ASM-1 cnp stats right now, hope theres a bug report for it, perhaps a C-801K brochure
Idk what people are on about with KH59. Its KAB500 with slow rocket booster, significantly worse then kh29t which it already has
3 Likes
“B-b-b-but did you see the range?! Russian bias no less!”
I think it’s laser, IR seeker won’t be so small
Hi Boy. I was happy to see the information you posted here.
Let me know if you created a report or suggestion about it. If so, send us the link so we can follow up.
I think it’s super important to create a report or suggestion so that developers can bring us something different in one of the JH-7A models.
The more variety in weaponry, the better. Thanks.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/CzqXMbSYz1iB
I’m trying to gather as much information as possible at my level and with the time I have. The report I published for an IR/TV version of the YJ-81 → YJ-83 AK anti-ship missile was rejected. There are other missiles on which a report could be done, such as the C-705, which is very close in performance to the KH59
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/e9gTIpUADREo
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/zaRnIrjc4Zyq
There are reports validated over a year ago that could finally give us national AGMs, including the C-704 AKG, which can also be mounted on the JH-7A and is already modeled.
But even if the reports are validated, all of this remains in the hands of Gaijin, who prefer to deploy cruise missiles with a range of 120 km when the maps are too small… and at worst, it’s done, it’s done, but Gaijin must provide an equivalent to everyone, and China has them.
It’s sad to say, but the players of the Chinese nation are destined to remain a more or less Russian-like sub-nation
The problem is that the more we move into the modern world, the more China becomes a major power, taking the place of the number one opponent against other powerful nations like the USA and Germany. Meanwhile, Russia is ultimately becoming a lesser version of China, and developed nations don’t want that. Therefore, they denigrate any dealings that merely provide weaponry that is only slightly inferior to US or Russian equipment.
Where are the Spall Liners on the ZTZ 99, where are the GPS smoothbore bombs (FT-series), the IR-guided bombs, the national AGMs, between the PL-2 and PL-5B missiles there must have been something, right?, Where is PGZ 88 to fill the gap between ZSL and PGZ 80 (PGZ 88 being essentially equivalent to ZSU 37-2)?
I even found a 125mm APFSDS round that could be inserted before the DTC10-125, and that way Gaijin could have given the true penetration values of the DTC10, which is 638mm at 0m. But the moderators told me it was classified. Anyway, the photos clearly show the ammunition on display in a showroom, proof that Gaijin is denigrating China… surely.
This ammunition is the BTA 4, which can be fired by the VT4 but also the ZTZ 99 under the national name DTW-125/125-IIM, which has slightly better values than the BTA 4, and thanks to this, we could repair the DCT10 so that it obtains its true values and competes with the DM53.
5 Likes
The problem is that the documents are linked to DTC10, clearly proving that DM53 is in competition with them
Anyway, that was a little interlude where I vented my frustration; back to the JH-7A !!
3 Likes
You want to know a cool little secret? The CM-34 apparently is gonna have spall liners…not a single mbt has had them added but a light tank will.
Anyway is kinda sad seeing the current state of the chinese tree it almost portrays the image that china can’t even produce their own weaponry or AGMs but is all right the more time it passes the more excuses are running out to add the missing weaponry for aircraft
2 Likes
Hi, @Smin1080p_WT . I hope you are well.
I tagged you in the discussion so we can get more clarity on the topic.
In a recent post about the Hawk 200, you mentioned that some weapons can be considered for certain aircraft, even if they have not been used operationally, as long as there is proven technical capability for their transport—which may lead developers to include them in future implementations.
In the case of the JH-7A, there is technical capability to carry the YJ-81 anti-ship missile, in addition to other glide bombs. Given this, I would like to know if there is a possibility of seeing these or other weapons being added to the respective aircraft — either in the tech tree version or in the premium version.
Thank you in advance for your attention and clarification.
2 Likes
Yes, it’s absolutely necessary to hide the fact that China ultimately has more modern equipment than Russia, so gaijin gives us scraps (spall liners) on support/second-line vehicles (PLZ-05/CM34), but there are still some that should have spall liners, and the main battle tanks/MBTs from the ZTZ96A to the ZTZ99A should have spall liners.
Spoiler
Spoiler
4 Likes
I really like your analyses. They are always informative.
In the JH-7/A/proto Dev blog, there’s a reference to the YJ-83K. Is that a typo? The YJ-83K has more modern components and its active radar activates from a greater distance.
If it’s indeed the addition of the YJ-83K for the JH-7A, perhaps Gaijin could add the YJ-83AK IR version or call it CM-802AKG for export, which is found on the JF-17
1 Like
Thank you, I can sometimes make mistakes, feel free to do the research yourself
Very well observed.
Now I’m wondering if it’s a typo, because so far it hasn’t reached the development server. We’ll keep a close eye on it to find out more.
Yes, we must remain vigilant, this could be an open door for the inclusion of Chinese AGMs
1 Like
Hey. So long as there is a technical capability and this can be proven with some form of source material, its possible to create a suggestion report on this to be passed for consideration by the devs.
2 Likes
Why have the bug reports about the JH-7A missing Pl-12’s been denied then? The JL-10A radar has the ability to guide the missile with it’s TWS mode (which is FINALLY coming to the game) and the JH-7A has been shown off with the LD-10 missile, the sister missile to the Pl-12 in that it has an anti-radiation seeker instead of ARH? Shouldn’t those bug reports not been closed as ‘not a bug’ and instead ‘accepted and submitted to the devs as a suggestion’? If it was an error, I would be fine with submitting a new report for consideration, but all I ask is consistency.
1 Like
This is why then. An anti-radiation missile being integrated is not the same as an ARH air-to-air missile
It will need to be proven specifically that PL-12 can be. LD-10 integration is not proof PL-12 is technically compatible.
Not only this, but as an ARH missile, it would be subject to balance decision anyway. As the aircraft would need a higher BR to facilitate it.
3 Likes
Thanks for the reply. Sure, I agree with the balancing decision to be up to the devs and how they want the plane in game. But as it stands its an argument of ‘no it can’t carry it’ and that is where our frustration is, we don’t even get to the point for the devs to make a decision.
I’m not quite sure what you mean by prove it can be integrated? The LD-10 and Pl-12 share the same missile body. The seeker is the only difference. Not to mention, there are sources that state the ability to fire ARH missiles:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/xGCa3njYKUNx
The evidence is there to support the claim but the reports always got denied. Like I said, I would be more than happy to send over a new report and consolidate the information for you guys, only if it isn’t going to be denied and waste all of our time.
2 Likes
Smin made a very important point. Personally, I think 12.3 is already a harsh rating for the aircraft (especially in SB, which is my specialty).
If it goes up in rating, it would become a JF-17 that is 10 times worse, and it would be a massacre. At 12.3, you will have the F18, F14, Bison, and Mirage with good SARH missiles, which will already be difficult enough on its own.
There aren’t that many Chinese pilots in Air Sim, and this aircraft should be an incentive to see more pilots on the red side, but with a 12.3 rating, it won’t change the win rate, which is almost zero. In other words, there is no real balance to encourage its use. Perhaps at 12.0 it would be more attractive as it is.
Source WT Data Project
1 Like