You could apply this logic to many jets
As in they couldn’t use Sparrows at all. Only Block 15+* F-16s I believe. The only earlier F-16 I know of is what the F-16AJ is based off of- the YF-16 proposed to Japan.
1 Like
not really
Which was made for the US, and only distantly related to the F-16J proposal. The proposed F-16 for Japan was based on earlier Sparrow tests and added the necessary systems (such as, but not limited to the two-piece landing rear doors with missile launchers) to a Block 10 base, but these tests were not made for the F-16J and had already been done by the time the proposal was made.
The proposed F-16AJ is a pure paper aircraft, it wasn’t prototyped. Gaijins version specifically I’d even call fake because it doesn’t even represent any F-16J proposal, just their assumption on something it could’ve become.
5 Likes
massive nobrainer. +1
1 Like
And Su-27!
1 Like
Xdddddd
1 Like
Supposedly the Su-27 was “trialed” in the same way the swedish Mi-28 was, so it’s not impossible i guess
2 Likes
YF-23 was allegedly offered by Northrop Grumman at the beginning of the F-X development, can’t wait!
2 Likes
The F16AJ has always been an abomination, especially considering that shortly after the Thai subtree was added, making it redundant in the editorial plans. It was the usual extreme favoritism towards Japan, something you never see for other countries. In short, pure marketing. It should be removed entirely
and compensated in convertible RP
Whoever already has it can keep it, it would be unfair to the player who researched it. It just shouldn’t be researchable anymore, like what was done with the Panther II and similar cases. In its place, a Thai F-16 — but not that fake plane
3 Likes
They should just fix it, besides the landing gear Sparrows the only other non-visual changes would be to add GBU-8 (that’s already on the normal Block 10) and to change the engine from a PW-220 to the PW-200 that a Block 10 of the time would’ve had (There is no mention of a different engine for the F-16J and the PW-220 engine would only even exist nearly a decade after the proposal). The rest is only minor visual changes.
If Gaijin want to be really technical, the brochure never mentioned the use of four Sparrows, and only depicted the gear door mounted ones in the brochure. So while it was a Japanese requirement to have four SARH missiles, they could technically argue for a 2 SARH + 6 IR missile loadout instead to keep the BR.
I would also want it fixed if it’s replaced. Even a hidden plane should be as close to accurate as possible.
2 Likes
I agree. Nothing should be lost, but if you can turn a paper vehicle into a real vehicle, that is identical/nearly identical with just a reskin then its the best solution for everyone.
Though if the Thai one never had Aim -7, then it could be dropped down to 12.3 with 9Ls only I guess, I think that would be mostly acceptable.
1 Like
I mean, I don’t think the R2Y2s were planned to have 4x 30mms and those haven’t been removed. As far as I’m aware, they were made to be light bomber aircraft for the navy.
*I want it fixed aswell, but I don’t think it will happen. Panther II had some differences too that were never fixed.
The Thai OCU at least is missing CMs, since it carries four dispensers in reality (30 small or 15 large CMs each), the F-16AJ carries only two.
The Thai ADF would also only carry two, which is likely why we are missing them in-game
1 Like
1 Like
Yes. Shouldn’t thry just do the same thing gaijin did with the ADF in the US/Italy, where they gave them the AMRAAM and changed it to the 13.3BR?
This is where they are fitted, so they aren’t visible here. There is many images attached to the bug report on it.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/uvO36fZV5n1m
I think this is the best image to see them clearly
