Far more evidence exists that it is real than the KH-38MT (Mockup with primary sources saying all the parts are functional with full scale testing starting soon) , but at this point they need to compromise
where did you get it’s hobs?
Also it’s likely going to be worse than the other amraams in maneuverability (IN GAME). aim 120c-3 was said to “keep the same kinematics as the a/b” yet they still gave 120 c5 worse fin aoa due to clipped fins
Actually, quick question about that Smin! Is Denmark also considered a Sub TT, given that they currently have vehicles in the Swedish tree?
Also, regarding this, how firm is Gaijin on the whole thing that it needs to have flown? And in terms of it needing to have flown, what’s Gaijin’s stance on aircraft that flew once or twice for say 30 minutes, then never flew again (or aircraft that performed taxi runs but were otherwise unable to undergo their flight testing)?
well you can be sure its at least 27 gs so you don’t have to worry about that, as it can hit 9g targets. and gaijin does a minimum of target g overload x 3 for missile maneuverability.
well im just taking it from that one chinese study which as far as im aware is the only secondary source we have on that thing. all targets are asssumed to be able to pull a max of 9 g (qf-16 drone)
KH-38MT is a mockup with a brochure, No evidence the seeker was ever functional
Spear-Glide is mockup with documents stating all parts have been tested with multiple core parts having been actually test fired via the Spear-3 or the Crossbow OWE
If KH-38MT is allowed, then Spear-Glide should be allowed.
Its not a subtree, but they did state its unlikely the vehicles get added anywhere else.
What this means currently.
Is that denmark gets restricted tp premium, squadron and event vehicles