How is it possible by all the laws of mankind that the much much older q5a has flares but NOT the new and improved q5L??? Truly mind boggling
China’s air force said no to countermeasures.
In fact, there are, including air to air missiles, but due to the lack of pictures of Q5L throwing heat traps and the gaijin so-called balance, Gaijin chose not to
I’ve seen every angle of Q-5L imagery.
There are no flare buckets anywhere on the airframe.
Yet I can find dozens of Q-5A with flare buckets.
Gaijin’s modeling and reality cannot be generalized. Many vehicles in the game are modeled incorrectly.
And most are modeled correctly within the knowledge available.
I believe Q-5L is accurate, and for a bomber it not having countermeasures doesn’t really impact its performance.
The only Q-5L photos you’ve seen are the “white camo” ones. The white camo is specifically meant for shows and PLAAF tends to not fit flare buckets onto those aircraft.
It is an upgraded Q-5III which already had an option for 3 dispensers and it is just a fact that the Q-5L/N carried over the same ability
If you apply logic it would make no sense for q5L not to have countermeasures. Its a ground attack jet so its going to be facing manpads and other ir tracking weapons. I refuse to believe a cas jet with a targeting pod and modern avionics does not also have countermeasures. its self sabotage to omit flares from a vehicle designed to get close to warzones with manpads… Seeing that older renditions of q5 DO in fact carry flares it only reinforces how silly it would be for L to have none. As for aams this is the same country that puts up to 16 air to air missiles on their light attack heli.
gonna bump this one, seems like the people that are behind bug report moderation hold some sort of a bias lol
That’s because it is rare for the PLAAF to equip them/uncover them (unclear if the panel covers them or if they are not there). But there does exist at least one image of a Q-5L with flares used during a demonstration:
Should have 24 flares total, the original flare pod seen on the A-5’s was moved over to allow installation of a second smaller pod. I beg reported this in the past, but they rejected it because “no book sources”. Additionally there is a Chinese book detailing the Q-5L and says it has flares, but I haven’t heard the status on that bug report in months, likely rejected knowing them…
The huge disadvantage of the chinese tech tree; finding sources to gaijins standards are very difficult due to the language and availability barrier. Plus china is still a minor nation and its player pool is smaller
Just going to add on this that I found while digging around again for further photos:
Found another picture of the same Q-5 as above, this time it has the flare pods covered, but look closely at them. they don’t follow the traditional single large panel prior Q-5’s had there. Instead it has 2 smaller ones shaped like the pods in the prior image. This is a bit confusing now because we can see other Q-5L’s with the large single panel but we also see this (these?) Q-5L’s with small double panels. Unfortunately I still can’t dig up what the nose number of the planes are. But this is definitive proof Q-5L has flare pods.
My speculation is since the Q-5L is a modernization program the other Q-5L’s didn’t get the extra flare rebuild package and just the other upgrades, thus some have the dual flare pods, and some the singular.
Yea, while it’s clearly visible the devs still won’t give a crap, which is a shame…
@Smin1080p are the devs and the bug report forwarding team still adamant on not giving this plane flares, PL-5 and moving it to 10.3?
The fact that it is modelled after an exhibition plane, clearly visible by the white camo, which did not have the full ordnance mounted (on shows anyway), should tell the devs that it is misrepresented in-game.
Or are they truly hating the plane to death lol?
I get the feeling they just don’t like the Chinese TT. I mean, refusing to give a vehicle flares even after pictures surface of it with flares? Seriously? Yet the F-5C gets to keep it’s flares because it “could” equip them even though the USAF NEVER gave them any. Or the latest bias with how our J-8F was denied the Pl-11 as a stopgap until the Pl-12 but the F-16C gets the Aim-7M despite also not having a CW illuminator…
well gaijin logic isnt exactly consistent. i mean the mig 23 airframe could mount the bllk-50-60 flare and chaff dispensers but they dont add it cuz it didnt have it IRL. well then make everything historical then lol.
plus the poor 23BN is at 9.7 with not AAM and only rockets and bombs (kh23 aswell but idk.)
it faces SPAA with SAMs and truly is quite difficult to fly efficiently.
Which is astounding given they could turn it into the fourth big tree beside the Big 3. But they dont…
I don’t see any flares on that image.
There are flare racks mounted in one and the others have the racks covered with an add on plate (demo airframes dont need flares)
Yeah I’m not seeing them.