Clearly not, since i can access it just fine, as can frienss of mine in the EU and US lmao
Im not sure why you bother lying, Ive been very fair and open with this post and the discussion.
i cant access the Sukohi website for example
and a few more russian .gov websites
http://www.sukhoi.org/
If you mean that’s what most people are claiming, I can believe that, given how propagandized people are
But I don’t think there’s any doubt that Russia could make the thermal variant just fine
Whether it would be deemed suitable for their own service (in terms of cost/capability and production rate etc) is another story …
Them being able to make something and them having made something are 2 different things entirely.
Unless you are saying every nation should get everything they could have ever made in-game, which is absolutely insane as a take.
1 Like
A MWS like that is a very different class of system. I get the point being made but this is apples to oranges. I think using small diameter IIR systems is a better way to demonstrate this.
The game is not based on peer-reviewed scientific proof
It’s based on what the country/company of origin claims
It’s not like we have verified all the claims that the non-Russian companies/countries have made in their documents …
In order to add a weapon to planes there must be proof of working weapon of said type to be at least seen on said plane.
Meaning: There is a picture of, lets say F-80 with, lets say R-77, and in that imaginary scenario that place can fire that missile. It means it can be added.
IF it would be lets say J-7D with AGM-65A mockup, it would not be added, as it does not meet the critera and it is not eligible.
8 Likes
gaijin added it. i don’t think there is any way to get it removed. they won’t accept anything despite knowing that they themselves don’t have anything that fulfills their own criteria.
1 Like
Not “everything that they could have ever made”
But rather “things that they claim that have made”
In fact, that’s exactly what Gaijin does (with some rare exceptions where they reject the sources saying what the source says is implausible etc but that’s a different story).
And there is also the Dev criteria, where everything goes…
If we can indeed prove no MT existed, and we make it vocal enough they just might.
Or they will keep it for “balance reasons”
I know in some cases they rejected it, but I’m not sure if they have a hard rule against mockups for plane loadouts
Last time i checked they had.
But there are always exemptions from the rules…
1 Like
Well he’s wrong lol
OLS-27 and derivatives use a very different optics train and gimbal assembly from what would be expected in an iir missile
Please read the whole thread before being so confident in your statements.
You can clearly see a lens at the bottom and the circular thing at the top is indeed a gimbal rotation point, there is even marker paintings on the bearings to indicate rotation.
9 Likes
But … But … Do you have a video where the missile is launched at a target with a selfie camera mounted on the missile pointing towards the seeker so that we can be sure it for real works and it’s not just propaganda?!
1 Like
I see, my bad. I scrolled through the thread last night late and only saw low resolution pictures that made it look like we were seeing internal reflections.
OLS-27 still uses a very different assembly and optics train and they look nothing alike.
God, do you still believe in this nonsense about washing machines?
It was supposed to be sarcastic :)
3 Likes
ive seen bug reports denied because manufacture brochures were not considered valid sources
8 Likes
they accepted these ones as source though