It is a game limitation presently yes.
2 Likes
its almost like they havent updated EN sight in over 10 years…
1 Like
adobe scan explains some of it but it does not in any way ensure that it is not an edited image
6 Likes
Photoshopping a built missile on a plane instead of just mounting it makes no sense.
1 Like
I just find it odd that it emerged out of nowhere from Chinese social media, not the most trustworthy source if you ask me, there is also all the weird artifacts around the missile and the weird bent shape, it just does not still confidence in me.
Wasn’t a Chinese consultant once banned from Gaijin for making up sources? Or some drama like that, I don’t really remember.
Either way, it’s the best we got, but a shotty source at that.
8 Likes
I think it may have been mentioned in one of the excerpts that @Gunjob had, as it is an excerpt from one of the Harrier manuals, of which I’ve lost the link(s) to.
Which currently there is basically no reason to take, and would reduce the magazine depth for the missile if it was needed, at least for the worst offender, Su-30SM
Don’t have anything on the resolution, this is the weapon description page from the Harrier GR7 manual;
Isn’t there a page that refences the scene being split into eight grey + B/W levels (Histogram normalization) similar to the functional description in the below excerpt 3.3.1.16?
This excerpt covers the AXX-1 TCS, not AGM-65
It’s certainly what I am remembering
Could you please post the rest of the intervening pages for the Maverick section.
I think what I may have been thinking of was the F-16C/J manual.
You are assuming the missiles aren’t just the mockups from the previous trade shows.
1 Like
yeah but that is assuming it was built
all we have confirmation for is a mockup at an expo which might have not been built to scale or been built to be suspended
2 Likes
Missiles from the 38M family share the same body so if 38ML was confirmed to be built and mounted to an aircraft, I don’t see why the other members of the family couldn’t do the same. They are bragging about this modularity themselves.
It doesn’t take a genius to take an already built body with working mounting mechanism and just install a different seeker. Photoshopping that doesn’t make sense.
1 Like
This comment is not for the sake arguing its real or not. However if there was a situation where they lacked the seeker, then they could photoshop it onto a body of a missile.
Example:
ADATS turret photoshoped (very bad render) onto a LAV. Both existed (2000s brochure), so why photoshop it?
15 Likes
The seeker has been photographed from up close so they definitely had something to put in.
yeah but if there isnt an IIR seeker for it they cant do that
no a mockup claiming to be a seeker was photographed that is a very different thing
the mockup might just not be compatable with the real missile
That doesn’t look like a scaled toy.