IL-28 in GRB is 7.3…
K.
Tu-95 isn’t going to die to anything in GRB at 8.3.
There’s only a chance in full uptiers.
Hopefully they ungimp big bombs like the FAB9000.
These things will be okay but they’re going to be very inconsistent (as any other bomber), between the countermeasure count and the option to climb into LEO they’ll be vastly better than the other bombers like the B-66 and Tu-4 in ARB.
The Tu-95 payload is very sad tho ngl.
this seems more realistic to the load out tho
It will, Gepard 1 still exist and is very competent as anti-air vehicle in medium ranges (at War Thunder scale). Any smart fighter will easily take it down and since its IAS limit is very low even at <2 km altitude you will recieve critical speed alert in 100% throttle during curves, despite the bomb load, still pretty much fragile, I’ve tested both bombers maneuverability and speed and I can confidently tell that Tu-95M is very weak in the survivability regard, not only against other gunned threats but also the speed it can’t sustain, be at normal circumstances or at diving maneuver, Tu-95M can gain speed way too fast and as funny note, after replenish in the airfield, it will accelerate even at 0% throttle.
Going a bit out of topic; any good player will know that the less closer you get from the battlefield the better, not to count that both vehicles (B-52H and Tu-95M) will be on stock status, although I can’t lie the stock payload is decent for one base or two if dropped correctly and if the player survive to throw bombs at a untouched base in air realistic battles which Nuclear Thunder event told that the players are much more interested in a more composite gamemode where ground targets is important as air targets are. I hope that Gaijin returns Nuclear Thunder formula to the regular game, I don’t think a lot of people is satisfied how air realistic battles is as of right now, and I think you can agree that ground strike is something that barely gives any progression towards the match and rewards at the end of it compared to sonely air-to-air combat in the current Meta.
Gepard has an effective range of 2km, and Tu-95 can easily be 4 - 6km up.
That’s because the idle engines are still producing quite a bit of thrust.
For such a slow, large, moving aircraft going in straight line, Gepards can be a serious concern even at 4-5km.
And then don’t get me started with the WZ305 😂
Flying at 4km means being 6 - 7km away.
Doesn’t mater if all your bombs miss. Throwing a big individual bomb with a large radius is always better in terms of overall kill in one run.
It’s a given.
No.
Look it up, there are actually a lot of nations which currently don’t have a 9.3 SPAA.
If the russian bomber gets full uptiered, it can actually avoid fighting IR missiles SPAAs. On the other hand, the 8.7 american is cooked either way.
It’s, once again and as we’re now used to, a double standard and a bias.
that the slower bomber with a smaller payload is at a lower br?
1 Like
The overall payload doesn’t mater.
If you throw 1363738399kg of TNT thanks to 16464439334844568 bombs while 85% of them actually miss their target (because it is what happens when you carpet bomb, the large majority of your bombs won’t hit anything) → your 1363738399kg of TNT actually becomes 5kg of usefull TNT.
As it is nearly impossible to be accurate when horizontally moving the bomber’s sight while bombing, it will actually require multiple runs to “”“accuratly”“” drop all your bombs, on as many targets as you can. And you will most likely get shot before that happens. So don’t even think about doing multiple carpet bombings as well.
The russian bomber is more easy to use and straightforward. 1 big bomb dropped, everyone die in a large radius, lots of kills, back to the base. No miss, no multiple runs, no death. And if you have the time and are able to be precise in your shot, you also have some less big bombs to drop, that you can actually drop at once during a single run. And which will definitely do massive damage and several kills as well.
“Slower bomber”, no. They’re both fat, they’re both going more or less at the same speed. They’re both most likely going to be shot down anyway, and it’s not the little difference of speed that’s gonna make any difference in that mater.
It’s just a bias, once again. But we’re used to it.
Russian Bias fan club doing immense mental gymnastics just to claim that 0.3 br difference is biased
3 Likes
0.3 BR difference when one (Russian) is clearly worse in several ways*
1 Like
carpet bombers dropping a single bomb at the time not knowing that there is a “secondary weapon ripple quantity” button exists so you can drop up to 16 bombs at once. Probably gonna give you even bigger effective blast radius than FAB-9K like that
If it was 250 or 500lb bombs, sure. But these are 2000lb.
You need like what, 2 or 3 per base? You should have no issue getting those to hit.
With your bomb load of 21 bombs, that is around 7-10 bases where as the tu95 is looking at 4 bases max.
No, the different radius don’t add up. It’s just gonna be 16x the same radius at the same place.
It’s useless. You’re just wasting bombs.
0.3 BR difference when one (Russian) is clearly worse in several ways*
No, as I already explained it in my precedent posts.