You’re telling me it can destroy the seeker? Not just trick it? That’s insane
Oh that’s funny
There are a lot of laser systems in development or already deployed in sekrut that can hard kill guidance hardware. And not just IR, in fact if your laser can destroy a drone or radar guided munition, taking out any optical seeker is easy.
1 Like
more like blind, if the laser is powerful enough, even IIR seeker would be blinded.
just search some news about laser radar in electric cars damaging camera’s CMOS, it’s similar.
1 Like
My question is, will the seeker just be blind temporarily or will it be physically damaged so it can no longer track even if the laser is disabled
I think temporarily.
the laser lens would be much larger than what we current seen if reach the power of burning the CMOS
1 Like
It is reasonable, in my view, to equip Chinese aircraft—at least the J-15T—with a countermeasure pod. In real life, Chinese military fighters rely entirely on electronic warfare pods, so there has not been a strong emphasis on developing BOL dispensers. However, dedicated electronic warfare aircraft do not exist in the game, which turns this into a disadvantage within the game.
The J-15T is an aircraft that has only come into public view in the past couple of years, and much of its equipment remains classified. It is unreasonable for the aircraft to suffer from a diminished gameplay experience simply because certain details are unknown and therefore not implemented. Fitting it with a countermeasure pod that clearly exists in reality—even at the cost of occupying a missile hardpoint—is entirely acceptable.
Having only 48 countermeasures is already very poor for a battle rating of 14.7,even 14.3 . To put it into perspective, even the Su-33 at 13.0 already struggles with a very limited countermeasure count. Therefore, adding a real-world Chinese countermeasure pod is not about making the J-15T overpowered; it is simply a matter of fairness, much like the countermeasure pod on the Mirage 4000. I really hope to see this implemented in the game.
1 Like
Well we have pictures of the M4K atleast mounting the CM pod´s afaik, which we do not have of the J-15T, so there is no proof it can even mount it in the first place (from gaijin´s POV) and guesses on feasibility arent accpeted by gajin.
The J-15T is an aircraft that only became known to the public in 2025. You cannot expect there to be numerous photographs of its various equipment, let alone require it to carry those outdated and niche physical countermeasure pods. Moreover, there is clear documentation proving that China does possess physical countermeasure pods (this is not a high-tech product—it is simply wrong to crudely leave the J-15T to rely on just 48 countermeasures at 14.7 simply because the electronic warfare mechanism does not exist in the game). If Gaijin has introduced this aircraft into the game, it should be responsible for its balance; otherwise, it should not have added this aircraft at all.
1 Like
Well if you think there is something wrong with it, as in the words ive read way too much now, go bug report it.
Like i am not saying this to make the plane bad, ive been trying and talking but it always come back to them saying, Guesses, calculations and such will not be accepted, neither talking to the mods has brought anything usefull to the table, it always end with them saying go bugreport it, with what? i dont know, do they want us to give them classified information? on a plane as recent as this one ? ATP i´ve given up since there is nothing we can do about it. (doesnt help that some people demand unreasonable changes on top)
2 Likes
I understand your position, and I’m not trying to argue with you. If my words have made you uncomfortable, I apologize. I simply believe that Gaijin should be responsible for the J-15T’s gameplay and balance.
not really, all modern planes has some basic EW ability, especially the ones with AESA, the radars are integrated with some jamming modes.
some old planes like JH-7A and J-15(OLD ONE) rely on pods, but not for things like J-16/J-15T has some basic EW ability. meanwhile J-15DT and J-16D are more specific in EW like EA-18G.
2 Likes
I wonder what the limitations for the ECM equipment are.
For example using L-203(e) jammer for su-27sk that China got from Russia, jamming is disabled when front radar is turned on due to interference, and it only works behind the plane in a ±60 degree azimuth and ±30 elevation. It also can’t jam to the sides of the plane.
So if you have to turn off the jammers to use the radar it’s gonna essentially be useless.
Though who knows if gaijin will model ecm like this with these such limitations.
Cause for example irl you can’t use spo-15 when you use the radar on the mig-29 because using the radar will constantly illuminate spo-15 so it’s essentially useless, but it doesn’t work like that in game.
Also for those curious about what ECM/JAMMERS do:
Taken from su-27sk manual, RLS refers to radar emissions.
From this we can see that it is really only effective below 500m.
Above that missiles will still cook you
Thank you for your reply，I am not suggesting that an aircraft only possesses electronic warfare capabilities when carrying a pod—besides, the electronic warfare capabilities of different aircraft vary in quality. However, since this mechanic does not exist in the game, it is outside the scope of this discussion. The key point is that, as a new aircraft, the J-15T’s electronic warfare capabilities are what ensure its survivability, which is why carrying only 48 countermeasures is considered sufficient (at least, that is what SAC believes). In fact, the layout of the J-15T’s countermeasure dispensers differs from that of the older J-15 model, which indicates that SAC has not failed to fully understand the Flanker family’s design or countermeasure systems—quite the opposite. However, this very situation has resulted in the J-15T’s in-game survivability being extremely concerning. Therefore, I believe it is reasonable to equip the J-15T with a physical countermeasure pod that clearly exists in reality and is clearly suited for the aircraft.
4 Likes
usually this needs to be suggestion in this forum.
if submitted in bug report section, needs to be more specification. which maybe you can try the incendiary bombs.
an example, my old issue about Z-10ME missing AG300A/M ands 19 rocket pod, it’s about Z-10me missing something so it’s a “bug”
2 Likes
I think this should be detailed enough; the remaining parameters are impossible to be disclosed.
no, I mean the issue you submitted is too far from a “bug”.
1 Like
