I think it’s an edited screenshot from this report
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/uM50xadDrBYA
1 Like
Got proof for that mate.
Cause as far as ive seen it never made it off the drawing board
As a test bed with no munitions and armerments fitted.
You have any evidence of the kikka functioning with weapons, and munitions.
No, you dont.
You have intended purposes much like the kh38mt.
As well as this i cant respond to the F16AJ response as it wont let me quote the photo.
The thing never should of been added, regardless
1 Like
yeah i know that one which is why i was a bit confused but looking back at it i should have seen its edited lol
its here
i know this is not my discussion but maybe we should have different standards regarding information between tanks and planes from WW2 and a missile thats supposed to be in production since the 2010s?
3 Likes
RE the kikka - just because it could use an existing gun doesn’t really change anything. There are several well documented examples of guns which worked perfectly fine on one aircraft causing severe issues when mounted on another aircraft.
A couple of examples are the Vulcan causing flameout issues on the f-104, and icing issues with mustangs and their .50s which didn’t occur on the p-47.
1 Like
Agreed a lot of documents were destroyed by the axis before they could be siezed and there was not many photographs taken.
But for the Ostwind 2 even gaijin indirectly admits its a paper tank:
true but i think the ostwind 2 is actually a pretty good example of the kind of paper stuff thats fine in my opinion. Its not game breaking, its old, it fills a gap in the tech tree and its plausible. The KH-38MT is at best only plausible
Well Kh-38 is modilar platform it’s the same missile with different guidance modules saying that missile is unexistant is technically incorrect.
Fair point
But I disagree since this opens up the floodgates to even more paper designs and we end up in World of Tanks territory.
Even though I’d really like to have the Panther2 and Tiger2 105 I’m still kinda against them being added back.
How do I explain you this?
He didn’t say that the missile doesn’t exist.
He said that that type guidance system doesn’t exist on the missile.
Same as the 10,5cm KwK was never used in a tiger2.
Does your modilar brain understand this.
Finally!!! Someone who knows what i mean 😭
That then breaks the standards of addition.
Im for removal of the kh38mt but as long as they acknowledge that theres more that has to come out…
The f16AJ is a major one as it never happened
In another light I’d much rather see more designs grounded in reality than have to face 1970s tanks in a ww2 tank.
I’m really torn on this issue
yeah i see where youre coming from, its a fine line between adding some cool paper stuff and full blown “world of tanks what even is reality” level. Im probably a bit biased, because the german paper 7.0 lineup is my favourite. But i still think that paper stop gaps like the RY2Y make more sense than adding a new paper top tier capability no one else has
Oh damn what smart person no one wrote “missile isn’t real” so seems to be im wrong here clearly he didn’t compared non finished prototypes and said that MT absolutley doesn’t exist engine ins’t real, body isn’t real. How you people learn to write before learning to read ?
kh38MT thread try to talk about the kh38MT challenge (IMPOSSIBLE)
well the US have the same modular system similar to the Kh-38, called the AGM-65
what i am saying is the guidance it self is the type of missile.
like the 38MT cannot be like ML because the MT have imaging infrared instead of laser guidance.
like the AGM-65D is having different guidance than the 65E. both are maverick but i cannot call the 65D with 65E because one using infrared imaging with HEAT warhead and the other using laser guidance with SAP-HE
It still has no bearing on launch range, it has bearing on track range what seeker is used. The missile itself being modular with IOG and potentially INS/GNSS if some material is to believed means that theoretically all of them have a 70KM launch range, just that they wont start actively tracking till much later.
I think you missing the point, what i mean is that if let’s say hypothetically if one of the Mav variants weren’t existed in reality and if it was added in the game saying that missile and everything in it is made up and doesn’t exist would be wrong because other variant’s are real, what wouldn’t exist is specific part not the whole missile, so comparing it to prototypes which missing certain part and concluding that missile is more unexistant than prototypes is logically wrong