I don’t know if it was functional or not, I was just saying that even if it wasn’t, it wouldn’t matter since Gaijin didn’t care for the Radpanzer 90.
2 ways to easily spot that this is fake: The most obvious one is that there is more than 1 new top tier MBT on the list, which is a clear indicator. Second is that the CV9035NL is already in game.
Then again, I wouldn’t complain if we saw a lot of these vehicles next update.
Agreed, I just want a historical version of it added instead.
Also agreed, especially since subtrees can replace it perfectly.
It’s by the principle of “unfinished prototype”, which is the suggestion ruleset and the closest to fixed rules we get.
While Gaijin is inconsistent and sometimes adds vehicles that don!t pass these rules, or denies those that pass, suggestions have a clear and easy guideline that a historical R2Y2 or Ho-Ri would fit (of course the in-game versions still wouldn’t).
But if you just ask how I used the word historical, I meant “As they were historically”, so faithful to the real design. This has nothing to do with completion or service history, just with not making stuff up or misinterpreting information.
2 Likes
I get this, but the very idea of “unfinished prototype” is already questionable since especially for aircraft, there is a very real possibility the aircraft simply would not work or would perform very differently from in-game version
I mean, if the prototype wasn’t even fully made and tested, how can you be so sure it would make it off the ground?
Malaysian Hornet, you mean? I don’t see why it should matter in terms of the game though, a combined sub-tree would have made perfect sense.
If any of those parts was vehicle specific, as in specifically made for the XF-108 suggestion rules say yes.
I’d absolutely support a suggestion like that too, since I personally really like the more niche historical designs that didn’t get as far, it’s one of my favorite parts of War Thunder.
That being said, it also depends on the information available, generally the less we know, the more Gaijin just make up. This is an issue I feel like most games have with unfinished vehicles, and I’d be cautious of it if there’s too many unknowns.
Well the YJ-93 engines were meant for both the XB-70 and XF-108. The radar and missile were originally intended for the XF-108, but after it got cancelled, they were put on the YF-12 (which also got cancelled lol, but it did exist, fly, and fire missiles)
But I was mostly using it as an example of what should not be added since it simply is not real
I actually mean Thai Hornet.
Thailand was a Hornet customer in the 90s, buying 8 airframes. Sadly before they were finished the Asian Financial Crisis cut this short, and Thailand couldn’t pay the missing 3/4 of the deal. All 8 aircraft were finished as F/A-18Ds for the USMC.
It’s a bit of a cope, and very much a sidegrade to the F-2 anyways. So more of a joke than anything else.
Don’t think the engine counts if it was for another aircraft too, on the same basis the Kawasaki AH-2 was denied. But if the radar was designed specifically for the XF-108, that should be enough.
I’d personally like to see it still, seems like an interesting aircraft. Especially for the US, where most of their mainline jets were export successes, there’s a good need for more unique airframes. Especially with subtrees now.
That being said, I go by unfinished prototypes not because it’s a Gaijin rule, but the suggestion rule. And I personally like it.
Gaijin themselves are very fishy, sometimes adding full-on paper vehicles, sometimes even not adding near-completed vehicles.
So if you want to go by a different system, that’s probably just as close to actual Gaijin inner workings as any other.
There is other century series jets, as well as YF-12A. and Navy fighters like F7U and F5D
Also, they can just keep Advanced Eagle and F-16E in US (well i guess there is Israeli F-15IA but that doesn’t even exist yet)
F-22 as well, and Super Hornet since afaik only 1 other country currently uses them
if they wanted to, US would have many unique airframes by now
1 Like
The aircraft that would probably take almost a whole state to turn?
1 Like
maybe turning while sustaining mach 3 at like 80k feet, but ive heard A-12 series had solid performance at lower speeds. not a dogfighter ofc, but still
SR-71 manual says a little over 50 nmi radius @ M3.2 and 44 deg bank angle, and a little under 40 nmi @ M2.8
1 Like
Su-34M?
Mayhaps
seeing how it carried only prototypes to the phoenix and only 2 itd be pretty much useless
predecessor is not same as prototype
it could carry 3 of them btw
Yee, had this bug also but with an German F-18(Yes, German/sadly in the end it was the US Premium version which somehow turned up in Germany)and an German Eurofighter
1 Like
Bug Thunder
I’ve been seeing enemy chat messages (like drone pings) occasionally pop up in my chat and on my mini-map.
Also, does the Obj 292 have blowout panels for the charges? I swear it used to, but I got hit in the charges and exploded. On top of that, I’m loading it with only APFSDS shells, yet still explode when the rounds in the carousel get hit.
Gaijin, fix your game.
Why is it that people always say it’s a copy and paste of Germany, Russia I understand but Germany, some captured tanks and leopards which we are planning to retire soon anyway.