Some nations dont have much to give which is why don’t see frequent additions. Thats not the fault of other nations.
TVC is helpful because you can point your nose around for HOBS missile shots even if you are at a speed where no air is flowing over the control surfaces
Im not even air rb fan. I don’t care how many super duper hyper planes snail adds.
We need ground.
True but the F-15i but they did not get the avionics nor the visual model right. The dome behind the cockpit is missing, so are other specialties of the iDF F-15i 😉
1 Like
Not entirely some things are actually ruined by other nations, gaijin has completely killed the chance of any unique Gripen C’s being added thanks to many of the SAAF bug reports assuming all Gripen C’s are the same. Gaijin now has already screwed up and despite evidence showing the difference in the MS series of Gripen C’s you have a Gripen thay doesnt exist. So now none of the other nations can have any unique gripens, would help for some to have multiple options but that entirely gone now.
And for all of us that enjoy piston engine aircraft, LOS combat and do not play or use Skynet operating vehicles . . . .
2 Likes
i mean it’s too low, it’s 4.0 for sure
So? it’s not a FOX-3
Also garbage RWR, garbage radar.
Good luck with that.
Cuz Su-27/27SM/J-11/11A also should be lowered.
The SU-33 does not have the N012. Not quite sure where you got this info
seethe
1 Like
same BR as F-16A blk 10 with only 6x 9L
Could be, the reverse is good and gun depression is -5°, which is good for this kind of vehicle, but I am still worried about that gun handling.
I mean yeah absolutely.
Oh there’s no anger here buddy. Can be disappointed with a terrible decision and be happy, especially when you have tacos 🙂
then F-16C F-15C/E and Gripen should be lower too
we’ll see tomorrow in the dev stream
1 Like
Usually the day after the trailer, but could change because they released it on Monday instead of Thursday
1 Like
Pretty sure the Russian air ministry said exactly the opposite of what you just said and that’s why they abandoned the forward canards on the su35 and later versions of the Su30 if I’m not mistaken…
Thrust vectoring adds marginal weight btw, only a few hundred pounds, the systems are drastically lighter than that of a canard which involves reinforcement of the entire forward superstructure. (I have worked on many canard aircraft and vectored aircraft in person)
Now as far as NATO aircraft go, being much smaller airframes, your argument holds weight I’m sure.
4 Likes
Its a china HQ-17