Next Major Update - Rumor Round-Up & Discussion (Part 1)

[KhorneFlakez1337]

So, to be more precise, Tranche 2 Block 15 EOC 2 integrated Brimstone capability

[ILuvAnneHathaway]

Thank you

[_Renzo]

@PilotPug010

If it’s premium i’ll surely buy it especially since it’ll pair well with the CV90.

2A4 could end up as a premium, 2A6 is to high of a BR to get added as a premium anytime soon.

[Deathmisser]

I can see the Belgian one being this years winter rewards

[Admiral_Pieter]

2A4 would be a cool premium

[oom1992]

@KhorneFlakez1337

it would be between 7.7 and 8.3

F7U-3 Early could be 8.3 and located after group of F9F Panther & Cougar, maybe

Vought F7U-3 Cutlass (Non-Afterburning Early Variant) - Off to a Tragic Start

poll [image] Vought F7U-3 Cutlass (Early) Naval Jet Fighter    Hello, I’d like to suggest the Vought F7U-3 Cutlass (Early) with non-afterburning turbojet engines for US aviation in War Thunder. The F7U-3 was a carrier-based fighter designed and produced by Chance Vought for the US Navy. The F7U was the Navy’s first tailless production fighter jet equipped with swept wings. Entered service in 1954, it was the most dangerous naval aircraft to fly simply due to frequent hydraulic systems and …

@KhorneFlakez1337

That thing wouldn’t be below 9.0 in any desireable configuration

I predict would be FJ-3M battle rating 9.0 to early rank VI before F3H-2

North American FJ-3M Fury - Heading in the Right Direction

poll [image] North American FJ-3M Fury (Late Production) Naval Jet Fighter    Hello everyone, I’d like to suggest the North American FJ-3M Fury for the US aviation tech tree in War Thunder. The FJ-3M was a new design of the Fury variant that addressed the shortcomings of the FJ-2 aircraft and became more suitable for carrier operations than its predecessor. It was the last and most successful iteration of the Fury series before the FJ-4 fighter-bomber (which we already have as the attacker…

[KhorneFlakez1337]

The F7U-3M would be 9.3 at least, if not even 9.7.
It is a lot faster (almost 200 km/h faster) and has much more firepower than the comparable Swift F.7 (which is 8.7), having four cannons and four missiles.

The early F7U-3s without afterburners feel like a rather pointless addition and the F7U-1 would probably be extremely painful to use with its underpowered engines.
If they were to add an early F7U-3 it would probably be 8.3. A regular production F7U-3 would be a BR step below the F7U-3M.

I don’t know anything about the FJ-3 and I wasn’t talking about it at any point.

[PilotPug010]

Ok to be fair I’d have bought it already if I didn’t play the German mk100 to death already.

[PilotPug010]

@KhorneFlakez1337

and four missiles.

A radar that extends well beyond the Swift’s 3km also dramatically improves the performance of those missiles.

[KhorneFlakez1337]

Pretty sure the Sparrow Is also had a larger range and a higher speed than the Fireflash

[oom1992]

@KhorneFlakez1337

The F7U-3M would be 9.3 at least

I don’t know before or after F3H-2. But F7U-3M better F3H-2 ?

Actually F7U-3M should fitted Westinghouse J46-WE-8A or J46-WE-8B engine

@KhorneFlakez1337

A regular production F7U-3 would be a BR step below the F7U-3M.

F7U-3 (late production) were Westinghouse J46-WE-8 engine like F7U-3M ?

@KhorneFlakez1337

and has much more firepower than the comparable Swift F.7 (which is 8.7),

I think F7U-3M performance and maneuvrability better Swift F.7

@KhorneFlakez1337

and the F7U-1 would probably be extremely painful to use with its underpowered engines.

F7U-1 similar to F7U-3 Early (Allison J35-A-29 turbojet engine) ?

@KhorneFlakez1337

I don’t know anything about the FJ-3

Sabre naval version

Nowadays, USA tech tree no fighter aircraft 9.0 like F-86F-40

[battlerog]

@someweirdname

belongs in another tree tho

@someweirdname you sure about that
(for precision , the complited plane was used for training , before being streaped down on this pic , this is the only pic of it has i’m aware)

[NoodleCup31]

Answering your concerns regarding spall liners, MBTs and Aircraft

[image] Hello everyone. We’ve noticed that many of you had questions regarding spall liners on tanks and armor in general. To avoid any misunderstandings, we’d like to briefly answer some of these elements below. The effectiveness of the M1 Abrams [image] We’ll soon be releasing a dev blog on the hull armor for the M1 Abrams series of tanks, where we’ll explain why we believe that hull armor was not reinforced on prod…

“In the near future, we will update the DM for Leopard 2 tanks, therefore correcting any minor discrepancies.”
December 21st, 2023

Sooo this patch maybe? Please?

[Ravanos]

I really thought we would get cluster bombs before Sat guided bombs. Hopefully we get them with this next update.

[Thomas_Belgium]

The Dutch NF-5A K-3001 would like tot have a word with you (NF-5A with paveways).

[StormRyder13]

As I said before this is the only update out of the year I have been interested in so far, partly due to the abnormally high number of WW2 stuff.

plus it was a bit of an exaggeration we do get some WW2 stuff as TT but outside of naval(something that most people don’t play) it’s few and far in-between.

[PilotPug010]

I’ll take it! (If they add it)

[PilotPug010]

Just testdrove the cv9035nl. No crew lines, that normal?

[hienapunk]

@NoodleCup31

“In the near future, we will update the DM for Leopard 2 tanks, therefore correcting any minor discrepancies.”
December 21st, 2023

Sooo this patch maybe? Please?

What? Gaijin lies?

[Morvran]

They said that for the challenger 2 and only nerfed it