We can point it out all we like sadly, RB24J (AIM-9P-3) has been pointed out for years and they’ve done absolutely nothing to give it its differences from the regular 9P and it frustrates alot of us
3 Likes
I should also note the aircraft is called Saab 35XD by Saab themselves, not XF. Very minor detail and that only really affects the forum here
Though speaking of the name, Saab F-35 is plainly wrong as well for the game. That term has never been used, and since they are adding the WDNS mod, they should just rename it to F-35 (WDNS) in-game (Saab never had a designation for the WDNS mod so calling it Saab 35XD would not be wise either when the base model is added later, which should be called A35XD if you insist on using Saab designations)
2 Likes
That’s a thing that i don’t really like in wt, it’s called double standards, for example the aim120c is specified as a block 5 but the 9M’s block isn’t specified at all.
If anything, it should be as you say, be called F-35 (WDNS) since that is its service name, where as the Saab 35XD is the manufacture model number.
It would be like calling the Halifax, H.P.61 (manufacture model number) instead of its service name of Halifax B.III.
1 Like
Now this sounds interesting.
Whats the G pull?
Should be about the same as the AIM-9N, the only real modification of note to it is the new SR116 motor
Havent really caught up to DEV, but last time i head someone talk about them, they said something along the lines of 20G peak pull, thats correct?
I believe so, yes
Well if it comes, i know what im researching next.
was someone able to test if the carrier hook works allready?
As far as I could see, no. And it isn’t technically a carrier hook, but simply a landing hook for (presumably) shorter runways. The Swedish Drakens were meant to have them, but never installed any. The Danish ones on the other hand, did get them. They were notoriously annoying, with a tendency to swivel to the sides upon landing, which made it a little troublesome to stop the aircraft from plowing off the runway
So aim-n2 would essentially play like a aim9j with range comparable to a 9g?
Range would be averaging out at 3.2km, 9G has a 5s burn so that’s why it has such a long range
hows the impulse on the n2?
Not a clue, the manual only stated burn time as a whole
I’ll ask some guys that may know, since it isn’t info I have laying around at the moment. No other Sidewinder has this burn time so there really is no comparison there. Only similar ones I’ve found are SRAAM and R-27ET, but one self-destructs when it runs out of fuel, and the other has much more specific impulse, so it is hardly a fair comparison
1 Like
The REAL F-35, been here for 55 years and still rules. I hope they change it to F-35 in game so people will lose their mind if they don’t follow the updates
1 Like
I saw F 35 being added to dev server (according to today’s changelog), can anyone tell if it is wrong in most ways (as usual) or finally cooked?
Think the P-4/5 should have the SR 116 aswell
As the SR-116 motor is still in use, it is probably classified. Information for it can be found in, for example, T.O. 1F5E-34-1-1-1 or T.O. 1F5E-34-1-1-3. But i cant get eyes on those