Unfortunately all there seems to be is mentions in text of bomb capacities. No actual photos of it armed, what the racks look like, where they are located or their effects on the aircraft are shown anywhere.
Therefor without sufficient evidence or info we cannot add any external presets as they appear to be paper mentions only and no actual details of the pylons, mounting points or the specific ordinance.
When any modifications are removed, it should refund return the GE if GE was used to purchase.
No timeline im afraid. They are also no older than a lot of other similar reports. But they are open.
The report was not submitted 4 years ago and the documents needed time to be reviewed and confirmed. Like all nations in game, there are countless suggestions for additional ordinance and weaponry.
This also does not compare to an 8.0 prototype aircaft having an erroneous shell that's more powerful than one found on the A-10 that was very clearly overperfoming above any reasonable level.
Fixed as of 2.7.0.37
Fixed as of 2.7.0.37
Hello
This is not a bug but an intentional differential addition to the Mk III.
Hello
This is not a bug. In the major update, we gave most Rank VI / VII aircraft with multiple missile loadouts the abilty to use 2 x IR missiles from stock.
More details are within the patch notes: https://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/525861-war-thunder-red-skies-changelog/
Simply enough information does not currently exist that the devs are aware of to support any AP round.
I said we have no
confirmed
information about it being present for this aircraft / gun. Nobody has outright denied any existence.
Should it be presented, the situation can be re-reviewed.
Given the shell was more powerful than some present on modern day CAS aircraft cannons, thats not surprising ))
It was without doubt incorrect.
The round in question on Sagittario was more powerful than some modern day CAS aircraft. It was very obviously incorrect, however we fully understand the frustration behind its removal. This was our mistake and we have rectified this.
Should the correct information become available, the situation can be reviewed.
As for the G.91 R/1. Its under review. The Italian CAS gaps are in mind.
It was using entirely the wrong ammunition from another weapon entirely. It was a mistake to have it in any capacity.
We have no confirmed information about the presence of an armor-piercing projectile for this gun and its parameters. Previously, the ammunition parameters were mistakenly used from another, much more powerful weapon. If the the correct documents are provided / located, the devs have said they would gladly consider them. All of the other changes were fully historical (RoF etc)
We have no confirmed information about the presence of an armor-piercing projectile for this gun and its parameters. Previously, the ammunition parameters were mistakenly used from another, much more powerful weapon. If the the correct documents are provided / located, the devs have said they would gladly consider them
This is really just proves the point even more. Everything is "inspired" by something. It doesn't make them a copy.
Both were and its very well know they had extensive inspiration from German jets, just the same as some Chinese aircraft took initial inspiration from Soviet designs before fully going their own way for many projects. All nations did this.
None the less, after just saying:
I don't see why this is still carrying on here when this is just personal opinions and interpretations being presented against fact. Take it to PM if yo
The F-86 and MiG-15 (as well as most post war jets) are heavily inspired by the Me 262, among other German jets. It doesn't make them "copies" of the original. JH-7 also has practically nothing to with the MiG-23.
China has plenty of domestic aircraft ahead of it to come in the far future. But for now, we just had the J-7E and Q-5, both of which are domestic developments.
Lets try to keep this personal observations on who is more "domestic" into PMs please guys
Perhaps you are a time traveller from the past. In which case, watch out for 2020, but also:
We haven't said anything except for literally just when the Draken was first introduced last year and people first begin to immediately ask straight after. BVV mentioned it very briefly on the stream. We said it was too much back then and like all the long requested top jets it was just a matter of waiting.
So thats probably whats being referred too here.
It will be in one of the upcoming minor updates.
Hello
In the same manual, it is explained how the AIM-9G / H are capable of
40 degrees off-boresight. after lock is acquired.
Radar lock is not stated as a requirement for this.
Previous report:
devtrackers.gg