whataboutism is a logical fallacy
it shows that you dont have any real arguments
We are not in 2015 anymore.
Gaijin rejects bug reports using static aircraft at expos with weapons fitted as sources for loadout changes.
That statement makes literally no sense. There was no argument to be had…
Also whataboutism would deflect to a whole other topic, I was talking about a vehicle which had similar lack of documentation.
Seriously, are you just trying to start a fight for the sake of it? Or do you just hate the Su-39?
It was flying lol.
Congrats your eyes work, not what I was saying however.
For example
Spoiler
Gaijin wouldn’t accept this as a source for Su-39/25TM being able to carry Kh-31 and 58 at the same time, ignoring that it conflicts with official sources, but expressly because it’s on the a grounded expo display which are unreliable in their efficacy.
However, with the pic you posted above, they would take that probably… since it’s flying and not just on the ground as a display.
I swear the way they go about accepting things makes little sense sometimes.
Offtopic, but did you know the Vidar has less velocity than the Pzh2000? Despite being identical?
For m107(PF)
Now I wouldn’t say that, with Su-39 especially it’s ground displays are… fictitious at best a LOT of the time…
For example
This display shows an Su-39 carrying a Kh-29T on stations 8-4 while the brochure specifically says only 2 can be carried and the Su-25T loading manual only stating Kh-29s can be fitted to stations 7-5.
This is also ignoring the Vikhrs on stations 9-3 which is strictly for ferrying/transport and not functional.
Hell here’s the same Su-39 carrying a KAB-500L which isn’t even mentioned in the brochure nor in Su-25T’s loading manual…
Seemingly just some electronics changes, likely to allow compatibility for international electronics.
1 Like
So what I’m seeing / hearing is it likely can carry more / different load orders than we see.
What?
In game from what’s available is correct besides the R-73s being placed incorrectly going off 25T.
Even from your own output the KH-25s can be mounted in a different pylon.
And as I was saying, I think they’re a lot more interchangeable than we know, as the Vikhirs mount on the same pylons as the KH-25s
? I’m well aware that Kh-25s can be mounted on the 3 inner most pylons…
And no, according to the Su-25T loading manual, Vikhrs can only be used on stations 8-4, they are not functional on stations 9-3 since that is solely for transport/ferrying. As I’ve said above.
Gaijin has also denied a bug report (notably of my creation due to a slight reading error) for the additional Vikhr mounts.
Spoiler
Seeing as Su-25TMs are base on Su-25Ts, it’s reasonable to guess this restriction still applies.
It seems weird that it would be a transport only option, there is vastly better options.
Vastly better options? Either way, what were you talking about with Kh-25s, I feel like their mounting is well known at this point for all Su-25s?
I was saying how the mounting for the Vikhirs seems to coincide with the KH-25 mountings.
Yes, vastly better logistical options? Train or trucks would be much more cost effective to move Vikhirs over flying them on a Su-39
Vikhirs seems to coincide with the KH-25 mountings.
Likely purely coincidence.
vastly better logistical options? Train or trucks would be much more cost effective
Well, unlike trucks or trains, transporting them on the aircraft is far faster than ground based transport, many nations do it today with weaponry as well, alongside the Su-25T/TM’s R-195s being pretty fuel efficient.
Also if you’re using the vikhrs for testing, why wait and have them shipped by truck when you could transport 2 full sets on one aircraft for far less time.
Better yet transport them via:
1 Like
I find transporting weaponry in something incapable of doing such to be rather troublesome.
Hush Tu-160 doesn’t know that, don’t hurt his feelings