Unfortunately, the creatures that assume AI is an adequate replacement for research skills won’t grasp the difference between primary or secondary sources, let alone source credibility.
2 Likes
It’s doubly funny when there is documentation…
In mid-2008, the first supersonic release of a GBU-39 bomb was conducted at a California air base by aircraft from the 411th Bomb Squadron of the United States Air Force. The tests were successful, demonstrating that it was possible to safely release bombs at high speeds from an internal bomb bay. This allowed the entire program to introduce next-generation weapons to supersonic aircraft to be considered a success.
Yeah, they really rushed the update, it’s very obvious
1 Like
Pretty sure that within 20km the C5 is overall worse, I usually run 3 C5 for the begining engagements and keep 4 RB99 on the bol pods for the fur ball
the list for the gripen e isnt even that bad
its looking way worse for the eurofighter for example, a plane where they had a year to fix issues
Updated ))
Not to be that guy but lots of Gripen C or even Gripen A issues translate to the E model and are not included on the list here. Issues that are yet to be addressed after years of Gripen platform being in game and predating any of the Eurofighters.
Playing this whole game of who got it worse is pointless really. They rushed this current update as many others before - thats a fact and it sucks.
4 Likes
Tbf. A majority of the Gripen is classified so we cant really bug report things with 100% authenticity for some aspects. Regardless imo it still shouldn’t have been added in this slop slate. Whats Sweden going another yeat without a top tier aircraft anyways? Not like its a new thing. Still funny people want the E to be the same BR as the EFT/Rafale despite being worse. Really highlights just how bad compression is and how terrible gaijin is at balancing
2 Likes
same goes for both the Eurofighter and Rafale
and its even worse for stuff like the J-10’s
slop state?
the J-10C didnt even get the engine it used in service
J10C is a different ball park of problems drag, engine, hud ect. We didn’t even get a Gripen E we got a prototype in game, snail literally hadn’t done any research, im more suprised they gave it the additional missiles and didn’t screw it like they did the A when the C released or screw it like they did since they wanted the C to fit their ideal Gripen model and not a realistic one.
Also given Sweden air track record yeah its slop. F16AM 2nd worst 13.7, wrong CM loadout, all sorts of loadput r3strictions and things where both it and the Belgian F16AM should be similar. F-35 missing tons of CM’s despite modeling EMFCD.
JA37Di had to be fought just to be added to thebTT where its cockpit is still a mess and completely jank hud. I can keep going on but its been years since we had a solid addition or even a decent addition that survived the compression for air.
So yes excuse me for wanting swedens newest jet to arrive in a solid state compared to what was handed to us. A late addition who will be made redundant because gaijin refuses to decompress air and would rather throw it to the same BR as the other poorly balanced 14.3’s that dont stand a chance to the current meta. The Gripen E is a late vehicle with a identity crisis here nearly a year to late. With such poorly handled 3D modeling it makes me wonder if they thought the E was a Gripen C and just decided to google the first image rather than spend 1 second looking at trying to model it.
9 Likes
they added the 78425 which Indeed uses al31 irl
This part i have to strongly refute though. The only thing i could see that was missing with the 3D model was the extended wings, which it admittedly not even got IRL until 2 years ago and it has a majority of the time been pictured with the old wing so a relatively easy mistake to make (there is also an issue with one of the wheel doors hinges clipping through the fuselage but that’s relatively minor imo). But that’s it, at least to my knowledge. I’f i’ve missed an issue about the 3D model feel free to correct me.
GREAT POST, really. I have one simple question. The accepted “bugs” or “features” are certain to be added to the vehicle? or does Accepted mean it’s been passed on to the devs to look over it and possibly fix?
1 Like
If you open the reports through the links the bug reporting managers usually say which way they are forwarded when they add the “accepted” label.
In general actual issues and bugs are fixed at some point while other reports about upgrades and munitions are forwarded as suggestions and are up to the developers if they want to implement or not.
2 Likes
Not technically true CV90 MKIV armor is blatantly fictional and has been marked as accepted for a year with Smin stating its a suggestion despite being implemented incorrectly.
So lets not lie about what actually happens. I get you’re doing your point on the forum but some actual problems are left unsolved because they fit gaijins personal want for a vehicle rather than a real value for the vehicle
3 Likes
What part of my statement was incorrect?
Actual issues and bugs are fixed at some point is you telling a half truth, change it to “They may get fixed” that is more accurate as that allows for more room for things to never be fixed which is what actually happens
1 Like
V
Λ
Eh, still think it would be better to change it to a more open ended response rather than leave it as is but i digress