It was just an example of what happened. Not that it never existed nor that it did not meet relevant criteria, only that Gaijin became unsure so omitted it from an update. Which could of course be overturned should sufficient evidence be presented, and they actually get around to it.
For example I have the following, photos.
Various A-4's
These are in order;
A prototype coupler to permit the mounting of the WGU-10/B (the AGM-65D’s IIR seeker )to a Walleye (?-II ?) body. The F/A-18 could certainly use improved A2G ordnance, it can after all mount Walleye(s) so why not this prototype?
An A-4B airframe (potentially in a non-standard special test configuration) with a test configured Walleye I mounted to it.
An A-4E with a Walleye II mounted on the Centerline station (not possible in game).
An A-4E was tested with the AN/AWW-13 Datalink pod, so could receive Post-Release guidance capable ordnance should they be added in future, alongside the F-4E, A-6E A-7E, F-111F, F/A-18 , F-14A(AGM-53A) and others.
Evidence confirming that the there was a datalink control panel installed in select A-4’s confirming that the above would have full Post-Release guidance capabilities as an option.
Of course I haven’t actually submitted the reports at this point in time (some are partially written) since the A-4E sits at ~8.7-9.0 and it really doesn’t need 12km+ thermal targeting ordnance at all.
I could go on for the AIM-95 and select other items like VTAS III (“AN/AVG-8B”) but it’s practically more of the same and using fairly weak links, that are at least stronger than the evidence presented in this threat so far as to the -38MT actually having a flying prototype / breadboarded seeker or limited production run or better.
If we accept for an argument, that Gaijin is basing their stats on sekrit documents, then we can never change or correct weapon stats that Gaijin has set as their sekrit documents prove otherwise.
The issues would go far beyond the performance of vehicles in game. That level of access would prove close ties to the Russian government and would have…. significant consequences.
Just to be clear - I really don’t think it’s the case at all. I just wanted to point out that basing arguments on the “perhaps they have secret Russian documents” argument isn’t a great one.
I suspect they were looking for an IR weapon for the Russians, saw the the brochure and mockup and just didn’t do their due diligence on it.
i agrre that gaijin should show us the documents they used for modeling stuff, even if it is done by requesting it
so they dont have to publish all their documents but ppl can send a message to a Technical Moderator and he will forward the documents they used to you
I mean he also thinks Kh-38MTs ““need”” to be on a good platform to perform, but checking out stats of people who have MT carriers and EFTs shows that nah, 38MTs perform better regardless - and the “UFO FM” of the EFT isn’t enough to match how broken Kh-38MTs are lol.
okay for my understanding Gaijin can’t use classified to buff vehicle in the game
so, if KH-38MT is classified then they shouldn’t be able to add it in the game
but then it exists
I agree with you here for once.
MT don’t need a good carrier platform.
And after multiple people saying the new EF flightmode sucks, i tried it yesterday. It indeed doesn’t turn nearly as well as it did and i wouldn’t call it an ufo anymore, that title goes now fully to the Rafale, but i still had i think 5 ground kills and 5 air kills in that single match.
Personally considering how I primarily use the Su-34, I would trade the Kh-38MT for the FAB-1500 UMPK or Kh-59 (with APK-9) any day. It would be more beneficial for me.
