of a mockup
1 Like
You can keep saying that, but it doesn’t make it true.
It is not uncommon for marketing material of hardware that has not been built yet to use the predicted or planned performance.
1 Like
for content farming
he uploaded pictures of the KH-31 part of the brochure as well
2 Likes
its not uncommon, its literally practice when buying into weapons that are still being developed lol
1 Like
Yes
But with all weapons and especially with more modern ones it pretty much boils down to taking the manufacturer/country’s word …
Unless you want Gaijin to order one of each weapon and test them in-house …
But… they don’t accept the manufactuers word.
The bug reports are littered with “we don’t believe”
3 Likes
That works in cases where the thing has confirmed existence.
I have a brochure of ADATS Mk.III on a BMP-3 hull. Guess if this one is real.
4 Likes
Can you post a picture? Sounds cool as hell
He in fact posted multiple posts from this brochure
Summary
First 20 pages can be just usless info about company and etc like this
Summary
2 Likes
Still doesn’t change the fact you benefit from them being this OP, also the amount of hipocrisy is crazy in this thread.
2 Likes
Ah, true. Looking at it however, one of the images for the KH-31 clearly says it’s inert. Correct me if I’m wrong here, but isn’t that close to being mockup, aside from being able to be mounted and other things (ofc dangerous stuff like warhead or fuel) being removed? What stops it from being the same for the MT(E)? I guess it still somewhat counts as it’s mounted, but I’m not sure
Just a question, in case the inert definition is correct
4 Likes
Inert means no explosive warhead
5 Likes
i actually think gaijin shoul relax on some of their requirements personally, but as i already said before we’re 7.6k post deep and there still isnt any good prood, we got extremely new weapons like kh-69 which have actually already seen combat and there are numerous pictures of it.
for kh38 we got two pictures one of a mockup up and one of a brochures that as far as i understand we cant even get our hands on.
you can strap a non functional product on a rail nothing prevents that which is why a single picture is far from enough evidence of its existance. i literally dont see why there is so much friction. russia operates viable replacements, things like kh38ml already are ingame and strong.
RU site also doesn’t list the MTE or any other variant other than the MLE. Only the EN site has it listed. Inconsistent data.
One picture from 2017? and one from a 2024 brochure? Yet this missile has never been showcased at any EXPO event since the 2017 mockup. Only the MLE.
5 Likes
inert missiles are a production missile without the warhead and fuel so it is safe for training and in this case expos
they also list it as a seperate “sub”-variant of the KH-31P in this case
2 Likes
I mean … It kinda depends …
Of course if a manufacturer makes obviously impossible claims, yes, it doesn’t make sense to take their word
But sure, I know sometimes/often they deny reports without justification …
(And that’s not even the worst of it … Sometimes they just ignore the reports and leave them in “accepted / forwarded” state for years without any answer or action)
I benefit in what way ?
I have already answered this:
That’s taking a lot of assumptions that we can’t prove.