Its Pangolan_Fan, his takes are bad to begin with as he thinks SPAA are overpowered lmao
2 Likes
This is the bad stuff. It’s bad that any nation is getting copy paste they don’t need.
It’s a variant unique to Indonesia, based on the Hawk 208 (itself unique to Malaysia). This isn’t a copy paste.
In game it will get different loadouts including a gunpod, AGM-65G, AIM-9P-4 (they also carry P-5 in Indonesian service) and a different RWR. It’s not the same as the Hawk 200 RDA.
Also here’s all the Hawk 200 operators (from Flightglobal 2024). Indonesia is literally the main operator of this type. There is no reason they shouldn’t have it.
6 Likes
I think it (the blocking bumps)'s the two hoops immediately aft of the large bump circled, been trying to figure what they’re for with very little luck.
im more interested if it can go on the radar 200
The RDA is supposed to be able to use a gunpod IRL but Gaijin opted to not add it.
1 Like
it’s because of that stupid notch just so happened to have on RDA prototype
OH NO MY WALLET
And I have to pre-order for objectively the best Hawk 200 Livery
Damn it gaijin you’ve got me again
A lil disappointed in no Skyflashes but I can understand from a historical standpoint
3 Likes
From my understanding there are patches and there are badges. Patches follows the USAF style shield shape, and worn on flight suits. Badges are worn on Uniforms (service, and parade dresses and field uniforms) as well as on the aircraft itself. If they want to add it as a patch then they should add the text on it too. If they want something that can be applied to vehicles then they should use the Badge. The squadron Badge seen on the Hawk 209 and Rafale B.
5 Likes
I fear for my sanity
C&P for 70e — well, that’s impressive.
So as trend going on, are you going to add J-10CE to JP tech tree?! This is not a avoidable issue
For ground, it should be 11.0 maximum.
Weaker IR AAMs, and its 4x AGM-65Gs are on a slower chassis than the 11.3 Harriers.
Granted, even if it’s correctly BR’d there’s no lineup for it at this time in ground.
Its only getting 2x AGM-65G
which make it a fiddly aircraft to place in GRB
On one hand, It gets AGM-65Gs over the the 200/200RDA’s AGM-65Bs which are a notable upgrade, but it doesnt get as many. If it had 4, it could not be the same BR as the 200 or 200RDA, purely because of that, but as it only has 2, then 10.7/11.0 would be fair.
Though I am of the opinion that both the 200 and 200 RDA are over BRed in GRB and should be dropped by 0.3.
A2A performance is totally irrelevant in GRB and this can be seen in dozens of places
Oh, then 10.7 max even. A-10A is arguably better.
Personally I’d say ZH200 is in an alright place for ground RB, the RWR is a surprisingly powerful tool and with the decent counter measure load you can be surprisingly aggressive against SPAA. The downside being you’ll only have two or three sorties at best. Balances itself out IMO.
The RDA however isn’t in a great place, to have a line up to begin with you need to uptier ground vics, and the aircraft itself is pretty miserable against the 12.0 SAMs, especially with the 64B’s lacklustre lock ranges (5-6km for a track lock in my experience).
Id 100% put the 209 at 10.7 though, the config for GRB is probably going to be fairly limited (2 IR + 2 64Gs), and 10.7 is the right BR for a Indonesian Leo 2A4.
Huh? Then I think the 208 will be the TT vehicle…
2 Likes
nah TNI-AU is not getting J-10CE that’s out of the question, speculation on acquiring J-10B is also still uncertain. Plus getting Rafale is perhaps an easy confirm as delivery will going underway soon
1 Like
This looks pretty dreadful for a 70 dollar plane.
Can we not?