However, there are pictures inside. Then, the F18F is a complete variant of the F18E, with an additional rear-seat weapon officer to reduce the pilot’s burden. The pictures have clearly demonstrated the weapons and types carried by the F18E/F model
1 Like
And the only image you included in the report is of the F version.
You have to provide direct proof of the version you are reporting it for, not implied compatibility or assumed same capabilities between two versions of an aircraft.
There are MANY cases of other aircraft where different versions remove or add compatibilities for munitions even if they are based on the same aircraft and have almost everything else in common.
You have to use images of the E version and provide direct proof and with appropriate sources.
apologize for bothering you again. I wanted to ask: If I search for SDB II within the weapons category on the official U.S. Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) website, and I see that both the F/A-18E/F and the F-15E can carry the GBU-53/B SDB II is that considered a usable source of information?
https://www.navair.navy.mil/product/Small-Diameter-Bomb-Increment-II-SDB-II
1 Like
There problem solved with 20 seconds of research, from Raytheon themselves, both the E and F can mount the 53.
9 Likes
Then use that in a report :)
I’m just trying to inform them of how to correctly report issues of this kind, i’m not refuting any possible capabilities.
2 Likes
How about I take out the middleman and just attach it to a report thats already been made but ignored.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/tS1rgdX6GLTM
2 Likes
Not yet handled is not the same as “ignored” , “ignored” implies intent.
If you have questions about reporting or any one specific report then contact one of the Technical Moderators in a private message. You can find all the teams and the areas they handle listed here: (Who is who and Reporting Procedure). If you don’t get an answer within a few days you can add more moderators from the list to the original message instead of sending a new message (that way you preserve the date of the message and it doesn’t look like a new request), adding one of the moderators to the message every 2-3 days or so until you get an answer.
Please do not to add the seniors until you have tried all other regular moderators, the Seniors likely won’t answer unless they are added and pinged by the regular moderators but if you’ve added all the regular moderators with no answer then you can add the seniors.
this one is for E variant
Nah, I’ll be real hoss, 99% of TMs lost the benefit of the doubt long ago, you don’t just happen to prance by 4 reports on the same subject all open for 5+ days and only respond to the most recent one, as is the case with a number of reports pertaining to NATO equipment both on this dev and for frankly as long as the current reporting system has existed.
I have 0 interest in engaging with the system anymore, the balance of effort is comically skewed, I am not going to bend over to try and get something fixed if I seldom even get a passing glance unless I actively go out of my way to flag down someone.
3 Likes
tbh the American TT is the only one that still using mavericks after next major update, mavericks have proved themselves unreliable extreme low in cost-performance ratio (972sp) comparing to his opponents like kh38 and AASM even SPICE250. American TT cannot wait to get its on par munitions, the GBU53 would be a good start.
1 Like
Really do not understand gaijin’s fascination with the US only having the AGM-65 for sooooooo long as a viable AGM, yeah the 130 exists, but its really only usable against bases due to it’s speed.
The KH-38 obliterated the balance longs ago and even today nobody has a comparable weapon beyond those who got export KH-38s.
Like, the 53 won’t even change anything, they have smaller warheads than the AGM-65 but just have more range, thats it. I’d bet money that they will have trouble killing things if they arrive, meanwhile the KH-38 has been busy being a cruise missile launchable from the airfield that will kill anything it lands even remotely close to 100% of the time.
4 Likes
A10… My beloved
I have a report for this open in the Community Bug Reporting System. Comment with any additional sources, anybody.
Comparing to AGM65s, the GBU53 features a much bigger amount and lower spawn cost so it’s ok if it’s going to be a HEAT warhead.
why all radars of american top tier jets have 74km/h range and no more
If you think something is wrongly modeled then make a bug report with apropriate sources. You can bug report it here (just search a bit first so that you don’t report something that is already reported and known about): (Gaijin.net // Issues)
A guide on how to report bugs can be found here: ([Navigation] Technical Knowledge Base | War Thunder Wiki)
Please note the kind of sources they require for issues of this kind:
1 Like
Why does the Su-27SM also have dual R-77 racks? This has never been shown in photos or technical manuals.
L3Harris’s BRU-55/A pylon is used to carry various smart explosives. The company’s website states that this pylon can be compatible with the 1760 interface without requiring modifications to the aircraft.
1 Like
I made another bug report but probably they will not even answer.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/LFrdoF8d9LG6
I got the [AD1041216] that specifies it will be implemented on the F18E/F and a picture of the F18E super hornet carrying the GBU53 during a operation.
