It wasn’t changed because of a video.
It was changed due to multiple documents.
The video, which wasn’t a video on time, was only used as supporting material.
No, they guessed the IR tracking method to be similar to that of AGM-65.
The range has documentation cause the Kh-38 itself is real and the motors are the same.
What’s in contention is the seeker + missile combo, which we know the seeker exists, and we know how it works which isn’t like what’s in-game.
What we don’t know is if the Kh-38MT entered mass production.
Yes, i know, however the plane the proposal was based on was very much real. The F-16J was gonna be a YF-16 sparrow testbed with a different radar. Think of it like a proposed export sale of a vehicle then something entirely made up. Assuming, of course, gaijin gave us the right vehicle, which they didn’t. The F-16AJ in game is basically entirely made up, i wish they would’ve gave us the real one though, lighter weight and 6x sparrows would be so fun.
Changing the way its seeker works would have the same impact.
It’d no longer be usable as a mass-fragging missile anymore, at least from my understanding of the documents so far.
That’s my thinking as well, though having a mixed loadout would make it semi-effective. 1 or 2 MTs and the rest MLs.
It just won’t be OP in the sense of mass-frags anymore.
Only the F-15E and I would still be capable of that until new SPAA arrives.
And there is only people Guessing that the Kh-38mt don’t exist. While there info from butowsky or RU gov stating the contrary.
Kh-29D its pretty much confirmed to never exist. What he must be thinking its Kh-29TD. That its the suppose to be IR seeker of the Kh-29TE that its able to be used at night.
You do actually, proving something exist is exactly what you can do of the two. it’s quite literally impossible to prove the non-existence of something. The entire thread is ment to try to find proof of the missiles functional existence, If you are just claiming things without said proof then what is the point of commenting?
Brochures are NOT great sources. Idk where you heard that, but you usually need more than a brochure to add something. Second, someone already explained to you the situation with the “video”. You’re just trying to even the playing field (it’s not working)
