you’ve got to take into account the sheer size of the Granit too, like the warhead on the Granit weighs as much as an entire Exocet missile, I don’t have much doubt that one, maybe two would permanently remove an Iowa class from action, not even mentioning the fact that with the potential for ship recognition the missile could attempt a top-down attack
Yeah, though I doubt we’ll see those. More likely the smaller, air launched options for now
oh yeah, I don’t think the Granit could ever come, it has something like a 600km range at least, you couldn’t make maps big enough for it realistically.
loadouts are usually based on balance
No J-10 variant was seen with PL-5, the pylons it was equipped with was only compatible with PL-8, and for the J-10C the new pylons can be fitted with PL-10.
The use of PL-5E II was a balancing factor by Gaijin, as they believed that PL-8B (PL-8 with more range and IRCCM) was too OP to be added for now.
Here’s hoping they add it to the J-11B in March or June, and retroactively give it to the J-10A as well
It would be fine if devs acknowledge that J-10 never had PL-5 mounted, but I need them to say that.
They acknowledged this a while ago, iirc
Source? So I can delete my comment to Smin
It remains to be seen.
J-11B’s wingtip pylons were designed with PL-8B in mind.
They might add a late J-10A with JKL-24 AESA radar with PL-10 eventually instead.
More likely they just leave the J-10A as it is and add the B or C later on, in fact if we do get a better J-10A it would likely be as a premium, but I doubt we’ll see another J-10A in the research tree
Considering that an Iowa class is rated against 16" AP fire at some range, and said AP rounds go faster than granite missile even at range, while concentrating more force onto smaller surface area, and that the missile body is made of weak metal that will just disintegrate on impact, and that iirc Granit missiles go for waterline area where there is thick armor, an Iowa should be able to tank granit after granit
Yeah that doesn’t say anything about them acknowledging that PL-5E II was an unhistorical addition.
I think it would depend on what type of warhead it has. If it’s a shaped charge, then I wouldnt be entirely certain it would do no damage. But the question is how much.
I’m also thinking smaller ASMs anyway, like a Type 42 destroyer firing EXOCETs against various WW2 ships in war thunder and how they could be placed “fairly”
If top tier BBs took no damage from them, then they would need to be lower, but if they 1 shot any light/heavy cruiser… Then they become really hard to place.
It’s just a plain HE warhead, so should be no issue for an Iowa class.
And exocet would do next to nothing unless it hit in certain vulnerable areas
I think they should just do a full separation of cold war/modern and WW2 era stuff for naval, since it’s about impossible to balance the 2 together
PL-5EII is compatible with PL-9C’s PF95W launch rail. Since PL-9C’s launch rail and PL-8B’s launch rail look exactly the same, we can expect it to be compatible with PL-5EII.
WT Mobile just had a fairly major, minor update. Moving from versions 1.11x to 1.12x, here 's some highlights:
Visual effects for ECM
( remember, WTM had the code for split chaff/flare countermeasures 's added before WT did, even though they don’t yet have any aircraft that have CM 's )
Statcard and BG icons for South Korean vehicles
There are also a number of changes to the controls of aircraft carriers, primarily in regard to their airgroups. The full list of changes will be on the appropriate thread.
The regular WT game has also had some additions:
( https://www.reddit.com/r/Warthunder/comments/1i77gj9/243067_243069/ )
And on the topic of Moments of Valour, remember the Dagger(ARG) and Sea Dart ? I still do.
This one is already in the files:
8 Likes
I’m not inquiring if it’s compatible or not. Perhaps it is compatible with J-10A. Just asking if developers know if it was ever mounted on the J-10A.
Anything about Harpoons?