Until people stop writing nonsense about what they absolutely don’t understand.And so it will continue
1 Like
- To avoid deviating from the main topic and to keep it clean you should still discuss it privately (if you find the findings or conclusion of the discussion to be useful then ofc post it in the forum)
- There are plenty of people that will have their own ideas, as long as you think and know you’re in the right and have the sources to back it up just ignore them, if they are trolls they’ll get tired once you don’t give them attention.
As long as it pertains to the topic, if people only cast doubts in private there is no way to discern opinion from fact
The discussion goes back 300 messages and talks about how Russia and it’s own planes and tanks are doing in the Ukraine war, also talks about hangars for aircraft… how is that relevant?
Meant to say “if it pertains”, I’ll edit
2 Likes
To that ofc I agree… but in this case people were talking about Ukraine war and nato/western systems… just create a different thread I guess.
Funny Kill & Supermaneuverable reverse attempt.
I was caught slipping with full fuel & rack of R-27ERs by a M2k 5F who started off with an energy advantage & at my 6 o’clock.
1 Like
just a cultural project, leaded by AVIC but down by third party cultural company, there aren’t any useful information
1 Like
Anyway since it was somewhat lost in the back, for anybody that has a second this is a new bug report about the J11A radar:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/vqbCmqSXz3Es
Also @pegabug where does it say in the Rupprecht source that the J11A has the N001VE? so that we add another quote.
2 Likes
Anyway, wish this luck
1 Like
“The main reason behind this work were the dated avionics of the original N001 radar, which as a first step were replaced by or updated to the N001V with better tracking performance. This was further improved by the N001VE which was capable of engaging two targets using both SARH R-27RE1 and active radar homing R-77 AAM’s. … The variant was called the J-11A…”
We don’t have to add quotes to the reports, the devs will get the pages I posted and if they desire, they can obtain copies of the books if they think there is more information.
Regardless, we have 2 valid sources for the N001VE in the J-11A, not sure what the hold up is on acknowledging the report.
3 Likes
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/8N0v6cHACV5T
an issue about J11A’s N001VE from DarkWorld25 was been marked as acknowledged
5 Likes
I’ve read the issue… seems pretty much fine. The third source doesn’t directly say that the radar was the N001VE but it heavily implies there was an upgrade… the other two sources are crystal clear with that and technically we have another source that is the book @pegabug bought… if possible we could contact the author of the issue and give him this fourth source (in the case they reopen the issue… at the moment it is acknowledged and comments are restricted)
After edit:
@_DarkWorld25 (author of the issue)
In case you might need an additional source for the J11A radar we have this one:
Modern Chinese Military Aircraft 1990-Present; Author: Ryan Cunningham
Date of publication: 14th March 2024
ISBN-10: 1838863494
ISBN-13: 978-1838863494
“Reportedly, the J-11A began its flight test programme in December 1999 and entered production by 2002 (if not earlier). By now, Russia had also relented on the radar dispute, supplying the improved N001VE system.”
Neither sources are primary and are slightly more ambiguous about what their information comes from, obviously the radar can not be observed and therefore the devs are weighing up the sources carefully. The sources for Chinese vehicles always have to be more clear and authoritative due to the huge number of misinformation and rumours.
I’ve got a question on that… as you can see here:
The employee themselves say that encyclopedias aren’t material that we can use for Chinese bug reports.
But a different employee said that one of the best and most accurate sources that we can use is 中国飞机全书 that in its cover clearly states it is…
So can we use it or not…?
2 Likes
Its always that moderator man
Also the book was quite literally written by an ex-PLAF officer.
Yeah that’s my point… like can they be a little cleared with their source requirements…?
The requirements for chinese vehicles are always not just ambiguous but much higher than other countries. I have seen fixes with one secondary data or even many tertiary data, yet it requires 2 secondary information for a fix when it comes to Chinese vehicles. The fact is however there is no primary data for currently in service vehicles and secondary sources are undefined from CCTV footage to books, it is extremely hard to find any reliable sources regarding chinese vehicles so I suggest that they might lower the encyclopedia of well known authors into secondary info.
4 Likes
Makes sense.
1 Like
Oh yeah, they won’t take PRIMARY sources either since they are CLASSIFIED.
2 Likes