Smin1080p

This is not the same. This is a static trailer which needs to stop, detach and deploy like this to even function:

FlakRakRad is a singular self contained unit

Not sure if it will be this update, but there are considerations to resolve the slats matter. Right now we don't have any conformation of what the decision will be. But the devs are aware.

We haven't broken any rule and now the French also have a VT-1 platform this update.

Not currently.

Both the F-4E and F-4F are planned to have AGM-65 as they both historically should.

I missed this in le spam.

Yes, there are plans for the AGM-65 and F-4E.

Almost all nations have vehicles in other trees. France is no exception to that.

Thats the reality of military combat and vehicles where nations buy, share and capture each others technology.

Regardless, this is just purely off topic now.

We have answered all questions on the French Crotale now. Any further discussions can be taken to a more appropriate topic

It was over 3 pages, you just cant see that as we simply used to clean suggestion threads up a little to make it easier for the developers to read and process. But this was just the base suggestion. Its been mentioned and discussed since then in many places.

More so the reaction from French players at getting the FlakRak. It has nothing to do with major or minor nations.

Not fully there right now. Including for Japan.

Apologies. My mistake as its a little hard to be compressive when your notifications are being as extensively spammed as mine are ))

F-5A

ITO made more sense in this case. FlakRak doesn't really work at all there and as you say would just lead to more Drama. Which I could do without ))

It was a very popular suggestion, we just didn't have the P-51C at the time: https://forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/134017-japanese-premium-p51c-34evalina34/

The M113 crotale is a private development intended for other nations. It was never for France. Its a PR photo to sell the platform.

Meanwhile the FlakRak was German. Hence why it was added to Germany.

F-5A was operated for training and trials by the USAF.

It was later modified into F-5C.

We don't plan to change the chassis at all as both the M113 and 987 tracked platforms are both actively worse than the ITO in terms of the vehicle platform itself. Both would effectively be a downgrade over what the ITO offers with both being no more domestic than the M113 and 987. Hence why the ITO was chosen.

You seem to have missed the last major where the South African tree was introduced into the British tree. Hence why they are there.

A French company with arguably more US involvement. Even the VT-1 itself was not solely French, but simply involved French development with huge amounts being done by the American company LTV.

So if anything with the M113 and 987 both being American vehicles and the VT-1 being heavily American too. They are closer to the US tree than French anyway.

Why?

The UK needed a top SPAAG and has C

It seems the criteria for what makes something more French changes from patch to patch.

Last time it was French parts or French weaponry, now its built in France.

The ITO VT-1 platform meets all the same criteria that yourself and others used for the suggestion for the SK-105 in the French tree.

The M113 and 987 are no more French than the ITO.

The 987 FVS is again the same situation as the M113. Its a private development which France didn't adopt.

One of the things im most looking forward too this patch

It was modified by the Tomson company. Partly also US.

It has no relation to French armed force service and no more than the ITO.