That wooden mockup weapons doesn’t means it is a not go payload. Thats is a normal way to use the weight and aerodynamic of particular weapons form to test stress in the airframe. Me and everybody, with minimal aeronautic knowledge catch that in a glans. You are not in that knowledge group.
Doesn’t change the fact that it never carried real weapons. It lacked all neccessary internal systems and all wirings to control ordnance. This also applies for the gun. This jet was just able to fly as a test bed.
The entire fire control system of Yak-141 was functional, it was just <2 months from being installed all in one package for testing before cancellation.
It’s equivalent to the Kikka where the Kikka guns were there ready to be installed, but weren’t cause it was cancelled before.
If it was, how is it any different to the GPU-5/A for the F-15A & -15C? And why is the former ok if the latter isn’t?
1 Like
? I never mentioned brochures, nor did I entertain that goalpost ever in my life.
On top of that, the 30mm gunpod is usable on F-16A unknown-block but not on F-16C as an example of compatibility being changed.
Which as mentioned in the topic the Smin’s quote is from, isn’t even in the game. Even though it was reported way back when the F-16 was on the Dev server and is in the files for the Block-10.
Because it was a trial, and discontinued after less than a week due to vibrations and constantly losing it’s zero.
This reasoning would open the door for all kinds of fantasy units. Like the Flakpanzer. The guns were existing and functional as well, the project was just canceled before they had been mounted. The Flakpanzer is not ingame. But the Yak is… And its even requested to add more and more weapons, cause it was ‘planned’… Not fair.
1 Like
Brimstone on Harrier GR.7 when. XD
1 Like
Super Hornet with brimstones when?
2 Likes
No, it doesn’t. Also that reasoning is literally why Ho-229 is allowed to be in the game.
Provide proof of the turret being functional.
@Stockholm_Blend
1- Prove that Harrier GR7 isn’t in service.
2- That’s likely GR-9.
Man… you are taking everything seriously :|
It was on the Joke level. Come on.
Yes, it was GR.9
Still, there is no GR.9 (in-game)
And there is another example of Jaguar GR.1A with a TIALD pod.
(If I know right, the TIALD pod came from a slightly later variant.)
Soo… If Gaijin goes haywire enough to make ‘What-if’ kind of shit more and more.
There will be Brimmy-armed GR.7 or AIM-120 armed F-14D :/
Not fair what? You don’t gonna use it right. It’s not your business how people have fun with the real payload was planned and tested. Winning because people want to be happy?
Wood was tested. You want the real payload? Lets remove the missiles and add wood.
I fail to see how him not able to get a flakpanzer because it wasn’t mounted to a body equates to not having to use the 141.
I guess the best way to put Thodin’s point what makes your aircraft so special it deserves a manufactured armament but other nations can not.
Personally I would have used the EAP as an example instead of the Flakpanzer.
3 Likes
Brother we can’t get a 2 more AMRAAMs for EF just because there’s no straight forward statement from the manufacturer. Even though hard point compatibility is there, official arts and layouts state that, but no… I’m not even talking about all german phantoms being unable to carry more than 2 Maverics… They got a damn IRST on their plane, Eurofighter can mount it at any time and there’s a couple of them that were installed in german EF, but no, no IRST for the germany. You’re not getting R-77 and anything else on your yak or we’ll make it into a precedent and make this br bracket unplayable for you and any soviet aircraft.
Lol!! I like this
You said it’s not there in the sentence prior to this claim.
Also prove that the Typhoon was never put into service.
1 Like
??
I remember you’ve been talking a lot in the Eurofighter thread. How can you not remember that we found the manufacturer of a mount rail and it stated that it’s compatible with AMRAAMs such as aim-120. it’s just not used this way because of the “mission” restrictions.
1 Like
Oh, you didn’t remember, I see.
We found a render by the manufacturer of a potential thing in the Typhoon topic, but that’s it.
Not only that, but Typhoon is a production aircraft.
As for your argument of conjecture; conjecture isn’t evidence.
1 Like
compression is so dogshit at these tiers that 141 could gain r-73 and not move in br
1 Like
This Prototype that UK gamers doesn’t want much was even show in Farnborough Airshow.
How come they denial a piece of art they also enjoy so close?
1 Like