US used/has something similar to F-4F ICE?
Fair enough
Australia, Finland.
GB and Sweden.
I can’t speak for Sweden, but for GB it isn’t just “UK”, it’s essentially a Commonwealth tree so technically it would, even if Australia bought it after independence (and is likely one of the few nations in the world being represented under the GB tree with little to no problems).
Tornado GR1 is goated, but it also lacks in CAS a bit and the F-111C was a heavily requested aircraft.
(They’re also not at the same BR anymore iirc)
Fair, but the US didn’t have a Phantom with AMRAAM, no? They went straight to F-16/F-15 and Germany couldn’t cause they didn’t have either of those so had to do a “in the meantime…” with their Phantom.
Fun fact, the US isn’t paying for it. Their planes are only doing the work as testbeds because:
but also, it’s cheaper to do it on US soil than UK/Europe because all of Lockheeds technicians doing the integration work lives in the US.
It’s like expecting French Mirage IIIs to have Israeli Shahir missiles because they were used as testbeds. It just doesn’t make sense at all
You keep saying this and then conveniently ignore the idea of subtrees. It doesn’t matter if the “main” nation didn’t, the sub-nations in that tree did. What’s so hard to grasp here?
The US isn’t the one actively funding nor is it even entertaining the idea of using it themselves, why should they get it?
Yeah, I agree. But they will complain too much, besides it would be the only American aircraft with a good fox 3
This is only because the US broke their contract and thus forced the UK to let them do the integration which is about a decade+ behind schedule now
1 Like
not a sub
not every vehicle from a subtree needs to be added as we have seen before
the US does have at least one F-35 that has carried Meteor though, which is more than anyone else.
doesnt change the fact that US F-35’s are to date the only ones to carry them, and Lockheed is doing the integration work for them like you said.
still should not happen, not every subtree vehicle needs to be added
like i said, it doesnt change the objective truth that only US F-35’s have carried them. its just the matter of fact.
still doesnt make Meteor magically appear on UK F-35’s lol
Whether you call it a “subtree” or a “representative line,” Australian (and others) jets exists in the GB tree to provide variety and fill performance gaps. Saying “it’s not a sub” doesn’t change the fact that Gaijin uses these ties to give the GB tree unique platforms like the F-111C or F/A-18s.
Just like “every weapon tested by another nation” doesn’t need to be added?
This is the “testbed” logic again. Being the manufacturer and providing the lab space (the airframe) for a client’s integration test doesn’t mean you own the weapon.
Lockheed is a private contractor being paid by the UK to do that work. It’s a “service-for-hire” for a British requirement. If you pay a mechanic to install a custom engine in your car, that doesn’t mean the mechanic gets to claim that engine design for every other car he works on.
The US Air Force and Navy haven’t spent a single cent on Meteor integration because they don’t want it. Using a US-owned airframe as the “test bench” is just a matter of convenience and cost-saving for the customer (the UK), it doesn’t grant the US military “ownership” of the capability in-game or IRL.
Of course, this would also mean (by your logic) that the US could also get Python 5’s (as an example, there are others) as they’ve tested it for Singapore’s Air Force? If the US got every single missile ever tested by their aircraft (as they routinely do…) it would be a balancing nightmare.
That’s not really up to us anyways, though it doesn’t matter either way
Refer to the reply 2 quotes up.
It’s too early to say that. We still have 0 info about AIM-260 which could be very good or decent enough for war thunder. Even AIM-174B can be good enough especially against stuff like AWACS (Which would be placed very far away) and Tankers (If they ever add those)
“unique” haha
but if the UK’s F-35B got it along with the AIM-120D-3 then all of a sudden its perfectly fine?
of course our F-16’s could. i dont think there is really a balancing reason to do it like the with the F-35B, but if there was why not? you know, the first aircraft to fire ASRAAM was an F-16C iirc. and the US actually was interested in the program until it dropped out in favor of the 9X for cost and stockpile reasons.
not comparable, for WT they will usually allow weapons if it has been shown to be carried/used and it doesnt bring up balance concerns. either we get it too, since our F-35’s have carried them which is what matters, or no one does because of balance concerns
is there a precedent for specifically the expense on integration and nothing else being the reason for denying a weapon?
Parasite nations…
Serious, mate?
1 Like
fits the definition, for the last couple years they take US stuff but rarely ever give anything in return
1 Like
Thats called an export market, not parasite
3 Likes
for WT purposes it absolutely is a parasite, its not like we get paid in GE for every US vehicle in another tree lol
And, no one else gets “compansated” when their stuff ends up in other trees why should the US be special
1 Like
im not serious about wanting GE for every US vehicle in another tree. but people are so against US getting munitions tested on our own aircraft, when those same people are perfectly fine with entire families of aircraft getting spammed to other trees. is that not parasitic behavior by its dictionary definition?
Maybe the US shouldn’t export so much equipment so this wouldn’t happen, that doesn’t make the nations receiving that equipment “parasites”
2 Likes
That is more a problem for Lockheed or General Dynamics than for us.
They sold things to us, we operated them, then we get it on our tech tree
If you wanted to have export-built vehicle
You should’ve convince congress and import it just like how Harrier went.
Calling customers as parasite feels quite rude ig.
2 Likes
But all he want is that meteor that was tested/integrated on F-35 should also be given to US F-35 in future. Though him calling other nations parasite nation was wrong but he has a valid point (about US receiving meteor for F-35)
in real life obviously no since they pay for it, ingame yes
congrats on comparing real life to WT
dont want that unless US actually used it a good amount, I want some weapons tested on American aircraft but thats too much apparently despite all the US stuff they get
2 Likes
its even funnier when they get weapons only used by the US because “compatibility” but the US ones never get any foreign weapons
7 Likes
Ok then, if that makes them parasites, lets look T the export stuff the US has, might surprise you to know how much there actually is
M728 APDS
Spitfire
B-57 canberra
Harrier
The various captured aircraft from other nations
Oerlikon 35mm kda
40mm bofors
Are there any im missing here
Ah yes the Iranian f-14
1 Like