There's STILL MORE Inaccuracies Among War Thunders Top Tier Jets! | Part 5
Вставка
- Опубліковано 19 лип 2022
- What are these intros even becoming...
═════════════════════════════════
►► Check out the Armor Cast channel for our military reviews and documentaries
/ armorcast
═════════════════════════════════
►► Discord!
/ discord
►► Twitter!
/ sc0ttishkoala
►► Merch!
teespring.com/stores/thearmory
═════════════════════════════════
Mor vids yo
Guides: tinyurl.com/WTguides
Dogfights: tinyurl.com/WTdogfights
Gameplay: tinyurl.com/WTgameplay
#scottish #warthunder
═════════════════════════════════
Sauce?
Point 1:
USAF Series A-10/OA-10A Aircraft Non-Nuclear Weapons Delivery Manual - 3 May 1999
man.fas.org/dod-101/sys/land/...
www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone...
Point 2:
www.joebaugher.com/usaf_fighte...
Point 3:
USAF Series F-4E Aircraft Aircrew Weapons Delivery Manual (Nonnuclear) - 15 April 1979
Point 4:
russillosm.com/A-10%20FAQ%20re...
nationalinterest.org/blog/reb...
Point 5:
www.military-today.com/missile...
www.secretprojects.co.uk/thre...
Iranian F-14 Tomcat Units in Combat
Point 6:
btvt.narod.ru/4/vichr.htm
www.airwar.ru/weapon/aat/vichr...
Point 7:
Navy Training System Plan for the AGM-65 Maverick Missiles May 2002
Avionics and Non-Nuclear Weapons Delivery Flight Manual USAF Series Aircraft F-16C/D 16 June 1997
Point 8:
cmano-db.com/aircraft/336/
Point 9:
JPRS ID: 9830 West Europe Report - Foreign Broadcast Information Service, February 1980
Point 10:
Naval Postgraduate School Monterey, California - An Outsider's View of the Phoenix/AWG-9 Weapon System by Stephen Thornton Long March 1977
Point 11:
USAF Series A-10/OA-10A Aircraft Non-Nuclear Weapons Delivery Manual - 20 February 1983
Change 8-15 March 1988
Point 13:
Archived Report: R.550 (Magic 1/Magic 2) - Archived 12/2003
GCC - Iran: Operational Analysis of Air, SAM and TBM Forces - CSIS, August 20, 2009
Point 14:
Technical Manual USAF Series F-4C, F-4D and RF-4C Aircraft Volume 1 - 1 November 1965
Changed 1 August 1967 - Ігри
Is the a 10 was realistic it would have a buff against british tanks even more so if they are on your team
Also in ground RB friendly tanks are not marked due to its lack of equipment in spotting, this will be fixed in the A10C
Literally the best comment.
@@yanisbaker881 Even though I am an US main I would find this hysterical, especially because I gave up on top tier ground 4 months ago
When A-10 is spawned all British team members are prevented from spawn until the A-10 is gone cuz of the habbit of US forces to team fire.
I could be wrong but wasn't the case in I think the Gulf War where the UK told the US that If they deploy A-10s in there area they won't support them cuz they didn't want to risk the life's of there men over US friendly fire
Should’ve been called “All the problems and in accuracies with the A10 with some other issues mixed in”
for ground the chally 2 TES is modelled with barracuda but in game this doesn’t work in game when in reality it significantly reduces its thermal signature (and some other aspects) but if it was functional in game it would give a reason to actually play it
The wrong hellfires of the Viper are also a problem on the Tigre HAD, which used Ks despite having Bs in game.
After watching this I just realized theres another thing that WT has completely ignored after its botched attempt for introduction earlier when Radar was first introduced
Gun lead computing.
The F-14A should Definetly have it considering its a 4th gen and basically *every* Jet post F-4 Phantom that has Radar has gun lead computing
The MiG-23MLD I think has it, though don't quote me on that as Russian Aircraft are not my forte.
The F-4EJ Kai should have it considering that its Radar is literally just that of an F-16 Falcons set
Going on from that, there's a bunch of jets that have Radar Range Finders for their guns that do nothing in Air RB, something that could easily be fixed by one of two methods
1. Have the reticle for where your guns are aiming change to show where the bullets will fly at the distance fed from the radar gunsight
Or
2. Have a separate reticle, either just a green cross or something simple, do it instead.
Would give some love to the cold war jets, and actually make the radar gunsight useful, meaning your not having to use the same old method of leading your targets by hand like you would in a F4F Wildcat when you have a gunsight and radar system that automatically tells you the range to target and displays your fall of shot at said distance. . .
final point, gyro gunsights? Like, literally just have another reticle showing the same information in third person that the first person gyro gunsight gives pertaining to where your bullets would fly.
Honestly I'd just like more sophisticated gunnery tools given that, we have them in game. . .if you play Sim. . .cause god knows no one plays Air RB in cockpit mode above 2.3.
We talked about radar and gyro gunsight lead computing in a previous episode actually, part 2 or 3 I think
Radar gun lead used to be a thing in air rb but got removed for 'balance' reason.
@@MJRSoap then removed tracers from Swedish planes because realism despite not giving them the realistic reason they didn’t need tracers.
@@MJRSoap I'm not surprised if people keep leaking documents to prove actual facts since gaijin be gaijin 🐌❤️💰💰💰
@@oseansoldier make BR higher for balance they said, including high repair cost they said 💀
Yes. Finally somebody on youtube that understands and outlines the loft problem with the 54's. Gaijin even DID put a loft parameter on the 54 but it's only there to keep the missile in a flat trajectory in midcourse.
Side note: the 7F also has loft. The sparrows instead have a predetermined loft angle and time vs the phoenix where it plots its own loft trajectory based on the target and launch altitude
Any information proving that? Only Sparrow I know to be capable of lofting was the AIM-7MH, in fact it was one of the primary upgrades that variant brought
@@theScottishKoala Aim-7P has the ability to loft, it's still in service tough
Yes please cover Ground vehicles! It would be nice.
I think it would be nice to see a video about ground vehicles. I think there are lots of inaccuracies that could be covered there.
Point number 15
You should be able to use Binocs with the A-10
When you play the A-10, team markers also shouldn't appear
You really expect gaijin to make these things right? That could take minutes of research, MINUTES!
can we all take a moment to agree that they completely fucked up on the A-10? WHY does the early model have better ground loadouts than the late and is premium and is LOWER IN BR. ITS LITERALLY PAY TO WIN against its normal tech tree version
Let’s put it this way. You get more missiles, but both models need a buff because both where a money grab and dogshyt
man, i am so freaking happy to see you back making videos again! i hope the new PC is good!
The F-14 is also missing IRST, and the A-10A (From my knowledge) didnt have the paveway penny pod yet its modeled on the plane
A-10A did have Pave Penny. It's A-10C that tends to lack it (not necessary given that A-10C can carry TGP's). PavePenny is the only way the A-10A can guide Paveway bombs.
As for the IRST on the F-14, that was only very briefly fitted to a couple of Tomcats before it was switched out for the TCS. Our model just has the basic chinpod with neither, which plenty of early F-14A's did fly with. It's not so much an "inaccuracy" as it is just a strange specification Gaijin decided to use
@@theScottishKoala 1. Why would the A-10A have a targeting pod being the less advanced of the two, and the A-10C (the modern one) not have it? Im certain you have it backwards
Also, then what does that little chin bubble under the nose house?
This f14 is the early version it doesn't have either yet
@@aviatorlewski9310 The A-10C carries targeting pods like LITENING. So they often have the Penny pod removed. Pave Penny is receiver only, it’s used to allow the A-10A to drop Paveways and have someone else on the ground guide them. The A-10C can guide them itself, so Penny is unnecessary. Not all have it removed, but many do
For Viggen: In the event of an in-flight engine failure, emergency power was provided by an automatically deploying ram air turbine (RAT), capable of generating 6 kVA.
Please start Advocating for more helis ingame. There’s so much possibilities for vehicles to be added instead of gaijin making a single boat for all 4 top tier naval players
Not sure if you caught the list of wheeled IFV's we did in the last video... got a similar style vid coming soon for helicopters too
@@theScottishKoala If you are struggling on finding Italian ones, take a look at the forums on Italian heli section of suggested and previously suggested. :)
@@theScottishKoala haven’t watched as of yet but had many extensive discussions with friends about IFV/AFVs ingame. Hoping the Britain gets their light tank tree if not one or two sole vehicles next update. Gotta find a reason to play Britain with my 225 vehicles I have already 😂
@@nicho3051 send us a link if you can, that’d be good 👍
These videos are my absolute favourite, keep it up Koala
I was playing neverwinter while watching and wondered why I could faintly hear skyrim music.
Regarding doing a similar video for ground vehicles, yes, please. You could probably do an entire video on the Spz. Puma alone given how much shit gajin got wrong. Or like how none of the open bolt double feed guns are working right and that most of them shouldn't even have mixed belts to begin with.
Don't play top tier.. but still enjoy these videos.
WarThunder is an Inaccuracy in of itself.
loved the video and cant wait for the next ifv video
Keep up the pedantry, I'm learning so much!
The Pvkv III is missing the Slpprj m/49 APDS with 140mm pen at 500m
This is always interesting and cool. Well done and well rescearched.
(Ka-50 nerf soon^TM)
Also, does anyone know how to change the UI back to how it was befor the changes just after DanerZone update. I find the colours odd and the "sharper" numbers for aircraft hard to read on my small screen.
Also, it's difference. D:
Try changing the fx setings, after the update they reverted that to the default ,witch is responsible for the strange UI, at least for me
@@pedrovieira2986 Thank you. I shall try it out.
Sadly, not the case. All Post Fx settings are as normal and graphics is unchanged.
@@theteadrinkingowl.2295 Even the option for sharpness?
Just to make sure you are looking at the one I'm referring, it's the post FX from the main menu, not the graphics menu
@@pedrovieira2986 Post FX settings are as I left them. Sharpen and contrase.
Thank you for trying to help anyway.
@@theteadrinkingowl.2295, then the other thing you can try is changing your monitor sharpness, if it has that option, aside from that no idea mate.
Well good luck and I hope you can find a fix fast
the Israeli F-4E does have its front sparrow bay sidewinder pylons, but misses the additional countermeasure pods mounted on the rear sparrow bays
If I’m not mistaken, the Gau-8 should fire ten rounds if you pull the trigger once.
Pulling the trigger once can mean holdinh it for 20 seconds
The F105D is missing its ECM, walleye, and Various GBU cluster bombs
Cluster bombs as a general factor we covered in part 3 I think (might have been 2). Any sources showing Walleyes on the F-105D? The weapons delivery manuals I’ve seen don’t list them
I beg you to make more "your favourite tank sucks" vids lol
Yes, seeing something like this for ground would be great too. All extra Koala content is a plus
Yes please cover ground vehicles! And good Video as always 👍
another thing about the super 530: it should have 50km/h clutter filter on the seeker
The TIGER HAD in the French TT never mounted AGM-112 B's, France never even owned them, the HAD/HAP both mounted AGM-112K's, or Hellfire 2's.
R530F and R530 are (still) missing their chaff rejection gate.
Gaijin could have added more than the Aim-54 as a self homing missle with the R530D, a R530F with a full active seeker head and improved motor and range than the 530F.
The Magic 2 is capable of 50G+ maneuvers while the motor is burning as well as an increase in thrust of around 10%. There are 2 'variants' of the Magic 2, the initial Conversion missiles, with a different seeker head and the modified tail fins, and the full production models. If there is a difference it likely lies in the rocket motor. The Magic 1 is rated for well in excess of 50G maneuvers but was limited to 30G in service to ensure they wouldn't fall apart. Service showed they wouldn't so the Magic 2 had this restriction lifted.
The Mirage F1C has the wrong countermeasure pods, the pods on it are from a CT/CR, by the time these pods were in service, NO F1C WAS IN SERVICE. All F1C's had been converted to the CT or CR standard. The pods the F1C should have would grant much higher counter measure capacity than the pods currently implemented, something the F1C sorely needs with how bad it's performance is. (Seriously you can't even lock a 530F unless you're closer than you need to be for a regular 530, even when looking up at the target, I had one fly off for a team mate that wasn't even dropping chaff too, one of the few times I managed to even LAUNCH one).
The Mirage F1CT is actually the post 2001 conversion, it's 1 30mm DEFA was removed for a gun camera. Arguably it should have even more modern equipment as a result.
The Cyrano 4R radar is capable of TWS of 4 targets at once. In game it's just a Cyrano 4.
Fun Fact: In a recent update the 30mm DEFA/ADEN cannons have been nerfed! The HE shell now does less damage than the 20mm Hispano 404's from PRE WAR FRANCE. Much like the Pre-Fix Hispanos, Ground Belts are now your most damaging belt.
The MISTRAL manpad is still missing it's flare rejection, despite IRCM being listed on the stat card, all this does is allow it to lock helicopters with HIRES or similar systems that prevent other MANPAD's or missile from locking them.
The AIm-54 does NOT give any RWR warning when it goes full active. It should, it's a separate radar source flying towards your plane. It's, in effect, being treated like an optical or laser guided missile.
As for the Magic II, it was STRESS TESTED for 50G's (making sure the avionics wouldn't just break at that kind of pressure) but the missile was not actually able to pull more than 35 due to limitations with the seeker head itself. Same thing is true for the R-60M supposedly being able to pull 47G's (it wasn't, just the 30 we see in game). That's at least what the most viable sources state - I know there are some sources that claim 50G's in real world performance, but the ones that do also have various issues making them less reliable than the ones that posit 50G's as a safe aerodynamic limit but 35G's was all the seeker could do.
As for the Mirage F1C/CTs' inaccuracies, I'd love to see some source information to be able to include it in the next video. The flare pods on it not entering use until the conversion to F1CT sounds like a great thing for us to bring up, as well as the radar. Got any manuals or anything that prove it?
In game, I don't recommend taking 530F's at all. Just take the two Magic II's, get them off and then RTB. They're the best missiles in game and that's without their IRCCM modelled. The Mirage F1C with just the two Magics is a BEAST when it comes to its performance, since you're not weighed down by the near-useless 530F's
Lacking RWR lock from the active AIM-54A is a bug I have heard is being worked on to be fixed very soon, so we decided not to bother mentioning it
WHAT!!!!!!!!!!! F-14 should have basically AIM-7 E2's, why Gaijin that is my favourite missile. WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY??!?!?!!!?!?!?!!?!?
W the ka50 I can hit targets from 8.8km out as long as you're within 9km you can be hit
The A10 has a fire extinguisher for the engines and the tabs to activate them are clearly shown in the cockpit. So why the hell can we not use them when the plane catches fire?!?!??!
Snail.
Well at least Gaijin fixed the dancing track bug (I think). Took them about a month.
I really hope you make more of these for low tier planes and tank's one day
gj mate!
If Gaijin fixed all of these Errors from those Vids, they could delete half the Tech Trees in the Game, just because they become obsolete
Ground vehicles will be nice for this series too!
Hey Koala, if you’re not feeling motivated to play War Thunder, I probably speak for a lot of people when I say that I’d love to see some non-War Thunder content on the channel like DCS, Il-2, etc, etc.
Definitely gonna do some DCS, just haven't had the time to go and really learn how to fly yet
Yes I would definitely be interested in seeing the same style of videos for ground forces only! Yeah I guess that’s mainly spooks thing but there’s so much to choose from in terms of inaccuracies in game and spook seems to like focusing on a single vehicle at a time so an overall look at inaccuracies covers a sort of gap in what spookston does for the most part
Would be nice for the swedish Viggen to get its proper countermeasure pod with enough chaff to make a blackout in parts of Denmark.
Just in general, all NATO tech is nerfed. But Russian tech is the best in the world, according to Gaijin ;)
ah yes they nerf NATO vehicles by giving them powerhouses like the A-10s and F-14s, which have almost no comparable competitor in the game right now. how russian bias of them.
@@danielsteger8456 Before F14, who had the best plane?
Also, playing A10 isn't all sunshine and rainbow either. Try playing that on ground rb. AA are more than capable on shooting one down. Even worse for the 10.0 A10 Late who has to fight against Tunguska.
Not only do I love these videos, I would absolutely love more tank equivalents!
Also, I have a more specific question that I can't remember if you previously covered. What are the actual capabilities of the AIM-9L? I feel like the missile on the F-104S ASA is wildly inconsistent and not at all as good as it actually should be. 40g pull, a seeker radius more akin to the 9G, and more accurate tracking.
Oh well, it's not like they introduced a Starfighter at 11.3 only because of those missiles, then nerfed them because they also put them on a 9.7 premium... oh, wait.
When is wheeled IFV videos??? Gawd I can’t WAIT
FOR EVERYTHING GOOD IN THIS WORLD ID LOVE TO SEE A GROUND VERSION
These developers just can't handle the complexity of 3rd-4th gen aircraft.
I believe the reason why the Phoenix isn’t lofting because it is still too close to require lofting. On the dev I was testing and the Phoenix did loft a little bit.
They had a sort of "prototype lofting" code on the dev server that wasn't transferred to the live server. I guess it wasn't working correctly (kinda like when Hellfires were first introduced). Even with a 20-30km shot you can expect an AIM-54A to loft by some 8,000 to 10,000ft. At 100km (yes I've actually scored a 100km kill with these things!) you'd be seeing them loft by around 40,000ft or more!
Plenty of other planes can also mix flares/chaff without having to fire both at once. MiG-21CMT/MF (with SPS-141), MiG-21bis (load flares on one pod, chaff on the other), MiG-23M (individual fire control for each of the 12 slots), and MiG-23MLD/27k/27M (same deal but for all slots).
Also, the MLD (and 21bis) should have P-60Ms. And the M shouldn't. And they should be able to mix radar and IR variants of P-23/P-24 missiles. And neither can.
Are the MiG-23’s not now on the hardpoints customisation feature? If they are you should be able to mix medium range missiles now. I think we actually brought that issue up in a previous one of these videos.
As for R-60M’s, they were withheld on the MLA/MLD to prevent them from being too overpowered. The German MiG-21bis already has 60M’s, but the Russian one doesn’t because unlike Germany, Russia got a tech tree MiG-23 with them. Kinda balances things out.
I think we’ll see all three MiG’s get R-60M’s next patch, after Gaijin’s made plenty of money off of the F-14A.
@@theScottishKoala Theyre on the custom hardpoint system, it just wont let you mix the 2 for some reason. If you try to it removes the other and gives you a message that you cant mix them.
As for the P-60M thing, I think between how well flares are performing, and how hard the F-14 is getting spammed, it would be fair to re-balance the MiG-23s. Remove the Ms from the MiG-23M, and maybe downtier it, and give the Ms to the MLD.
I especially think this if we aren't going to see a real F-14 competitor any time soon (MiG-31). MiG-25P is cool and all but it gets 4-6 missiles and no guns. PDS would be better since its radar and missiles make up for the lackluster airframe, but the 31 would just fit the game a lot better. Also I love the GSh-6-23 :)
@@henryatkinson1479 I'd say a real contender to the F-14 as it is would be a MiG-29A with 2 R-27s and R60Ms. Foxbat is nice, though it'd get its shit stomped fighting Phoenix's, and even more stomped if god forbid it had to get close for R60s.
MiG-29A would also be a more versatile platform given it can take some limited A2G equipment in unguided rockets and bombs, much like the current Tomcat.
@@Lecog MiG-29 would beat the shit out of our current F-14A, especially with R-27T’s!
@@Lecog MiG-25 isnt a viable counter, and I didnt say it was. The MiG-31 would be since its really the only Soviet plane designed to fit that same role as the F-14.
The MiG-29 is more of an F-16 counterpart.
would love to see a tanks version of this since i myself am a tank main you should do a collab with spookston
The yak 141 carried R-27s and R-73s with the same radar as the su 27 so i don't really think it's the best competitor to the f14.
A mig 25PD could be good since it fixes all the problems with the mig 25p except a gun
If it wasn't better, at a lower br, Gaijin wouldn't have a reason to sell it, so they'd "lose" money
The vikhr has a guaranteed range of 8km but it's possible to hit targets up to 17km and more away if high enough and especially when shooting it in an ark.
Never seen any evidence that would suggest that. Doesn't seem possible either - unless you have some evidence to support it? Sounds like it came straight outta someone's ass tbh
War thunder is the world of tanks of jet sims
Will we be seeing the USSR/China wheeled vehicle video soon? Really been looking forward to that!
Definitely, but unfortunately my PC carked it and I had to order some new parts and rebuild it. Lost a bit of work, so I put this out in the meantime while I remake the wheeled IFV one. Should be out in a couple days time
@@theScottishKoala no worries! I totally understand (been having some laptop issues myself lately). Keep up the great work, and take your time! I'll be here first thing when it comes!
@@theScottishKoala also, I would totally love to see your take on tank inaccuracies. As a tanker myself, I'd really like to hear what you have to say!
Me as main SB and main ger seeing usa and rus mains fighting each other to see who point and click better...
0:19 please don't tell them that the tracers make my life easier
Wait, so your telling me that we could have had a more powerful hellfire in-game, but Gaijin didn't add it WTF.
First time?
Don't worry, Americas still waiting to receive a Tpod for its F-4E since despite being the most prolific user of the Paveway laser guided bomb they still don't have any laser guided weaponry outside of helicopters. Everythings either IR or TV Based. . .or, just based in the case of the AGM-12C Bullpup missile.
@@Lecog can confirm Tack and Spike pods are in the works, as well as potentially the Pave Knife pod for the F-4C
@@theScottishKoala o. . .oh?
pogpogpogpogpogpogpogpogpogpogpog
Hi koala I have a quick question. How do you make the marker of the bomb computed mark Green like the hud of the radar please ?
Was done automatically after HD interface changes came (shortly after Danger Zone dropped). If you haven’t downloaded the client version with full HD textures you might not see it, but I certainly didn’t go and change it myself so I’m not entirely sure, it was just like that
Finally I found another Scottish person on youtube
Weird that there are no Soviet vehicles with inaccuracies that effect it in a negative way. 🤔
Another missing feature for Maverick missiles; they should be 'lofting' to increase range instead of going directly to it's target.
Interesting, I'd not heard that our current Mavericks would loft. Got any information that details this?
Odd to not see it in game if it's meant to be, since both the Kh-25ML and Kh-29L have lofting functionality modelled in game
@@theScottishKoala from the Tactical Manual of a Harrier which utilizes Maverick missiles:
"The g-bias algorithm in the MAV seeker causes the missile to perform a popup maneuver after launch to increase the aerodynamic range of the missile. At low altitude and long range to target the altitude gained by the missile is higher than at high altitude and short distance to the target. Consideration should be given to this factor when flying under overcast skies. In the worst case, the missile will climb approximately 2,900 feet above launch altitude."
@@captainedward8278 The Harriers used AGM-65E's though, they're quite unique in the Maverick family, I'm not sure that's quite enough proof to say that B's and D's should be doing it.
Not doubting what you're saying, just need something to unequivocally prove it before I include it in a part 6
@@theScottishKoala I will try to find a more reliable source including other Maverick models. Though for the record, Harriers also used AGM-65G, which uses the same guidance section as AGM-65D with a larger warhead and some software adjustments to lock on ships.
Is the background music from Skyrim?
aj 37 payload is to small compared to the real one that had 7 pylons
Never seen a manual showing the middle pylon used for ordance, only the fuel pod
The exception is carrying a rb04 for transport, although it couldnt be launched from said pylon
A-10 don’t need buffed especially until other nations get AA to counter at 9.0-10.0. Modern ZSU-23 or BRDM-2 please Gajin.
Correction: It should be buffed to historical capability... and raised in br up to 10.7. Get AIM-9L's away from my 9.0 air games please!!
Strela-10 would be great for a Russian AA though
@@theScottishKoala There should be different BR for air and ground. Playing air A-10 is PAIN. Sure, you may have good missiles. But that's gonna be a defensive missile since you can't pursue anyone even at 9.7, let alone 10.7.
@@triparadox.c it’s also a massive pain to deal with in air RB provided the player has two brain cells to rub together. It has a tight turn, high energy retention and all-aspect missiles with an 8km range. Half the aircraft at those br ranges don’t even have flares ffs!
It’s for the sake of its place in air battles that it’s battle rating needs to be raised. AIM-9L’s should not be fighting Venoms and MiG-15’s!
We do not need separate air and ground br’s. People just need to stop expecting attackers to double as fighters. The A-10 should never be played in air battles. It should not be able to compete with fighters in air battles any more than a heavy bomber can. To make up for that all you need to do is give the tech tree A-10A better stock armaments (all its dumb bombs and rockets. Have it grind for GBU-8’s and AGM-65B’s and D’s).
first happy to see you making another vid
Reeeee Britain needs the Tornado GR.1 and F.3
in other news, the sky is blue
The a10 should also have a splash area of 9m² but we don't have that either
Not in RB - the reason for that large splash radius (which actually isn’t that large… it’s just over HALF what a Vulcan’s is at the same range!) is recoil throwing off the pilot’s aim… well in RB all aircraft are constantly pointing themselves straight at where the mouse cursor is.
In sim, firing the GAU-8 for more than a couple seconds WILL cause it to vary wildly in accuracy as the aircraft’s nose bobs around from the recoil
@@theScottishKoala in real life in near perfect conditions that's what Fairchild republic considered accurate so that's what I'm saying in RB I completely understand why the gun is so accurate but in real life it was not that accurate and a lot of vets hated it for thst
To be fair to the F-14A WT has never implemented engine idiosyncrasies into the game. Like the Tiger's (all of them) or other aircraft who's engines weren't really that reliable.
Reliability is one thing, but compressor stalls are a completely different factor, more to do with performance than reliability.
This would be kinda like Spitfire’s engines NOT experiencing carburettor stalls when going upside down
Do you submit bug reports to the forums when you make these videos?
Most of them are already reported, often that’s how I find out about them in the first place actually
The real overload of skyflash is 25Gs? Some sourcers say 30Gs
So let me get this straight, NATO vehcles have inaccuaracies that make them worse while Soviet tanks have ones that make them better...
Hey koala, just wanted to ask if you still have any intention to continue the "everything wrong with update ##" since it was a very fun serie.
Honestly, no update has been quite as much of a shitshow as 1.91 and 1.93 were, so I haven't really had enough cause. I might have done one for both Wind of Change AND Danger Zone together if it weren't for THESE videos already bringing up all the issues with inaccurate modelling of jets (which was kind of the biggest issues).
Trying to do a video like that for the more recent updates, I just wouldn't have enough points to bring up
@@theScottishKoala fair point, it's really a pity given that those 2 videos about "eww update ##" are the first videos i watched about war thunder back when i had ~500 hours to learn about the game. (I have 6000 hours on war thunder now) xdxd
@@theScottishKoala but it's still entertaining though 😆 used to put money and time playing top tier when the f4f and mig23m only have 7k repair cost 💀 (I haven't mention the BR compression or the latest reward-punishment system in the game, did I stutter mate?)
So basically... Many US aircrafts get 'nerfed' implementation, but Russian's (e.g. KA50 52) get 'buffed' implementation..
Russians also get plenty of “nerfed implementation”
of all the inaccuracies that have been brought to light, What % of the inaccuracies have Gaijin actually taken note of AND corrected? I would think less than 10% at best? What do other players think?
As far as this series goes, we actually covered a few in part 4 that have since been fixed. We cover some 12-15 per video and I reckon at least 10 have been fixed
Hey, Koala, I tried to apply to KILT 1, 2, 3 and 4, but all the squads are full. so I applied to KLAD, I don't know if there are rules to join or be a member, if you can explain me better, I'd very happy, thx for the vids mate, you're the best WT creator
Cheers mate, means a lot! I did not expect all four KILT squadrons to fill up again so damn quickly, but we will be making a KILT5 very soon.
KLAD is more a personal one for close friends, so we tend to keep that one closed mostly. Occasionally we do open it up, but you’ll have to wait for KILT5 next week (keep an eye out for our Russian/Chinese wheeled IFV video, when that goes live, so will KILT5)
@@theScottishKoala Aight, thx man, I'll be looking foward for it
also the f14s degrees in the cockpit are off and not right
also the f14s acm radar mode is only 9 km witch i dont think is right i could be wrong tho
Can you do the AH64D Apache in your next video please
What’s inaccurate about it? Other than the AGM-114L’s on the Longbow missing
Does Mig 29 warrant the f16 and do you think usa will get a upgraded m1a2 next patch because of the AIM and it being better them A2. Sorry if i sounded like a reporter lol
Depends on what Gaijin does with the F-16A. If they make it an early block model with no BVR capability, just Sidewinders, then the MiG-29 would be a bit too good, on par with F-14B. If they make it a Block 15 model with say AIM-7M's, then the MiG-29 would be about the most perfect match you could ask for!
As for US tanks, I've no idea. I think an M1A2 SEP V2 with Trophy will be coming before too long, but as for next patch? Toss a coin! XD
MiG 29 needs to come next update for sure
Not unless an F-16A or F-14B comes alongside it
@@theScottishKoala the first mig29a would be worse then the f14a that is already in the game. The f14 can outrate fight a mig29a and if they buff the f14a with aim9ls it would be for sure better. The mig29a should come with r60ms and r27s and it would still be worse. Having worse guns and missiles and radar.
@@soamazing367 R-27T's would basically be fire and forget AIM-7Fs that give off no RWR notification.
As for out rating it... not a chance. Not when the MiG-29 has such a massive thrust to weight advantage, AND can pull higher AoA
Even the earliest MiG-29s would out compete the F-14A in War Thunder. They'd be a great match for the F-14B and F-16A
If you want accurate planes, better play DCS
I'm glad to hear that I'm not the only one to almost completely lose interest in the game after Danger Zone, even as an America main.
I've played like 3 hours of tanks, a game or two of both boats and helis, and maybe like 2 games of air total since the update? I just don't care as the game stands currently. Not even grinding for the tomcat, still 370k research to go on it, I'm grinding for the F-104C so I can research the F-5E, and the AH-1F for the AH-1Z.
Italy is missing half of its jets
Mistrals should have 30G capability
I hope they will bring down to ground level Ka-50/52. Vikhr missile is straightly over powered to point where it defy laws of physic, it has better range than lofting hellfire, can be shoot 12 times simultaneously , it can shoot down plane/missile/helli with ease(only better missile to shooting down helis is starstreak) and uses tandem warhead with 800 penetration
Irl it only has 8k of range on helis and it can only fire 2 simultaneously
@@viruspter1dactl i watched the kola's video, I by bringing down to ground i mean to nerf it in game
I mean that's all well and good but if you could use the Jet Target Pod on console it would be way better
Helicopter works fine but jets is broken
the mirage F1CT should also have a missile approach warning and the super 530 should be extremely resistant to counter measures (as it stands its seeker is a literal copy paste of the matra R530)
Any sources on F1CT having MAWS? Not even Mirage 2000C has that so I’m sceptical on that one
@@theScottishKoala there’s sensors on the rudder front and back kinda like the MAW sensors on helicopters. As well as being a ground attack jet it’d make sense to have idk what else those could possibly be
@@patrioticpanda7618 probably RWR
@@theScottishKoala Mirage 2000C has the D2M, which is a MAWS for short-range Fox2 such as MANPADs and SAMs but it covers only the belly and the rear of the plane.
My money's on they'll sell the real brrrrrt for $60
When next thunder crew vid?
Which plane could carry a MOAB? I want to see that in the game.
B-52… not much else
Where is your source for number 9?
All sources are provided in the video description if you check. This one comes from the document "West Europe Report, JPRS ID: 9830" published by the Foreign Broadcast Information Service, February 1980
Yes 2 ground
Why the hell is there a skyrim music playing in the background? :D
I assume there's bug reports filed for all these?
A10 is accurate actually (they should added a10c for better armament)
All the points we brought up are still inaccuracies
Not sure if it’s meant to be but I couldn’t see why it would but the f104 asa can’t drop bombs at Mach+ speeds unlike the f104 s
AIM9J wasn't able to be carried on F-104. They have pylons but not the Systems to do so.
AIM-9J's were carried routinely by Turkish F-104S models. Once Gaijin found evidence showing they could do this with no modification required, that allowed the Italian F-104S to carry them too (since it must have had the correct pylons to do so by default, for Turkey to be able to use them out of the box so to speak). Because those pylons were never changed for the F-104S ASA variant, it would also be able to carry them.
Italy themselves didn't have stocks of AIM-9J missiles, but that's never mattered in game. The ABILITY to have mounted the missiles is all that matters, and that's something the Aeritalia starfighters always had
@@theScottishKoala Damn. I see. My apologies my friend. I saw on thunder show that someone asked about it and Bruce said they didn't have radar technology to carry AIM-9J. I am very glad you corrected me! Thank you m8
@@RUSS-Wolfwrestlr the only Sidewinder that requires any sort of radar is the AIM-9C. AIM-9J’s have nothing to do with radar, hell early A-10 prototypes flew with them. Gaijin’s research department for some reason went through this phase where they were adamant that a Sidewinder variant with SEAM (radar-slaving ability) actually REQUIRED a radar to be used at all, which is not true.
I still wanna know why gaijin gave the a10 early more ordinance than the late..
Money.
@@theScottishKoala sounds about right 🤣🤣