Why is the r77 loadout not even
Rvv-ae
Image from Wikipedia and has been there a long Time
Sukhoi Su-27/30/33/35/37 Flanker series & Su-34 Fullback - History, Design, Performance & Dissection
Because this is a picture from some dubious magazine.
1 Like
Worse - Wikipedia
The R-27T/ET cannot be suspended on the 11th and 12th suspension point
Problem with that theory is the Su-34 were getting in-game doesn’t seem to mount L-175 Khibiny:
Opting for wingtip R-73 rails instead:
Also, it was given L-150, not L-175 Khibiny, which as previously discussed, it does not seem to have the antennas for:
Its possible theres some antenna hidden somewhere i havent spotted, but between not having the Khibiny pods which are the only thing I could see be used as a valid argument for an RWR it could have, and not having any of the apparent L-150 antennas clearly seen on aircrafts that have L-150, it seems an awful lot like it was given an RWR simply because itd be worthless without one…
It probs should still get an RWR, since itd be brutal not having one at all, but I am wildly curious as to the source used for the claims of it having L-150, as ive never actually seen any evidence of it myself beyond tertiary sources (at best).
I tried searching for some info a couple days ago but couldn’t find anything relevant, maybe some of the guys here can help
Indeed
According to the bug report, RWR should be removed and Khibiny should be given to them
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/rZhztKcvO3bt
2 Likes
So, essentially, just -2 R-73. Aint much of the lose, but annoying since essentially nothing being given in return (since game doesnt have functional ECM. If it did had - then it would be fine)
i just want the grom-1 back :(
2 Likes
I just wanted to play around with it in test flight. But at the same time couldn’t stand the constant “grom1 OP!!!” complaining. So whatever.
Would be funny, but doubt for balance reasons and this is Khibini-M and I don’t know if those were installed on Su-34
That is also interesting, although it not clear for me, they also contain “expendable materials” (shaff dispenser? Module can control use of shaff and flares) on L-175VE
I don’t saw any ircm looking emitters on su-34, so IDK
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
Didn’t the Su-34s wingtip pods appear in the files on dev? If so they could be just giving it a conventional “placeholder” rwr for now and will change it whenever they add a proper ECM mechanic.
I mean, the pods can be added without ECM like the SPS-141.
That is an option as well. But i have a feeling gajin might not do that this time around and just wait for abit.
Hi, @Gunjob, any updates on the wrong scan pattern bug?
If possible, could you please add the following to it:
Spoiler
This bug seems to stem from the same issue that caused some ground radars to spin back and forth:
Community Bug Reporting System
Namely, it seems that the behaviour of barsOneWay was accidentally changed to be barsOneWay: false by default (implicitly). It used to be barsOneWay: true. So any radar that did not have the explicit line barsOneWay: true before, suddenly started to behave like barsOneWay: false (almost all of airborne radars and some ground radars).
For example: the ASRAD had this bug (the radar dish would spin in one direction and then in another, every full 360° rotation) but it was then fixed by adding barsOneWay: true.
Another example: the AN/APQ-50 on the F4D-1 did have the barsOneWay: true line, so when the bug appeared, it was not affected. The AN/APG-66 and N001, on the other hand, which did not have it set to barsOneWay: true explicitly, were affected by this bug.
4 Likes
As a sim player, If I could could choose any bug to be fixed today, it would be this one.