its probably some unique domestic Dutch vehicle that should have been in the TT, but not, because the TT has to be C&P.
Despite the community wanting domestic unique stuff in the TT and C&P as premiums.
4 Likes
The curse of the sub-trees strikes again. (It’s 90% likely to be a unique Dutch/Belgium thing that should have been TT)
1 Like
If you’ve never played the line up, how the hell are you supposed to know that the Stormer HVM and the AD have issues with medium/long range targets?
The HVM has a range of 7km, with a practical target lock range of between 3-8km depending on cloud cover.
The AD has a lock range of 5km and a practical missile lock range of 4-7km on warm maps, but on winter maps can get as low as sub 1.5km on helicopters.
The OSA fixes these issues by giving a low manoeuvring but long ranged missile (10.5km) and a launch platform with a tracking radar.
A capability gap =/= a tt gap
The US Tree didn’t the T-77E1 because the M19/42 didn’t exist, they needed it because the M19/42 have aren’t amazing in a SPAA role (without extensive practice), ergo a gap in capability.
Hell, the Stormer AD was added to fill a capability gap that HVM has with targets at sub 1-2km ranges due to the boost stage not guiding much.
Yes to fill a gap in capability.
Stingers come in two variants, Stock you have the impact fuse, as a tier 3 mod you have the proxy fuse Stinger.
1 Like
I’ve seen all the models for the 1216 at Newark air museum. It mentions a 1:1 “mock up” being built but development wasn’t taken further (unfortunately)
I wish there was a version of War Thunder that allowed for such designs to be added
Spoiler
WoT and WoWP don’t count, their gameplay is atrocious
It was taken further, I did a massive amount of research on it a while back to make a suggestion, but unfortunately it didnt get passed because it just barely skimmed the line of what is allowed
I posted it in machinery of war
basically it reached the stage of building a full scale tail section to see if it would be able to survive the PCB temps but thats as far as ive been able to properly verify
2 Likes
The JH-7A’s airborne rating needs to be downgraded, or its missiles strengthened. It’s hard to imagine that in 12.3 there were only four non-IRCCMs
1 Like
I kinda wish war thunder had leaned into the whole paper side rather than subtrees, even just a select few aircraft would have made trees so much more interesting
3 Likes
Hmm… Does my Black Death finally get Daggers to kill?
(though if its on the israeli tree, it wont ever fight them)
true… that thing is painful to play and grind.
The CAS ability is terrible as well… with only 115kg TNT GBU’s.
nah, its gonna be the Finger, trust
1 Like
War Thunder is the perfect place to test such vehicles.
2 Likes
Yeah, sadly Gaijin disagrees there :(
1 Like
Year 6. Waiting these missing vehicles in Japanese naval tech tree:
IJN Takao (1944/45), IJN Maya (1944), IJN Atago (1941), IJN Ashigara (1941), IJN Kagero (1941), IJN Yukikaze (1945), IJN Shiratsuyu (1943), IJN Fubuki (1928), IJN Hibiki (1944), IJN Kitakami (1941), IJN Ōyodo (1944), IJN Tenryū (1942), IJN Akikaze (1943), IJN Hiei (1942), IJN Yahagi (1945), IJN Fuyutsuki (1945)
5 Likes
I’d really love for some of the weird Gnat prototypes and developments, they’re a right lark.
Maybe we could get an F.2, they did build the wing, although the project was cancelled cause Bristol wouldn’t make an afterburner, would have been a nice F-100 equivalent.
The Fo.147 would have been cool too, twin engined VGW tailplaneless Gnat
3 Likes
The domestic europe 4.5 generation fighter show in trailer
But first devblog season might be vehicle low tier or mid tier
Very very unlikely.
ENAER Pantera…
