A compression is needed. 16.0-17.0 will make God Mode much easier than before. An 11.x delta-wing has enough speed and maneuverability to sneak up and shoot down a Typhoon or F-35B, unlike the current 9.0 early jets, which are hopelessly outmatched
Very simply just do it in ground and shoot down helicopters.
For me, great fighter aircraft 6.3
But forgot update BR ?
Why not decreased BR to 6.3 ?
The first 1st gen fighter aircraft for british and very low battle rating
It probably should CA-27 Mk.31 to premium tree
It would have to come at 15.0, it would be too OP
So i might have made another suggestion about a British superprop. Hawker Fury LA610.
i do not know where it would fit, but since it is essentially a land based Hawker Sea Fury with a different engine.
Also 2 completed prototypes were made, and a 3 ordered but never finished.
2 Likes
well the good news is that its already technically in the tree, just under a different Prototypes name, when I get around to it i’ll change it to just a Generic Fury Mk.I and attach your suggestion.
Thank you!
1 Like
I predict Typhoon FGR.4 increase max BR to 15.0 in 2 years (2027), and gaijin ready add AIM-132 (Blk 6)
ASRAAMs will be a game changer perhaps to OP
For the obvious reasons we all know we are going to finaly get gr9A jaguar gr3 tornado f3 late go up in BR Gripen C too ASRAAM will change the BRs of a lot of vehicles for sure
1 Like
I have some suggestions for some modifications of Spitfires, that might be interesting as either Premium or event vehicles.
The 3 Spitfires with the serial number BP985, BR114 & BR234, were all three Mk Vc, that were similarly modified by 103 MU, to be able to intercept the high altitude Ju 86P. From what i know, they engines were modified with a higher compression ratio, the propeller were changed to a 4 bladed de Havilland propeller and some of the armaments were removed to save weight (I have found conflicting information on what armaments they retained, some said they kept the cannons, some said they kept the machine guns and one site i found even said they were equipped with .50 cal). They successfully intercepted a Ju 86P at an altitude of at least 39.000ft. One of the pilots of these 3 aircraft is George E. C. Genders, one of the pilots that died during testing of the DH108 Swallow.
History of BP985, BR114 & BR234
BP985:
FF 10-4-42 6MU 12-4-42 47MU 20-4-42 SS485 9-5-42 India Middle East 1-8-42 mods at 103MU Aboukir for high alt interception Engine cut forcelanded on beach and overturned El Gamil 7-10-44 SOC 27-10-44
BR114:
FF 12-3-42 39MU 14-3-42 Crosby Co 23-3-42 mods Alderamin 4-5-42 Takoradi Middle East 26-6-42 CB ops 13-9-42 mods 103MU Aboukir for high alt interception MedAAF 31-3-44 Armee de l’Air GR2/33 11-7-44 destroyed by Hak 31-8-44
BR234:
FF 27-5-42 39MU 28-5-42 82MU 10-6-42 Nigerstown 20-6-42 Takoradi 28-7-42 Middle East 1-8-42 SOC 13-9-42 M61 high alt fitt plus other mods at 103MU Aboukir for high alt interception
.
The second spitfire modification is a Mk IX with the serial number BS273 that was also modified to intercept the high flying Ju 86R aircraft. The modifications on this, included removing armor on it, and reducing its armaments to only 2x 20mm. It was piloted by Emanuel Vladimirovich Galitzine, where with this aircraft, he is credited with the highest recored air combat during WW2 at 43.000ft.
Image of BS273 (It says BF273, but it was repainted wrong by ground crew)
History of BS273
FF 14-8-42 R-RH Cv IX M61 64S 16-8-42 AFDU Duxford 16-8-42 Cranfield 3501SU 27-8-42 Special Flt Northolt 5-9-42 Wood prop armour removed armament reduced to 2x20mm can lightweight pt finish operated under code Windgap reached height of 45000ft 124S 25-1-43 3501SU 27-3-43 453S 1-5-43 mods AST 9-5-43 453S 15-5-43 ? AST riw 24-6-43 453S 26-6-43 Shot down by fighters nr Cayeux 4-7-43 F/Sgt C Woodall killed
.
Then there is the AD269, where it says that it was a trial Spitfire Mk Vb with 2x20mm cannons and 4x5in mgs.
History of AD269
Trial Spit with 2x20mm can 4x5in mgs 24MU 6-10-41 317S 13-10-41 AST 8-12-41 CAC ops 14-4-42 315S 4-9-42 303S 30-11-42 Crashed in bad weather Normandy-le-Wold Lincs FACE 15-12-42
.
There is also NH346, which is a Sptifire LF Mk IX with D type wing carrying 2x 20mm and 4x.5in m/gs.
History of NH346
with D wing (2x20mm can and 4x.5in m/gs) original FV fin and rud 45MU 22-5-44 412S 22-6-44 1ATC 24-8-44 AST 1-9-44 485S CE ops 15-11-44 bboc 28-2-45 MedAAF 3-3-45 87S ‘LK-M’ SOC 30-4-47
.
Of these aircrafts suggested, i feel as if the BS273 & one of the 3 Spitfires modifed by 103 MU would be quite viable to add into a tech tree, because the information available about the aircraft. But for something like the AD269 & NH346, while they would be interesting aircrafts because of their armaments, i just haven’t really found any of info on them outside of the history of the aircraft in regards to unit and squadron history and its fate.
2 Likes
very interesting, I will look into these when I get a chance.
Thank you!
I haven’t had the time to look through the proposal but have you looked at the Vampires that mounted two Firestreaks?
¬Sirin
1 Like
From a quick google search, i didn’t find specifically a Vampire mounting firestreaks, instead it was a de Havilland Venom NF2, WL820.
5 Likes
Ah yes, my apologies, I meant the Venom. This would make a fun addition to the TT or a nice 8.7 Premium or an event vehicle.
3 Likes
Thank u! Ill have a dig soon hopefully (i know i keep saying this, but trust)
Been really busy with school lately so havent had much time to do much else im afraid
3 Likes
Too busy making thomas the tank engine youtube videos
4 Likes
sush, bleached is finally happy, we cant let him spiral again
Britain was so much of an aircraft design factory that I’m not even surprised it’d take 9 lines for a full tree
5 Likes
I really like the idea behind this project, of expanding out trees so that they can be more comprehensive to a nation’s technological development. Would be a great way to expand the game, and something to center updates around that don’t involve new tiers or new tech trees, just filling out pre-existing trees.
Having said that, I do have issues with a number of these inclusions. Specifically, those regarding lend lease, evaluated, and captured aircraft.
First, lend-lease.
While I can get Britain receiving
While I understand that there are nations where you kinda have to copy paste vehicles into trees as they may not have anything else otherwise… I feel a lot of the ‘new’ lend lease vehicles ‘suggested’ here are unnecessary.
Firstly, in regards to such vehicles in the tech tree, I feel most of them can be cut out. While I feel the Mustangs can ‘stay’ given their extensive usage by RAF, the importance the British had in the development of the Mustang, and the fact that they were the first operators of the craft, most of the aircraft feel like they are there because they can be as opposed to a real need. I bring this up specifically for the Heavy Fighter line, which feels more like the lend lease line, at least for the early ranks. While I will admit, I am not an expert on British aircraft, so I don’t know how much of these are unique modifications, I don’t think that the tree needs them. Heavy Fighters aren’t really something the tree needs, and there isn’t any reason the line can’t start with the Mustang Mk.1, so I don’t really see the purpose in most of the line between the Mustang Mk. 1 and the Lysanders. Also don’t see why the Invader Mk. 1 is needed either. Yes, it may be the only thing the British have that can slot into a BR of 5.0, but, even assuming we remove the Marauder B.lll (which is me assuming it’s copy paste without research), the Liberator GR.1 at 5.0 and the Jet Provost T.2 at 5.3. Not light/medium bombers by your according to the tree, I know, but seeing as how Britain already has CAS options at about 5.0, I don’t think they have the need to dip into evaluated foreign aircraft to plug a hole. I could go on, but the tree has a lot of vehicles, and I can’t be bothered to do a play by play.
While I can understand the argument that some of these aircraft were relatively significant to Britain’s war effort, I don’t think that’s enough to warrant inclusion into War Thunder. Not because they are insignificant, but because such a description can apply to hundreds, if not thousands of vehicles, which makes it a meaningless limitation to have, as it can apply to so many vehicles, leading to a situation where a ton of aircraft suddenly have the 'Sherman" problem of being everywhere.
As for the premium and event aircraft that are a result of being lend leased, evaluated, or captured… I’d recommend getting rid of them all. They don’t add anything to the game, and only result in making trees less unique, especially if we apply it to all possible additions. A huge amount of vehicles would suddenly face the issue the Sherman has where it can be found in just about every tree, with the Axis nations being dis-proportionally affected as many of their prototypes got yoinked by the allies after the war.
Outside of those issues, however, I really like this project and hope Gaijin decides to do something like this in the future.
Please refer to this:
I would also like to add that this would not be the “Ultimate” British Air Tree if we left out half of the aircraft britain used because they are “lend lease” or captured.
You cant discount aircraft because they weren’t built by the British, especially when they were used in such great numbers (some of which were used more than the US), So many aircraft served as major parts of the Royal Air Force or Fleet Air Arm during the war, and just removing them because “Muh Copy and Paste” is quite frankly (and not to be too blunt) rather stupid.
For example lets have a quick look at some of the aircraft I have included, starting with the Tomahawks and Kittyhawks; Whilst they are variants of the Curtiss P-40, they both served as major parts of the Royal Air Force in the skies over North Africa, in fact, Britain modified them to carry extreme bomb loads (sometimes as high as 3000 lbs) to use them as fighter-bombers. Also the Corsairs and Hellcats which, In the latter stages of the war, were some of the biggest and most important aircraft the Fleet Air Arm had in the pacific, being the backbone most carrier air wings.
And in case you cant be bothered reading what i linked above, this is not meant to be a wishlist (although I would very much like to see some of the lend lease aircraft included in the british tree) but a representation of what could be added, if this was for the US air tree, I would have included the Spitfires, Beaufighters and Mosquitos that the US used.
Quite frankly the question is where do you draw the line in this? Should the Phantoms be removed from the British tree because they are American aircraft and the Tornado fills the fighter role? should the Gen 1 harriers be removed from the American Tree because they are British aircraft with little to no modifications? Should the Hunter be removed from sweden because its just a Hunter F.4 with Sidewinders?
You also stated:
This is a massive understatement.
So many of these aircraft were quite frankly, invaluable to the British war effort, to the point where entire fronts would have collapsed without them, The Buffalos helped stall the Japanese advance in Singapore, The Kittyhawks were some of the best aircraft the Desert Air Forces had that could compete with modern Axis fighters, The Martlets were the some of the best naval aircraft britain could get in decent numbers early on in the war, and for them, I would also like to add that Britain adopted into service before the Americans, even seeing combat on christmas day 1940, only just after the Americans adopted the aircraft into service the same month.
And lastly the age old statement;
If you don’t want everyone to use your vehicles, DON’T EXPORT THEM TO EVERYONE
9 Likes
It’s not that I am discounting aircraft that weren’t built by the British. I don’t even main Britain, I main the United States. My issue is that, if we go by the simple metric of being used by the nation in question, then, if we apply this fairly (as in, everyone gets their ‘ultimate’ tech tree, not just Britain), we run into an issue where a ton of vehicles face the issues the Sherman has where they show up everywhere as the major victorious powers sold off a lot of their surplus to friendly nations, which especially affects the US and UK as most of the nations modeled in game are nations that were friendly with those powers. Heck, even during the war, the Russians received a lot of aid in the form of vehicles.
The end result would be nations losing their identity, and less of a reason to play multiple nations, or more specifically the US and UK, as you can play a lot of their most iconic aircraft in your main tree. It also isn’t very fun to have to grind out the same vehicles for the morbillionth time. You’d also end up facing a lot more of the same vehicles when matchmaking, like with what we see in top tier. While it wouldn’t be as bad, owing to there being a lot of indigenous aircraft at lower tiers, the issue becomes more severe if we expand ‘ultimate’ trees into captured aircraft as, at that point, there is little reason to play Japan or German air. By the time the war ended, and the dawn of the post war era came, the allies had captured pretty much ever single vehicle the Axis nations had ever produced. Not everything, of course, the capture of capital ships is annoyingly difficult, and some of the smaller runs of production aircraft or prototypes were all destroyed before the war had ended, but enough of them that aforementioned statement may as well be true. This includes aircraft such as the Kikka, ME-262, HO-229, Ki-83, Ki-87, Arado, and so on, and when those air trees already struggle with being worthwhile grinds once you get into the post war, the last thing that should be done is give the option to play all of their coolest, most interesting aircraft in another tree. Similar applies to ground, less players are going to bother grinding out Germany if they can play captured Tigers in the US, UK, and RU trees, especially if Russia gets their captured Maus.
And that’s just with WW2 kit. The Cold War frequently saw the opposing faction’s vehicles being captured by the other side. MiGs, F-16s, you name it. At one point, pretty much everything that saw use got captured by the other guy. And when the Soviet Onion fell? US bought a ton of advanced, top of the line Russian aircraft, either to evaluate themselves or to prevent adversaries from getting them.
At that point, you may as well do away with tech trees entirely.
I have read what you said, and I take issue with it and don’t think it would be a good idea, and everything you have written up top indicates that you have plans to make this into a suggestion once all of the aircraft have suggestion pages on the forums.
As for a US Spitfires, and other such copy paste? No. Two wrongs do not make a right. US getting Spitfires does not magically make the copy paste better.
My line is copy paste should only be done either when it is needed, or the nation and aircraft in question have massive historical significance to each other. Prime example of this would be the Mustang, where not only did Britain make extensive use of it, but they also massively influenced it’s development. And the Harrier, which, to my understanding, was a joint development between the US and UK, with the US taking over full development of the Harrier ll after the UK dropped out for budgetary reasons. It needs to be beyond them using a stock aircraft as, again, if just use is enough to qualify an aircraft for implementation, then the trees WILL become a mess.
And that can be said for hundreds of aircraft. Given how many aircraft that would include, I think that standards for such implementations should be higher then that.
This is a non argument and in no way addresses the issues with copy paste, and only seeks to dismiss those with entirely valid issues with copy paste
It’s not much different then telling a German main who has an issue with the Russians getting a Maus that they should of thought about that before losing the war, or a Russian main that they should have thought about how their government collapsing in on itself in the 90s would have on War Thunder’s tech trees in regards to American SU-27s. Is it literally the same? No, but it shares in the fundamental principles of using real life events to justify something that adds nothing and makes the game worse, especially when we are looking at it from the POV of every nation becoming the ‘ultimate’ version of what it can be. This isn’t a single addition, this is across a tree with a heavy implication of applying to every other tree in the game as well.