I feel like gaijin is just bullying my boy Q-5L, like its ridiculous. They just wont add AA missiles or flares to it, despite the player base asking for it. It would be good for the chinese cas and would add a bunch of new strategies for Chinese cas and for the plane itself.
We just need some photos of the dispensers and AAM on the Q-5L. Then it can be reported and added.
We really need an active history thread on the entire Fantan Q/A-5 series, both because these threads have a way of uncovering new info that gets bug reports accepted, and because they have a way of concentrating community pressure on the most egregious of Gaijin’s modelling errors and forcing them to better acknowledge reports, which compounds with the improved quality of reports the new info generates
Frankly speaking what Gaijin’s done to the Q/A-5 is much more egregious than the F-5C’s flares, it’s in desperate need of addressing
Sorry but I doubt that. I’ve provided photos before in bug reports and they rejected it instantly as “not valid source”. In an attempt that maybe you can force the issue, here they are:
The flare pod has been shifted over to allow the addition of a second flare pod containing what looks like 6 flares in a 2x3 configuration. Here is what the Q-5L looks like with the pods covered/not installed:
Notice how there are 2 covers over where the flare pods go? Furthermore, we can deduce there are multiple upgrade packages for the Q-5L where some received the newer 2 flare pod setup as shown while some retained the original 1 flare pod design like the A-5C’s.
As for AAM’s, I don’t believe there is any pictures for that nor any open source documentation. The PLAAF doesn’t usually equip them on strike fighters, especially old ones that we really only got to see during airshows. Even finding images of flares on them was really difficult. If Gaijin had any documents on the Q-5N stating AAM’s/flares, they honestly should just switch the in-game version to the N since the only difference between them was the base airframe built off of (Q-5L built off Q-5C; Q-5N built off Q-5D) and they use different navigation.
Anyways, hopefully these pictures can help move things along…
I can see your logic for the countermeasure dispensers but unfortunately that wouldn’t be sufficient for the developers. They’d need to see the actual dispenser uncovered. I understand that it’s difficult to source a photo of that and somewhat frustrating but there isn’t anything I can do about it.
People wouldn’t be frustrated if this logic was applied consistently. The inconsistency with which such logic is applied, such as the lack of this logic in the provision of flares on the F-5C, is the driving force of it. The inconsistency means that the train of logic is chosen after the fact to suit their decision, and while doesn’t mean there is no logic, it does mean that the logic doesn’t matter. They have a consistent record of making decisions, and changing their logic to remain consistent in order to defend that decision, when they should instead have a consistent pattern of logic that they use to make decisions and analyze critique of those decisions.
Okay, you can see the flares on the first image but I agree that the picture is grainy and you could argue “I don’t see it”. So this spurred me along to hunt down some Chinese sources somebody shared with me on the forums awhile ago and translate them with just a basic Chinese translator. Spoiler, the document says the Q-5L gets both AAM’s and flares, find below both the translated (not the best) and untranslated pages.
For reference, the order of aircraft progression is Q-5B (Q-5IA) → Q-5C (Q-5II)/Q-5D (Q-5III) → Q-5L
NOTE: there is still some miscommunication on whether the Q-5C was from the Q-5IA or the Q-5A. Two of my sources agree on the Q-5IA and it lines up more correctly than the Q-5C being based on an older Q-5A model when they had the Q-5IA.
Keep in mind these translations are rough, when you translate enough of these you can match of the Chinese text pretty well with what the English is trying to say.
Q-5IA and onwards the Type 941 flare/chaff dispenser is equipped to increase survivability. Judging from the photos of the Type 941, perhaps the flare quantity on the Q-5A in game is incorrect. It should also be different than the A-5C as Pakistan had requested the usage of the GT-1 flare/chaff dispensor instead. I don’t think it’s needed so i won’t include that page, but I can provide it if requested.
Proof of Q-5C was made off of Q-5IA:
NOTE: the second translation has an error, it says the Q-5A was the basis but in the actual text it says Q-5IA, the translation software did not detect it correctly.
Documentation of compatibility with AAM’s:
Mentioned in these is that the outer light pylons are able to mount AAM’s like the Pl-5’s, Aim-9’s or Magic’s. It specifically says upgraded Q-5’s like the Q-5III (A-5C) can carry them.
Now, it should be WITHOUT A DOUBT the Q-5L can get it’s Type 941 flare pods (AND the Q-5A’s changed) and can carry Pl-5’s. If you would like a copy of both sources, let me know where I can upload them.
Create a report on the CBR and link it to me :
I’ll take a look after work.
It is applied consistently, the F-5C get flares do it being a renamed 5A. Which could be mounted with flares.
Here is the link to the report: Gaijin.net // Issues
Let me know if anything needs changed/adjusted.
Still working but you should split the report. One for CMs and one for AAMs. We have a one issue per report rule.
Understood. I have adjusted the first report to solely be about the missing Type 941 flare pod.
Here is a link to the second report about missing the ability to carry Pl-5’s: Gaijin.net // Issues
I did add a bit more information here as the sources agree that the Q-5III was wired for the Pl-5’s and the A-5C export version had to be rewired for Aim-9’s and Magic’s for Pakistan. The Q-5L being a further improved Q-5 retains the improvements made with the Q-5III development.
I hope the whole drama around the Q-5s can finally be put to rest…
Cheers, I’ve forwarded those for consideration.
For me at least, the targeting pod for q5L is completely broken to the point where its gbu’s are useless. When in the pod sight view, it only updates tank movement like every 4 seconds leading to extreme latency which causes your bombs to miss unless the vehicle remains stationary the entire time. Other wise the vehicles you lock will rubber band and desync into terrain and buildings etc
Well, at this point when we know the JH-7 is coming I at least hope the Q-5L also gets it’s missing features in a single swoop.
I guess that’d be nice
i found some images that also point towards the Chaff dispenser at least. these are a chinese variant so they look a bit different that the ones in game rn (or the ones in game arent given the proper 3d texture)
Neither of those two is the L model but I see what you’re pointing at.
Those are at least the IB models without dispensers inserted (because show camouflage, not needed for shows).
oh wait good catch. they dont have the Laser targeting system under the nose right?
That’s one of the Ls features yes. Smaller details I’m not as good at but ye