i have never seen an image of a F-102 having any AIM-4s even in hangars, does that mean they didn’t have them? also they are no photos of the F-86D carrying them, only their pylons(?). The F-86E(M) served the same time Greece was using AIM-9Bs.
What changes to assualt arcade?
Any chance that the F-86E(M) BR will be decreased. It has 600kg less thrust now than the CL-13A Mk5
1 Like
Wauw.
Also? GL getting the super hornet to Mach 1.8 😂
1 Like
If just other reports would get forwarded so they can get fixed too…
5 Likes
No ARH missile fixes either. Are you guys secretly trying to compete with the upcoming Ace Combat game?
They did same mistake with CL-13 Mk.4 LMAOOOOOOOO
They didn’t learn anything and history repeat itself…
If there images of it with launcher rails, then that’s enough, and on top of that default technical compatibility is present. I’m not aware of any such being present for the Sabre Mk.4 or even Mk.5, only the Mk.6.
This is a poor comparison tbf, we know they weren’t unarmed and even then technical compatibility remains, unless proven otherwise.
The technical compatibility logic is a bit strange but can be simplified like this:
If a vehicle, based directly on a variant or is an exact deviate of a aircraft model is known to have been able to use something, then technical compatibility is able to be assumed. If someone believe that the compatibility either no longer exists or was removed, then they must provide proof of such.
For example, the Finnish “F-18” had compatibility with A2G weapons removed, and we have proof to back that up. However on the other hand, their F/A-18s, which were A2G capable, have mavericks ingame despite never using them simply because compatibility can be proven and no one has proven otherwise. If that makes sense.
I have nothing that suggests the Sabre Mk.4s were ever sidewinder capable (I could very well be wrong), and I have nothing that suggest the F-102s given to Greece had any changes making them incompatible with Falcons.
Can you clarify what this means in terms of interaction?
If the overpressure mechanic triggers a fuel tank, then it explodes and overpressures everyone in the same space as the fuel tank.
Finally a worthy adversary!
No F-102 fixes?
3 Likes
Yet another bug fix to the Indonesian B-26. Devs can’t even copy paste correctly.
It’s been 84 years…
3 Likes
Would it be at all possible to specify what exactly was changed for Assault Air Arcade? As far as I can tell nothing is different. Same amount of bombers, and same inability to do reliable damage aside from hitting pilots from the front.
1 Like
All AARGM-ER platforms cannot even reach Mach 1.6 with weapons, launch speed to get to Mach 4 should be around 1.4 at most
2 Likes
Per the link used in the bug report, the HAF did equip the plane with Sidewinders.
So if it has the performance of the 8.0 F-86A and CL-13, it should get a BR bump. Generally, missiles on an early jet add +0.3 (see G.91R, Sea Hawk, MiG-17AS), so 8.3 seems most reasonable.
An exception would seem to be the F-86F-30 → F-40 increase of 0.7, but the F-40 also has slats for low-speed maneuverability, so it has more than just 2 Sidewinders over the F-30.
It’s not a high-quality source, but the link in the actual bug report on the F-86E(M) engine uses the official Hellenic Air Force site, which lists “2 Sidewinder air to air missiles” under armament for this plane.
2 Likes
In what way that bombers were balanced? Be a bit more specific.