Theres no satement in the source of which Scimitar upgrade / variant received it.
The other sources are datasheets or technical docs that don’t mention it either. Hence why it was rejected by the BRM.
Evidence must be clear and concise.
Except there is
It specified it is the Formation Recce variant
While i do not have sources allowing to officiallt identify each variant, im sure someone here does.
They are visualy different tho
this is referring to all the scimitars that went to afghanistan is it not? which is the mk2 and some late LEP scimitars with the same Cathrine megapixel thermals is it not?
I posted images of the 2, the first one is Close, the 2nd is Formation, the one we have in game.
Close has bigger sights for both guner and commander
1 Like
the mk1 eyeball is a useful tool often forgotten
1 Like
I think @da12thmonkey has something that could help us make the difference clear.
If you do not, and im mistaken, sorry.
If you do, thanks in advance.
1 Like
his info dump in the comments of my bug report was brilliant and (if given the time to read it) clears up any possible gaps of understanding within my report.
huge amount of respect for da12th, very knowledgeable guy, infinitely more than i am
@Smin1080p_WT Hello. Can you say that abandoning the idea of adding aircraft to the infantry mode is no longer a topic of discussion, or is it still possible to hope that aircraft might be added to this mode?
Nowhere is this specified in the report or made clear this is specifically the Mk 2. Again, ambiguous details must be made clear. It should not be left up to assumption.
1 Like
is the Scimitar Mk2 in-game a generic “Mk2” where any and all upgrades are applicable or is it a specific model.
If it is a specific model, then can that be shared so sources and reports can be submitted for that specific version.
It is extremely unfair to deny an extremely well researched bug report “because its not the for the speicific version in-game” without actually saying what the specific version in-game is meant to actually represent.
Just feels like another case of selective realism, where the devs have decided that the Scimitar Mk2 should be Gen 1 Thermals and is now just making up excuses to deny any report to suggest otherwise
4 Likes
No plans to speak of right now regarding aircraft in infantry. Its just helicopters now in terms of aviation (if you don’t count the drones).
1 Like
well ig it is the time of day again to ask @Smin1080p_WT questions, so here is mine:
are there any news on the IRST pod for the Super Hornet and similar systems for other planes?
2 Likes
The version in game is just a Mk 2. There are no spesific upgrades on it. Sources that directly relate to the Mk 2 can be used.
Ambiguity is the reason this report was rejected by the BRM.
1 Like
Nothing currently, but it remains in the plans.
1 Like
Okay?
So why was this report denied?
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/jrK21g0asTED
Especially with @da12thmonkey comment below clearly outlining upgrades for the Mk2
https://community.gaijin.net/p/warthunder/i/jrK21g0asTED?comment=70VbLZAUJWSrSntEOZ56vDly
1 Like
Sadly. May I ask why this decision was made? The planes weren’t even tested
I already answered that here: Next Major Update - Rumor Round-Up & Discussion - #5063
The source is not clear or spesific to the Mk 2. Clarity is needed.
Any and all relevant information should be in the report itself.
1 Like
They were tested internally. For now, the current focus is on helicopter interactions. Aircraft are significantly more complex from a balancing point of view.
1 Like
because how the mk2 was built to is the same spec that LEP scimitars were upgraded to circa 2010. mk1 and mk2.
publications explicitly saying mk2 was obsolete because of this. How can vehicles be modelled realistically if documentation of the era is looked at without historical nuance.
So, what you are saying then, that the @Caernarvon02 sources could be used to upgrade both the Mk1 and Mk2 to Gen 3 thermals because it just generically states the Scimitar?