technologically they share nothing in common.
An occasional bring up its fine, however when simply responding to one question starts a spiral of several different directions worth of reports, it becomes outside of this subject matter.
Sending a PM is more than sufficient to gain attention to a report, should there be anything possible to do with it.