My images have proven that the jh7a-mounted four-shot kh29t is perfectly capable of handling heavy loads. Since you don’t know why compatibility issues exist, just shut up and let the facts speak for themselves.
Weight is not the only consideration. Signal wiring, coolant plumbing, power supply, etc are still considerations for compatibility of different weapons.
I never said the tip of the jh7a could carry the kh29, right?
That ain’t prejudice against particular country. You can say AGM-65s which, before HEAT warheads of calibre >170mm damage and overpressure changes, couldn’t kill any Soviet tank with at least one tile of Kontakt 1 on the turret was discrimination of American arms industry (since AGM-65 was and primarily is the only numerous option of AGM for the US aircraft).
In this case, it is purely untuned and needs fixes. You have yourself prooven that this missile has a blast effect weaker than that of AKD-10 (ATGM), and it is not like only CM502 has problems with blast damage/penetration.
They can give them pure HE warhead, but I don’t think it will be much more effective against tanks (it will be only effective against light armored vehicles) because MBTs have tricky armor layouts and even something like AGM-65 with +50kg TNTeq does not always one-shot tanks.
The point is, just saying the pylon can support the weight is not proof it can actually use them
If you want 4 ingame, you need to prove it
Sorry, can’t read that my dude
I have a question: Why does Product 305, which has 20kgtnt of equivalent power, perform better than AGM65? AGM65 has 50kgtnt of equivalent power – this shouldn 't be the case. This at least indicates there’s an issue with the game’s calculation formula.
1 Like
There is also no evidence that the su30sm can mount six kh38mt, which is only theoretical, but the fact is that the su30sm has acquired this capability
Again, they had sources, I don’t work for Gaijin, don’t know what they are
Not really anything to do with the JH7A and Kh29’s though
There are enough issues about blast efficency in the game, and it is not like CM502KG or LMUR are the prime examples of them. In reality, even something that strikes top of the turret with 7kg TNTeq would deal serious structural damage to turret (both outside for optics and stuff, and inside for crew via fragmentation/shockwave), thus technically taking out the vehicle from combat.
I am not even talking about 20kg TNTeq and more because such stuff, in most cases, would just leave a serious hole in armor, was there ERA or not.
There was a mechanic that would bring much more realism to the the game, concearning blast efficency, — hullbreak. However, due to insufficent tweaking of such mechanic, devs switched to easier yet not less inconsistent mechanic of overpressure.
So technically CM502KG is indeed anti-armor guided missile which would take out vehicles from combat IRL, however its depiction is opposite due to application of different HE physics on armor in-game.
1 Like
there once a issue. provid the KH29T on JH7A use the same pylon as C802/KD88. hahahahaha
A pylon is an attachment point, the wiring inside and in the wings/fuselage to the avionics is the real compatibility
Its carrying 1 per wing in that picture, same as ingame
you mean that hard point can transmit the IOG/fuse/state/seeker video data of any air to ground missile but not KH29s’ right?
1 Like
then send me some kh38mt on su 34 and su 30 okay?
1 Like
USB C and apples lightning cable can both transmit power and data, but that doesn’t mean you can just jam a lightning cable into a USB C slot and you’re good to go.
There’s a lot of changes that need to be made to make Kh-29’s compatible with the Jh-7 systems.
the only reason issue manager told us about why su 30 and su 34 can carry kh38 is pylon hahahaha
1 Like
we are talking about weapons not PC
Its an analogy
Kh-29’s and Chinese AGMs are two completely different architectures