I’m not versed enough in how flairs work in game but shouldn’t we have the option of either small or large flairs on the internal launchers on Gripen?
Same with chaff, should we not get the choice of effectiveness against specific radar bands?
Edit:
@Gunjob might have some insights?
The ALE-47 comes in many different configurations. However I’m not sure if the BOP-G is actually an ALE-47 under license or home grown. As it stands the dispensers on the Gripens are large caliber.
When it comes to chaff, in real life you could have band specific chaff, but the most effective is broad band chaff as you don’t always know what threat type you’re up against. In game chaff works in broad band.
I know nothing about the ALE-47 or why it pertains to gripen.
and i know they are large in game curently, but IRL they can choose different versions of flairs to load into the internal dispenser. as shown in the images there are four options of flares for internal mounting.
my question was if there was a posibility to get those options in game as a choice when choosing flares/chaff
and if the option exists IRL could we get the option in game as well?
or are both these thoughts suggestions i can make and not something already implemented in game?
Both will be a suggestions for now. Different caliber flares to the internal ones you can get only in external dispensers and there is no option to choose what band the chaff is. Well, i have no idea why you would want to change the second one but you do you
Similar dispenser bins
I mean it could be possible sure, presently not so much.
A suggestion for band specific chaff could be made, not all dispensers have broad band chaff as an option. Early ALE-40’s are pretty limited if I recall only had band specific chaff (I’d have to check up on that, think my Jaguar Tactics manual talks of it). ALE-47 is more capable with more options. Pods such as Phimat usually dispensed broad band chaff.
“Phimat more effective and ALE-40” With both being broad band I guess its that Phimat had larger and more packets.
Use of Phimat;
ALE-40 did infact drop broad band chaff atleast by 1992 (might have been thinking of early ALE-40’s)
the reason i ask is that IRL Gripens countermeasure system is automatic and chooses the correct response to each detected threat as they appear. and being able to choose flare and chaff loadout in the same way you do secondary weapons with presets would be both strategic and also look cool.
especially now that sensor suite mode and ARH missiles are on the horizon.
There are plans for separate flare and chaff controls for this year.
I know stuff like the RWR on Tornado GR.1 was capable of dispensing chaff based on RWR feedback.
So suggestions could be made for Gripen if you have the source materials. I have already submitted a report for RWR feedback to trigger chaff dispensing similar to MAW but only for SARH and ARH missile types for the Tornado GR.1.
Thats awesome! will do when i have time :) and source material there is plenty directly from SAAB :)
That I think we can agree on.
I’ve said this to you before - everyone has different thresholds for what we deem sufficient/good evidence.
If you find you have to keep insisting that your claims are well sourced, then that in itself should tell you something.
You have used invalid sources much more than once. Everyone in this thread is already well aware, otherwise I would provide a catalogue of the invalid sources you’ve attempted to use within this thread alone.
@Gunjob
Any idea if the agm65G is going to be exclusively for the Hungarian Gripen at the moment?
Its on the GR7 on the dev didyou hear
Yeah saw the GR.7 is getting them, was curious about the other Gripens.
Oh i don’t about other Gripens
I believe you’d have to make a report (like Gunjob did for the GR.7) showing evidence of in this instance the SAAF JAS-39C using AGM65G
I had a report in for the 65D on the SAAF Gripen. But those materials also cover G/H.
I’ll update my report.
Cheers mate.
Looking forward to giving them a go, because the current mavericks in game rarely kill mbts for me
Regularly passing reports speaks for itself. They meet gaijins criteria, if you disagree that’s entirely a personal issue.
So why is it always the same issue brought up if there are so many additional examples?
I’m not even the one who proved the Gripen’s SEP is absurd, I just called it out early on. I’m not even the only person pointing out this issue, others did.
Doesn’t matter, until it’s reported and accepted it’s still a present issue and worth discussion. You’ll notice I hardly discuss the other issues currently such as instability… It’s been reported and Gaijin just has yet to fix it.
What you’re suggesting is Gaijin will fix it if we don’t report it and just wait. That 100% isn’t the case. Look at the F-5A and F-5E. They overperform so drastically that the F-5E actually outperforms the F-20 Tigershark’s known data. When it was reported they made the decision to leave it as-is because it’s been in the game too long and they don’t feel like changing older flight models. The F-16 and Gripen may very well end up the same way.
If they are bug reports about the Gripen…. In the Gripen thread… sounds on topic to me……
He’s not discussing the Gripen or the bug reports, or providing anything new though. He’s just talking about how often he submits bug reports, and that is supposedly meant to be an indicator of how good his sources are. If he wants to give himself a pat on the back he can do it elsewhere - people coming to this thread to discuss the Gripen shouldn’t have to be subjected to it.
