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
It is very much WIP still. It was added on saturday, only included in the changelog today
It is the most W.I.P vehicle we’ve ever seen in public hands I think, it is quite amusing how rough it currently is. That’s also why I’m not too critical yet, but I got my eyes out for the live version
I figured I should add some images for the people that are not as familiar with the airframe, and what to look forwards to.
The MFCD package looks like this, it sits right under the tail on either side of the tailhook, and accounts for 44 countermeasures combined
And speaking of the tailhook, that looks like this (or rather, this image is technically an example of the tailhook failing because it was on a swivel and tended to bend sideways at times as a result, but still)
Here is the difference in the HUD between F-35 and F-35 WDNS
And here is one of the airframes fitted with CRV7 rockets during testing
And lastly, simply a neat graph of cosmetic differences (between the Danish models), though just the F-35 since that is what we are getting for now
5 Likes
And some countermeasures located in the wing-roots? Or so i think ive read
That comes with the EMFCD, yes. At this moment I do not have a good image of those outside of one graph from the manual, but this is mainly depending on what Gaijin does next. If they don’t add EMFCD (which primarily consists of the wing pylon pods), I won’t be happy but I can compromise for the time being. I will however not compromise on them skipping MFCD, since that added the same tail flares as the Finnish model, but also the tailhook flares. I want a full package, or none of it. The 12 wing root flares came in the EMFCD upgrade, not MFCD
1 Like