I thought it was copied from f16a
So the F-16AJ is just an F-16A Block 10 with different armament, or are there any other differences?
1 Like
I think we need to find or wait for more concrete evidence for the HMD. It’s going to help the F2 so much. They can even add a new variant at like 14.0.
The US F-16A is a Block 10 with only 9Ls, the F-16AJ has a different radar, armament (7F and JM61A1)
I hope they at least allow JNAAM to be more unique. It’d be a shame if F-35s were all the same when there is a prototype missile meant for the F-35s that would be interesting in game.
It’s also based on the Meteor body that is integrated with the F-35, so fitment isn’t an issue.
They also added a made up fake F-16 variant instead of even the proposed F-16AJ. That addition is pretty much the worst decision making Gaijin has ever shown.
They could’ve added an XF-2A/B, they could’ve added a Thai / Indonesian F-16A, they could’ve added the F-14J that was actually considered far more seriously and actually trialed, they could’ve at least followed the proposal to make it accurate to what it was meant to be, but they did none of that.
Instead we have a fictional, downgraded configuration with removed features that doesn’t meet the minimum requirements of the competition it was submitted for anymore.
1 Like
I still don’t know why the F16 ocu is at 13.7 when they could have added the mlu lol
1 Like
It has a different radar (66 vs 66(V1)), 7Fs, JM61A1 rather than M61A1 (different burst mass), AIM-9P vs AIM-9J, missing Napalm + GBU-8 + 2000 lb LDGP Mk 84 Air bombs
1 Like
The US F-16 Block 10. The only changes made were the removed GBU-8 (despite being mentioned in the brochure) and Sparrows (in ADF configuration rather than what was intended for the F-16J about a decade before the ADF even existed).
That’s also why it uses the -220 engine rather than the -200 that F-16s at the time had. It’s an engine that is a decade newer than the F-16J proposal and half a decade newer than it would’ve entered service, but was kept because the US Block 10 is just a later model.
It has a few more armament differences than just the GBU-8. I’d argue that this is perhaps the most unique F-16 in game, there is no other F-16 that can use only Sparrows and Sidewinders. Its either only IR Missiles or IR + SARH + ARH
It’s a shame the gaijin are lazy and greedy. The Fuji T-1, AAM-1 missiles, and Ki-102 Otsu armament are still missing. The Chi-Ri was upgraded to 5.7 from 5.0 out of spite, the Ka-Mi still doesn’t have floats, and the Japanese CAS planes are missing. It’s sad that instead of the exceptional Fuji T-1, Nakajima Ki-201, or Kawasaki XT-4, we got the C&P F-84 and Alpha Jet. It’s frustrating when your favorite country is ignored.
2 Likes
Its gonna be so depressing when people get to the end of Japan’s air tree and it’s just rafale, gripen e, and su30 while the japanese lines are left to rot.
1 Like
yeah there’s way too much missing stuff for Japan. Even the subtree additions are subpar (Thai ground subtree being entirely copy and paste instead of unique)
1 Like
Yeah, it is unique, just for the wrong reasons. Especially missing GBU-8 annoys me because multirole capability was the main selling point over the F-14J / F-15J.
That and the missing Sparrows, because apparently because the ADF didn’t have it a decade after the proposal that completely invalidates the requirement for a 4 + 4 missile configuration for Japans new fighter at the time.
1 Like
no belly sparrows :(
1 Like
exceptional Fuji T-1… XT-4
What’s exceptional about either of those? The T-1 would all be underarmed and the XT-4 would be stuck with a 7.62 mm gatling as its only offensive armament. I still want them to be added but you’re really overrating them by calling them that, adding the copy-paste F-84 was the right choice considering how much better it would be than those.
The Alpha Jet TH was also specifically Phase 1 of a two-stage upgrade, just so Gaijin could avoid making the new glass cockpit for it
1 Like
Seriously, Thailand and Japan would be great if it weren’t for Gajin’s terrible C&Ps. Now Gajin is adding Indonesia and Malaysia to add more C&P. I really don’t understand the need to force everything into Japan. I started the game with Japan because in Wargame Red Dragon, the F-1 is a great plane (Gajin, give me the GCS-1 and ASM-1 for the F-1), not the F-18, Su-30, MiG-29, Gripen… I understand these are vehicles used by specific countries, but they destroy the originality of the tech trees. Gajin has messed up every subtree except South Africa, overwhelming them with C&P content and ignoring the unique vehicles.
1 Like
All of these nations could be amazing if Gaijin actually used what they had to offer. Thailand and Indonesia especially have not insignificant domestic developments but we haven’t seen any of that yet in game.
The best we’ve seen is a few unique variants and those are still underused and implemented badly.
Additionally, the statement in the last C&A that there are too many WW2-era vehicles and that they might be added as premium or event vehicles is another blow from Gajin. Japan is missing a huge number of pre-1946 vehicles, and Gajin is no longer interested. I’m truly at a loss for words due to my helplessness and frustration. I’ll probably uninstall War Thunder soon (after March 10, 2026) and delete all my suggestions. I don’t agree to Gajin using my work.
1 Like
Fun fact: Gaijin messed up with South Africa, too.
But with completely different way.
by neglecting them entirely.
Nearly 4? 5? Years have passed since SA officially became our subtree since Ixwa Strike Update, but all we got on air was a single JAS39C which is completely slashed by Gaijin’s double standards.
Used neither AIM-120 nor Darter, but Gaijin decided to make her worse than other JAS39Cs in the same BR. in the name of ‘tech-tree uniqueness’
No Sabre, No Mirages, no British-built planes, just a single gripen which is even worse than the others.
While they just C&P Brimstone on Italian Eurofighters, and let US Mains steal countermeasure pods from ROCAF for F-5A/C.
I really wonder, if Japan can get Indonesian Su-30, why Britain cannot get SAAF Mirage…?
Their tech tree addition is really bizarre.
As I said earlier, I don’t care about C&P if we used it historically.
(Such as Sherman IIA or Mustang as an example. Maybe even an Indian Rafale would be fine ‘IN DISTANT-DISTANT FUTURE’. not a close one.)
but feels like Gaijin even gatekeeps the rights to being copy-slopped to some.
1 Like