And? Others want the CF-18 to UK instead.
There is also the Australian F/A-18 super hornet
Ah now you see that not the original point you stated since you said “based off and feeling generous” that got nothing to do confirming Canada and Australia are sub-trees or not.
The point that you’ve made was they will add stuff on a whim not confirmation, if that make it clear
1 Like
AIM-7P, huh?
What is it with people using the royal we when trying to exclude India or Canada or Aussieland all the time lmao.
He just wants Australia lmao
Isn’t that the same “leak” we had years ago ?
3 Likes
They gave the UK the F-111C out of generosity. What do you mean? Nothing I have said changed.
If a C&P is innevitable, then might as well make it a reasonable one.
RAF/FAA pilots from the UK actually do have tours with the USN in the F-18. So its not entirely unreasonable.
When looking at the tree as a whole, the CF-18 fits better with the rest of the aircraft.
CF-18 actually fills a bit of a void for a higher BR SARH Slinger. Su-30 would be a 14.0+ thing that adds nothing other than an alteranative to the Typhoon.
Given the UK already has the ADATS and probably will get the LAV III. The addition of 1x CF-18 + maybe 1x Canadian Leopard creates a decent Candian Line-up within our tree. Given the CF-18 adds nothing to the US TT, it seems pointless to add it there.
I dont want a million C&Ps. Especially given just how much is missing or poorly added that britian operated, let alone exported. But there are a small handful that were and are acceptable. F-111C we got in place of the F-111K. CF-18 and a Leopard. Everything else should be native built from Canada or Australia or British in Origin.
That is a far stretch from people wanting Top tier Britain to be Typhoon, Gripen, Rafale and Su-30
4 Likes
Datalink AIM-7M iirc
The CF-188 if added to US TT will probably be a premium or Squadron vehicle so it does hold value for Gaijin to add it there.
USA got given skink because usa mains wouldnt shut the hell up so not getting your argument ngl. Canada and Australia may not be official subtrees but are in exclusion of a couple vehicles for BS reasons exclusive to the tree of which they share a King
SQV would probably be best. But either is fine imo. Could even come as an event.
edit: misread what you put. To the UK for those 3 I meant
For the US, given the number of operators. It seems silly to add the identical CF-18 to the US. Even the Australian one for the ASRAAM makes more sense
1 Like
I thought the AIM-7P2 introduced datalink and the regular AIM-7P was just regular software stuff
Lol ok.
1 Like
Yes that a purely US tech which smashes the point of Australia doesn’t need to be a sub tree to get stuff added to the UK tree.
And iirc Smin did say if a cancelled home project isn’t fit to be added then a Commonwealth addition is suitable
Maybe so
Jaguar IS’ still not correct. Needs better cockpit and RWR.
1 Like
I love how this gap/void apparently only just materialized an hour ago
Not happening
1 Like
Tbf i think the problem isn’t that people want the UK and Canada but the problem is the UK already has negated any reason to grind multiple trees and with Canada and Australia it further more makes more trees redundant to grind. Tell me aside from being a fan of a tree why should i bother grinding someone like Japan, Sweden, Italy? When basically all their tech is on the UK? I think if india and SA hadn’t been added as subtrees it wouldn’t nearly have caused such a fuss in the community.
9M
USA permanently stuck with 30g missile