Other early planes used include:
Frustratingly nothing that would fit at Rank III. The US did claim a few air kill as La-7s, but these are most likely misidentifications of La-9s and La-11s. North Korea also restored an abandoned Ki-43-II (Rank I, 2.7) but it was never airworthy.
+1 This is the perfect way to express Korea
+1 But it’s not an independent country. As a subtree of the United States, it needs K2
Man u spoiled af
Suggestion: the F-40 Early/Late could be replaced with an F-30/40 as there were upgraded F-30 Sabres with AIM-9 rails
Serial number 54-2308 is a F-30 saber given to the Koreans in 1955 and as you can see it has the rails
Yup, I deployed the F-86F-30 with wings replaced by the F-86F-40s as premiums.
Shortly after the J10A update, Mr. Baranikov, the chief game planner of War Thunder, said in a special live broadcast to China that China has other sub-trees in preparation besides Pakistan
i dont know why people always talking about historical issue or sth… but now Korea and Japan are very close aliies against threats from china and russia. And if u add Korea vehicles in WWII then theres many Copies. Id like to see K2 or some unique vehicles produced by South Korea appear in our game. but not with a long tech tree full of american and soviet copies :)
Check out the suggestions because there are more domestic unique vehicles in Rank III/IV, yes there will be CnP but like mentioned from Rank III/IV there is like 33% CnP. If we talk about the whole tree it’s 20-30% CnP.
So yes, you will face American and russian full CnP (extensive modified foreign vehicle still unique) but no this will not be lines of CnP as you claimed.
This also doesn’t mean much as neither are actual allies, they only work together as partners (security cooperation) just like how Japan works with Indian, Australia and etc on security.
So South Korea in Japan is a clear no go.
I got some nice news in regard to North Korea’s aviation. Some years ago North Korea displayed (mock-up) some new aerial weapons they working on like the AGP-250 as shown in my previous comment but also a new what seem to be Beyond Visual Range AAM.
Picture here of these aerial weapons :
Now i am happy to say that this particular BVR missile has undergone testing on the MiG-29 platform. The AGP-250 (rocket boosted assume) and the electro optic glide bomb next to it have also been displayed in front of the MiG-29 and and next to SU-25 platform and have been carried on the North Korea’s new MQ-1 clone.
Pictures here :
Of course there is little to no information but it’s really some nice and exciting news.
Is there any update regarding the single seater variant for the FA-50? Would love to have it as an exclusive for the United Korean tech tree.
EDIT:
Does the T-50 have Triple Ejector Racks? Always seen em with them on mockups but havent really seen on an actual airframe.
Thank you for your interest! In response:
It has just passed the development proposal stage, and development has been approved. Therefore, a physical prototype does not yet exist. As it is a conservative derivative, it is not expected to be technically difficult or take a long time. However, it is my policy not to include ‘what-ifs’ or arbitrary combinations (e.g., someone thinking, ‘The F-5C is a derivative of the F-5A. The F-5A had some units with countermeasures and others, separately, with an RWR, so why not just combine those features!’) in the tree.
The LAU-88 has a technical issue that, while not critical, can be somewhat bothersome. When an LAU-88 is mounted on an inboard pylon and equipped with three AGM-65D missiles, the aircraft’s tail fin is exposed to the motor exhaust of an AGM-65D in a specific position. During the A-50 program, an expert inquired with KAI about this, and KAI responded as follows:
“According to various test results, this issue involves exposure for only about 2-3 seconds from rocket motor ignition until the missile departs from the aircraft. The accumulated thermal fatigue over the aircraft’s total operational lifespan has been determined to be at a level that does not compromise aircraft safety, thus it is not considered a critical problem.
(The horizontal tail surface temperature changes were also measured during T-50 flight tests.)
As a corrective measure, the standard operating procedure is to carry two missiles during normal operations, with the three-missile configuration restricted to wartime or urgent and unavoidable operational scenarios. For reference, we understand that the current F-16 also experiences the same issue you mentioned.”
Like this (F-16):
The Indonesian T-50i does have Triple Ejector Racks, although they can’t carry three Mavericks with it
15th Squadron official explaining the TER capability
Honestly would be welcome to see this. The fact that it also starts at rank IV will at least marginally help the semi-historical consistency, can appreciate that. +1
Quick questions about the KF-5E:
Did South Korea ever procure AIM-9P-5s? And could they be equipped on the KF-5E?
Could the KF-5E self desginate targets for the KGGBs?
Did the KF-5E ever recieve the SPS-1000 mentioned on the earlier F-5E?
Also i cant find a single cockpit photo of the KF-5E, so did it ever get MFDs or a proper HUD?
I love the F-5 series, however it always saddens me that most F-5 operaters never modified their Tigers to carry more than 2 AAMs. Ik the KF-5E cant, but it wouldve made it all the more better. Cheers! :D
I didn’t expect to see someone interested in the KF-5! The KF-5 is a special aircraft for the ROKAF, a true love-hate relationship. Thank you for your interest and answer your question:
Table 1. Main Function of PDU
No. / Main Functions of the Pilot Display Unit(PDU)
- Mission Data Storage by linking with the Mission Planning Equipment.
- Transmission and Verification of Mission Data stored in the Medium-Range GPS Guided Kit.
- Target Modification and Emergency Target Input.
- Status Check of the Medium-Range GPS Guided Kit.
- Calculation and Display of the Launch Acceptability Region (LAR).
- Display of Release Parameters, Target Information, and Flight Information, etc.
- Operation of Self-GPS-based Maps.
- Transmission of GPS Navigation Information to the Medium-Range GPS Guided Kit.
To be precise, KGGB is not a weapon dependent on the aircraft itself. The KGGB’s development goal and biggest selling point is that it doesn’t require separate integration modifications. Generally, the KGGB is operated by a command and communication terminal carried by the pilot, and it’s released onto pre-designated targets within a pre-planned mission file. However, it also has an emergency target input function, allowing pilots to switch to other targets within the same mission file or even input new targets mid-air.
Nope. :p
Well why not, but that kinda looks like a nothingburger tbh… Except for the FA-50, the KF-21 and the few sk variants of us fighters, this is all just a bunch of american, russian and chinese vehicles copypasted into a tree… At this point the devs can just add national skins to vehicles in said trees.
The few unique aircrafts could be in a subtree and don’t really need their own tree
What Im most excited about this one is that the ROKAF FA-50s and other aircraft will have access to ROK made armaments:
This would mean that the ROK will still have a better FA-50 if it ever gets added even if the Thai TA-50 gets added.
Finally, the IL-10/Yak-18 hybrid will finally get it’s recognition 🥹
