Just give airspawn to the B-66B and Vautours, necessary and sufficient solution
1 Like
@Stockholm_Blend
It’s not a false analogy, it’s an example. A false analogy requires one to change the standard of the comparison to another set of items, which I’ve never done.
F-104S is so far more advanced, that it’s obviously not the B-57’s counter.
The B-57’s counter is closer to the Sea Hawk in France and Germany, and Mig-15 for a guns-only platform.
I was specifying major threat against IL-28 as that was the context, no contradiction.
I never once brought up my skill in this regard. I brought up skill that is better than mine.
Me: “We need to decompression 9.3 and create BR 15.0.”
No where did I project that offer onto you or others.
No one is trying to silence you. Long ranting posts inventing fan fiction about fallacies, and falsely accusing others doesn’t have anything to do with War Thunder discussions.
No one false flagged you.
No one is projecting anything onto you.
All you have are false accusations that are personal attacks because you have no argument to stand on.
We need to decompress much more than just 9.3… we need to decompress almost everything
3 Likes
The vaultourtho has air to air missiles tho and a better thrust to weight ratio than the b-66
The french Vautour IIA and IIB don’t have missiles
1 Like
B66 needs its cci/rp and the rear radar reticle for turret. Also missing its 3 5k bombs and the 20 500lb cluster bombs. All things it had irl. It didnt use a bomb sight like it has now…
4 Likes
Sir, that is what false analogy means. You use two things that differ significantly to draw a sweeping conclusion that supports your bias.
There was a big contradiction against treating R.511 and Vautour IIN when specifying them as a major threat against IL-28 or Canberra B(aka ‘Martin B-57’)
No matter using ‘your skill’ or ‘better skill in cleanroom level’, it won’t change that claim supported by rare cases with better skills can’t reflect real gameplay option.
I think I explained this part well in the last counterclaim, which got hidden.
1 Like
B-66B: 5479.2kg + 19510 + 4116 = 29105.
Producing 9000kgf of thrust.
9000 / 29105 = 0.305 in-flight.
Thrust on takeoff: ~15500kgf + 9000 = 24500kgf.
24500 / 29105 = 0.84 TWR until ~560kph.
Vautour: 2488.2kg + 1700kg + 11500 = 15688.
6400kgf.
6400 / 15688 = 0.40 peak TWR from 0 to its top speed of around mach 0.90.
If you averaged out B-66’s TWR from its starting to its 1110kph cruise speed it’s around 0.572 from 0 - 1100kph.
So while B-66B’s engines produce less TWR than Vautour, the entire package produces more to its higher cruise speed.
And in air spawn maps it doesn’t matter because B-66 will get to its cruise speed faster due to no suspended bombs.
the mig 17 and LIM5P will both catch it since they accelerate faster there 8.7 now too so your cooked as they will gun you down if there aim is good
2 Likes
did it use a ballistic computer ?
Pretty sure yeah, and no ballistic computer at rank 6 is crazy
Hopefully they fix the rear facing radar
I recently bought the B-66B and I was ABOUT to make the very same post. Something’s wrong with this plane. Not just because at it’s BR it will face Mach 2 fighters with missiles and your turret doesn’t even have a radar, or because of its speed, but I also noticed something else.
The bombs are WILDLY inaccurate. Everytime I (somehow) manage to make it to bomb a base that hasn’t been taken by a Mig21 or F100D using incendiaries or killed I don’t always destroy it. Further testing revealed that although it takes 7x of the stock 750lbs bombs to destroy a base, anything resembling high alttitude bombing ends up failing to fully destroy a base, since thebombs end up being spread out WAY too much by the time they land as to fully take it out (and that’s ignoring the annoyance that you cant drop 7 bombs in one go, 1 too few to use the 8 bomb serial dropping and 1 too little to drop 2x bombs 3 times).
Further historical plane researching I found out that the B-66B was actually VERY limited in its operational use and never dropped a single bomb, at least in Vietnam, considering that the main missions of the B-66 were the RB and EB variants, and that only 72 versions of this plane were built.
This is a complete opposite of the airplane it’s designed after, the A-3. You can argue that “they aren’t exactly the same” because of the USAF being whiny and wanting to make changes to avoid being shadowed by the navy, but they in design, looks, operation, and loadout the same aircraft, and the A-3 was more widely used.
The point I’m trying to get to with this is that I have no idea why Gaijin did not instead add the A-3 Skywarrior instead, considering that the B-66’s major role was as electronic warfare and recon, which are not factors in the game right now.