Lmfao that’s rich about Russian tanks because guess what happened to all those panzers and tigers after about 100mi I think. They were abandoned because they broke. The armor fractured quite easily because quality went to shit and as always, this isn’t some straw, it’s highly documented. Also, it’s quite bullshit that sherman variants couldn’t pen German tanks.
Then I sure hope you’re championing Leo’s and Strvs getting nerfed and equal armor to the other nations… but something tells me you’re probably all too pleased with those benefits.
does, tornado uses the same launch buttons as for the Aim-9L as it does here for the AMRAAM or the others.
check the three small pictures at the left.
it obviously shows an Aim-9L being fired from a pylon currently not allowed to mount A-A missiles
Oooh ,Weharabo ,now that is an insult, Are you like this IRL ?
Everything i said about Russian tank crews having zero training is true ,German ones had their 12 week training all the way during the war …naturally quality of training declined as war drew close but it still existed . On other hand Russian crews trained on the job and that showed in their losses . Agreed on German tanks being over engineered and not tested…kinda similar to todays games ,all features and zero testing.
Firefly …1944 …up to that point only tanks/TD’s that could take on Tigers & Panthers were Soviet 122/152 mm ones
You would have to produce unclassified documents indicating that specific German planes could carry that specific missile, otherwise it’s just a meaningless complaint.
That is the Multi-Function Rail Launcher (MFRL) produced by ACMA for the Eurofighter, if you can find documents that indicate the installation of that specific Rail Launcher also on the German Tornado then we can talk about it.
I’m not sure, it seems to me that that modified Tornado was used to test the ACMA MFRL, however a photo does not prove that the German Tornado in service had that device. Also because to transport the AIM 120, I believe that the German Tornado would have had to replace its Radar. If it had been enough to just change the rail launcher to carry radar-guided missiles, it is not clear why the British invested so much money in the Tornado F3.
if extensive modifications were required then the whole point of the MFRL and the ACMA mission statement would be a flop.
this is obviously an offer brochure and not a service one. this shows that the german tornado CAN mount the MFRL and with it, radar guided missiles. (some argue that a ground radar cannot search or track air targets when in reality a ground radar is just a normal radar tuned and having software for ground mapping.)
the tornado in game already has a 19km ACM mode. which if in correct is the typical engagement distance at top teir anyway.
this would allow ARH missiles to be mounted and fired. the MFRL was already used to fire the 9L from two pylons which arent allowed in game (which would give the tornado 4 x aim9L instead of the two it has rn.)
new radar, new body, different systems for different capabilities. weight reduction, different pylon arrangements and a host of other reasons.
just the AMRAAM isnt enough for an air defense role
you are aware armament doesnt have to be in service? gajin added plenty of weaponry only because it has been showcased with it and did equip them with it.
As example the french eurocopter block 2 gets stingers? you wanna tell me france uses stingers when they have their native mistral production?
the hell you talking about?
Even if france should use stingers, there is other examples.
Italy arietes dont use DM53
f4f late aim 9j, not active service only equipped briefly in america
French tiger hap physicaly unable to shoot hot 3 missles
germany never had R27ET
italian f16 never had sparrows
leopard 2a4m can doesnt get KE-W
