@@Yeeter_Inbound probably gonna have to wait for gen 4 at this point
2 роки тому+109
Didnt know that the F4 had such a helmet feature. Thought it was special to the Mig29 because it is always reported as a surprise to the western world after the fall of the soviet union.
The f4J in air realistic in pd mode is so much more unreliable than in a custom battle or squadron battle, i want to see that fixed and the IFF, I swear to fuck the f4j will lock on to the single friendly plane every single time or switch to friendlies mid lock that arent that close to the target
@@datoneslav6902 interesting they kept it then, the USAF had a pulse doppler system in its first few dozen models of the E and they were all replaced rather quickly (i think after the 28th they replaced all of them to the current radar setup)
@@invertedv12powerhouse77 they kept it because a, it was all they had and B later the AWG-10 would be upgraded to partially digital, improving reliability, also the F-4e never had PD radar, rather the first 28 had a incomplete An/APG-120, which was replaced later with a shrunk down version of it for the F-4E with a ground clutter filter
Another thing missing from every Swedish jet from the J-35B onwards is the STRIL 60 data link system that at the time the AJS 37 came about had turned every plane into an integrated node in an interconnected command and sensor data web
@@icaindianen that would be good, if radar targets became visible to closest allies. Not to mention soon we will enter eletronic warfare era. And ECM could be nice.
This one isn’t even inaccurate, it’s just pure lazy: the swift f7 exterior has a different cockpit to the swift f1, however in cockpit view it has the same. This sounds minor but it’s actually a major concern especially in sim, it blocks a lot of your view on your side, and I submitted a report to gaijin and they closed the report with no explanation
Same is true for the F-4's - the F-4E's cockpit at least is a copy/paste of the F-4C's (not sure about the other Phantoms). Gaijin are just lazy when it comes to cockpits. They'd rather get 50 new models out per patch than get ten out that are actually good quality
How many of the inaccuracies from your previous three videos have gaijin addressed or accepted as bug reports? It seems like there's quite a few that they could address pretty easily
@@theScottishKoala yep, there's quite a few, are there any examples where they've just straight up said we won't be doing this and never will? Like, spooling up and turning on the cooling on my missiles over and over is one that just drives me fucking crazy because it's so dumb
@@MCXL1140 actually as for missile cooling, Gaijin did confirm they are planning to rework that. Devs told me that for the moment at least they have no plans to work on RWR, but they said much the same about supersonic jets, capital ships, and a bunch of other things too… who knows
@@theScottishKoala As much as it's easy to get trapped in a negative spiral about this game... very often. I do feel like the game is still improving. The only think I directly wish they wwould address ASAP is that the grind and moreover, the sim economy is just completely busted now. I have pitched the idea on reddit of having the tech trees be split up by era, so that you can start the grind at each era of tanks/planes. That way a new player who just wants to do cold war stuff can skip over WW2 and go right to Korea or Vietnam. It would also benefit the matchmaker to just separate out these things that way anyway, IMO. But even just addressing the pace at which you progress, and the outrageous amount of SL some trees cost to play would be a good thing for the game as a whole.
I Think its pretty wierd that Gaijin never included the fact that the Viggen can't do high G turns without the engine choking and cutting out, it feels like a pretty essential thing in how it moves and how you're supposed to fly it...
They will probably never add that because it would incredibly limit certain planes in game, it would be cool for sim but in rb and ab it would make you easy prey.
@@voidgaming3700 lmao Javelin would like to say hi........ I understand it would be frustrating but knowing an aircraft is performing better than its IRL counterpart makes no sense. you either dont add it or add close to RL. Javelin is the opposite. gets it airframe hard limited based on a first production Javelin pilot note and all subsequent pilot notes have no mention of the same "airframe limits" while having airframe updates through multiple versions lol.
The Viggen is equipped with an engine auto relighter which will activate on high G turns meaning while you should "loose thrust" the engine would never actually turn off as say with the TF-30s in the F-14A under similar situations.
Funny thing, F104G in italian tree has flares, but F104S which comes after it, dosnt. It has been even reported and archived on WT Forums back in 2020.
@@frisos8850 The F3D was designed from the start as a carrier-based all-weather night fighter, The F3D-1 introduced ECM capabilities to the plane but was always intended to be used in a AW CB NF role, There was a dedicated EW/ECM variant the F3D-2Q
Q-5’s in China have lots of inaccuracies, the Q-5 early is actually the Q-5A and the Q-5A is actually the Q-5B, also all Q-5 variant’s could carry missiles such as the PL-2 up to the PL-7, the Q-5’s are also missing some hard points, (I don’t know how much of this applies to the A-5 or much information about the hard points) Also all Q-5’s had targeting computers of some kind.
A-5 iirc is a specialized A-5D for Pakistan, so its going to be missing quite a bit as of now as it was one of the more advanced versions, not quite sure if it was the D model but its a later model compared to all the other models we currently have in game in the regular tree, I know that for fact, so more than likely the A-5C is the Q-5C or D, my guess is D but it could be C, it does say 5C in the name so, that very well could be.
This may be a minor thing but in the viggen (all versions) you could actually pull the reverser whenever you wanted, having it on meant that the reverser would deply automatically once the main and nose gear hit the ground.
I don't know if it's an inaccuracy but the IRST Pod underneath the MiG-23MF's nose is right infront of the gun, and when the gun is show it passes straight through the IRST Pod...
British bombs were brought up on forum many times and there were many bug reports... Gaijin just doesnt care. Why should they... its just some british problem.Nothing serious for them.
I would love to see anti ship armament for top tier sim where theres sometimes aircraft carriers as targets which bring in a hefty load of points and arent exactly easy to kill without guided armament
as a player who is heavily getting into naval these days i agree with this, i think we might see anti ship missiles get a major expansions this year, i hope that also means they will address the excocet launchers on the albatross class boats, that strela launcher on the Pr 12412, im not too sure about that asroc launcher on the Chikugo as thats an anti sub weapon although in saying that so are RBU launchers on the russian frigates and we have access to those
The F3D-1 is labeled with the wrong tracking RADAR: APG-26, which should be the APS-26 (I also have contradicting source saying APG is correct) G - Fire control or searchlight direction S - Detecting and/or range bearing, search The APS-21 search RADAR should have a 20mile(32km) range; 17mile(28km is modeled) It is also missing the rear facing ANQ-28 tail warning RADAR. Gaijin, on the F3D-1 wiki page, says it should have this, but it is not in game.
Note on the TWS thing - The MLD should have TWS for 1 target, as should the F-1, T-2, and EJ Kai. The other problem is the way Gaijin has modelled radar means that fixing that (along with other radar changes you have mentioned) are probably going to mean a *complete* rewrite of the radar code in-game. Its already a totally buggy mess (look at how radar missiles will still track without a lock, or will follow a target not locked, or will fly into the sun). Oh and IFF in RB please
Dunno if you mentioned this in a previous one, but the Harrier jump jet can pull its nozzles forward of the vertical to perform a “full braking stop” and slow the aircraft incredibly quickly
with the current state of top tier Sim, i would KILL to have a RWR with more information like that... right now your RWR is nearly constantly active at all points of the map and your being locked 75% of the time if not pinged. knowing the targets estimated range or if a missile is actively trying to murder you, or hell, even knowing if its not just some random AI gepard locking you would make top tier leagues more enjoyable and not the definition of stress and red herrings as it is rn.
The thermal HUD would be sooooooo nice for the A-7E. The increased spatial awareness in SIM without necessarily having to enter the disorienting FLIR viewer.
@@theScottishKoala You also need to consider that the Germans and Russians are the only nations to have all asp IR aams. If they could at least add AIM-9P-4s to things like the F-4EJ Kai and F-5E that would balance it out a bit more. I dont want to make everyone cry by saying about AIM-9Ls so ill leave those out.
the british not having proper bombs for their time actually is really annoying, cause it means the canberras are unable to destroy a single base with their 1000lbs bombs (it might be able to just barely destroy one by getting its health so low it automatically drains, but ive personally not had it happen) and whats even weirder is that the bucc s.1 has the correct h.e m.c bombs, but also has the gp bombs mixed into it
3:24 idk if it was only for the later AJS variant, not the AJ, but the Viggen ground radar could be used to track airborne targets, though as you can imagine it being an air to ground radar it was extremely limited in what you could do after you locked. You should play DCS though. Not as like you said in the video cause "muh accuracy", but because its a pretty fun game with a fairly good community. Planes rad, the more games we can fly in them the better.
Here is a inaccuracy, The MiG-19PT in-game is carrying the sapphire radar despite the fact that the PT variant never carried it only the P variant did the P variant could also carry air to air rockets and had lead calculating gunsight with the radar
The F8E should have the RWR, I love the Crusaders in sim, they’re really good but the one thing that saved my life the most I’m the F8U was the RWR, told me to look behind at the exact moment, not whenever I need to which was often, but still the extra RWR helped, pls Gijian I love the F8E, it doesn’t rip as bad.
In regards to the RWR comment. On the Jugaur A, something like the RWR ID system is there. (Or something with the spotting system.....not sure.) All you get is a marker with vehicle name, as if you have spotted an AI plane, but the direction and how well it works is not trustworthy.
@@moritzaufenanger2537 Nothing on the green RWR thingy, but in the RB airspace. You just get a floating Red vehicle name tag, no range or player name though, just vehicle type. It may just be a Spotting system thing though. It may be the spotting system loading the full textures and due to them having their radar on, the range at which they are detected is more then thoses "gone dark".
I don't know why people would be hating on you. I see it as pretty realistic as it isn't supposed to be a sim, as it's marketed to people who get bored of long gameplay games,like me. I like these videos because it peels back a layer of glory for the game, that doesn't mean I hate the devs or the game but it does make me conscious that most games need change to get better.
Eh, I say some controversial things at times… some people hated what I said in other videos, and for some reason latch onto hating anything that comes from me… I don’t get it, but then again I’m kinda dumb 😂
By the way, there is an extremely old inaccuracy that has been around since the Catalina 5a was added. The PBY-5a had two different landing systems. It had the wingtip floats like the pby-5 as well as wheeled gear for landing on land. They even start the 5a in water. Easy way to implement the alternative landing system is simply cycling the gears, first two button presses toggle the wheels, then next two toggle wingtip floats. Alternatively, put it in the flight menu or just a different key. Instead we get spontaneously exploding landing gear (test fly the 5a and press the landing gear button once before you start moving, it's good for a one time laugh).
I wanted to add something preemptively since it appears even Gaijin may have made a mistake and I could see it appearing for a pt.5. There are some images from a Museum article implying the F-4EJ Kai could carry JDAMs. This is untrue according to all source documents and there are no images of one in active service carrying them. The Kai upgrade package was started before the MIL-STD-1760 wiring standardization was implemented. Before, each pylon had to be purposefully wired for a specific ordnance type. The JDAM requires this wiring package (first noted in revision c) to function, and as such could not be programmed from the cockpit. The only iteration of the F4 that I could find that was upgraded to modern standards is the F4E/TM for Turkey
Gaijin prefers standard loadouts for aircraft so its unlikely we would see the LAU-88 Triple Mav loadouts. As far as I understand the reasons are the same as for the F-16, being wing stress and issues concerning rocket exhaust damaging the tail plain.
The Syrian su22m3 should get flare dispensers above the engine and could carry about 136 flares as opposed to the 12 fares we get in game on the right hand side of the aircraft. It should also have a missile launch warning (although that was mentioned in the review) as well at the ability to identify what type of threat the radar lock was from as well as multiple other features of the spo-15
I agree with most of you point here just not at 4:02 since that system was added in later versions of F-4J and wasn't present at starting J version of the Phantom
The F-5E carried the AIM-9P5 which is an all aspect AIM-9J with a fairly long range front aspect lock range. I think they should be added as 2 AIM-9J’s against 6 all aspect R-60’s isn’t even close to fair
It been confirmed by the devs the F-8E missing its RWR, is not a bug. The one currently in game is an early production variant that didn’t receive the RWR upgrade.
That's a pretty stupid excuse when A: it's not accurate to an early model either, and has the name "F-8E" rather than its early name "F8U-2NE"... and B: the EARLIER model F-8C (F8U-2) DOES have the rwr! It's not a "bug", but it's still an inaccuracy, just one caused by the devs being INTENTIONALL moronic rather than just accidentally
I feel like the helmet mounted sights wouldn’t be used much at all except for like Sim, but most people wouldn’t care enough to point the seeker at someone
In Air rb you would likely lock up by rotating the external camera and dead zones would have to be calculated, the MiG 29 was the first aircraft to use an HMD system with HOBs (R73) it would be a nice touch if Gaijin added a helmet feature instead of the likely enormous locking ring.
It could work very well in RB. You know the select target feature where you press X or MMB or whatever the default binding is these days, where you're pointing at an enemy and it highlights their silhouette and username when within visual range? That would be the in-game RB version of your pilot "looking" at the enemy. They just need to make it so the uncaged seeker AIM-9s prioritise the target you're "looking at", similar to how they work with radar locks. There's no excuse besides Gaijin being lazy.
@@lukewhitehouse4103 the problem with this is it gives some control methods a large advantage over others, vr would murder everything while flying realistic on controller would make it basically impossible, if not extremely hard to use. To keep a level playing field I’d prefer this to stay out of rb and ab but would be fine in sim
@@GrundleLongDong Have you tried playing Warthunder 3rd person in VR... Gives you no advantages at all. I haven't played using a controller always mouse and keyboard. Also not to be that person, but RB players want realistic mechanics, what are console players going to do when we have higher fidelity Radar controls that allow a player to use the mouse to select multiple Radar contacts.
The AJ 37 could also not use the gun pods and RB 75s at the same time. it has to do with the anaologue dial you chose the weapon with, it had limited options. It CAN use gun pods and RB 05As however.
Cool vid keep up the good work. Btw has there been any plans for what will happen next to convertible rp, I don't think I've heard of many people using it to speed up a tech tree, instead people go for a premium pack or account time. What if the convertible rp allowed to be used on any vehicle modification research (freely instead of with GE) that way a lot more people could find a use for it, the GE research boost of researching new vehicles wouldn't need to be removed so gaijin would keep their income and the grind through the tech trees would be kept at whatever length gaijin want's to keep it. It might also help with the top tier stock grind "crysis" that everyone above rank 6 starts to face.
I mean, honestly, ASMs would be a cool thing for people who like going after ships in maps that do have them. Why not? It doesnt hurt the game. We have TORPEDO BOMBERS and no one complains about them lol
the reason i think war thunder should have this stuff and be acurate like vtas and hud flir is because its alot harder to pick up a hotas and play program the hotas to bind the keys to start dcs opposed to war thunder sim
The MiG-23MLD radar set doesnt have pulse doppler. Instead, it uses MTI standing for "Moving Target Indication" to filter out ground clutter at low altitudes. I see this misconception in the war thunder community a lot, but pulse-doppler isnt the only method used to filter out ground clutter. Also since we are on the topic of inaccuracies, none of the FOX-1 missiles act like they should in game and magically all have datalink which they use to track targets.
The Sapphire uses MTI up to about 2km, due to the way MTI works it has a short range and relies on return from the ground to do its calculations, above that altitude it switches over to a pure Pulse doppler LD mode.
@@southernbear736 the Sapphire-23 radar doesnt use a pulse-doppler mode for look-down/shoot-down capability. It uses something called envelope detection for it, which only really works on flat terrain. This is the LD/SD mode you see in game after going above where MTI works. While its true that the MiG-23MLD radar set should be better at doing this due to superior electronics, its still not pulse-doppler. It does however use the doppler effect to scan targets, but it is still a different technique and far simpler than true pulse-doppler. And before you ask for a source, its Alexander Mladenov's book called "soviet cold war fighters"
The whole problem with "play DCS" is I cant fly ANY of the top tier jets except for (off the top of my head) mig 19, saber, 17, 21bis, hind-p, and the ground viggen. Yeah the feel of dcs is way better and radar/IR working is fantastic but I cant fly an su-22m2, mig-27k, 23mld, etc etc. The fact gaijin doesnt want to (or cannot because of any myriad of reasons) implement the realistic functions of aircraft when they themselves have used the "historical accuracy" dogma for so long is absurd. Don't commit to the bit if you can't follow through. Or, communicate your difficulties to the playerbase so players dont sit there foaming at the mouth. Latest Q&A case in point.
With regards to the GP bombs instead of the MC. Pretty much every British aircraft that carries 1000lb bombs in-game could and probably did use the MC bombs at some point. If anything gaijin is making aircraft that got the M.Cs were nerfed to using the G.Ps. The Hampden used to have them but gaijin changed them to the GP bombs for some reason. Its probably some kind of balancing attempt or gaijin genuinely thinks they're the same bomb (MC has at least 100kg more explosive mass in-game so unlikely).
Every time i want to get back to british tree and i realize they have no other bomb than 1000 lbs I'am regreting even thinking about it. Like there is this 540 lbs for Jaguar and sea vixen(yet sea vixen still carry 500lbs in all loadouts except just 4x 540 lbs)
Do you have a source on the "only two Rb-75s on the Viggen" statement? I understand they were a direct upgrade from the Rb-05 MCLOS rocket that it could only carry two of initially, however I'm certain it could carry 4 of the 75s, two on the fuselage and two on the inner wing pylons. If this is wrong though, I'd love to be corrected on that!
The AJS model brought the ability to carry four simultaneously. Check the sources in the description, there’s a list of all available loadouts for the AJ37 and none of them list four Mavericks. I’m not sure exactly why, but it was a limitation of the aircraft until the AJS upgrade
F-4EJ Kai has a copypasted RWR from F-4EJ. In real life it was digitalized J/APR-6. It's heater missile should be a selection from AIM-9L or Type90 AAM(aka AAM-3). It's BVR missile should start from AIM-7E-2 then final to AIM-7F/M.
Dude I even put in a bug report with all the necessary documents about the F-8E RWR and Gaijin claimed that the F-8E is a “Early” model. Like brah what???
"Early"... yet they give it the name "F-8E" rather than "F8U-2NE"... despite giving the F8U-2 LATER modifications yet not referring to it as F-8C... Consistency brother, do you speak it??
@F22 Rapt yeah… it’s kinda stupid it’s being at the same br… withholding the RER from it though is a pretty moronic way to address that. Hell, if the F-5A can be 11.0, the F-8E can easily be 10.7 and get its RWR
He forgot to mention it because this “fact” is untrue. MLD pilots were even able to out-dogfight F-16As. The MLD is in no way a slouch in a dogfight. In fact, almost all of the changes that make the MLD an MLD are those that increased its maneuverability and flight performance.
Yeah, you're thinking of the MiG-23P perhaps, the PVO's model. Many early models of the MiG-23 used by the VVS were also limited to around 4.5 - 5G's to account for structural weaknesses which could cause the wings to snap, but the ML versions didn't have this issue, CERTAINLY the MLD didn't! As for G loading limits... the F-4 would be limited to 6.5, the F-8 would be limited to 6... and the Yak-38 would be one of the most manoeuvrable aircraft in game! In War Thunder though, because we're using a flying-point model in RB, and G limits aren't really a thing, we can pull whatever the airframe is capable of
Koala, I know I’m a little late here but another inaccuracy is with the centerline MER on American aircraft. Every load out option where they are included Gaijin gives them six bombs. While this might be possible on something like a Strike Eagle, it wouldn’t be used on earlier a/c. The bottom shackles of the rear row are empty to prevent any chance of fin damage on take off. A bomb with bent fins can go anywhere. Including up into its own plane. And then there are the dual rail Sidewinders on the F-105. No. Just no. *IF* a 105 carried a Sidewinder at all, it would be a single missile on the outside rail with an ECM pod on the opposite side. There is nothing to indicate the Thud ever carried the twin rail* in combat let alone two of them with FOUR AIM-9s. It’s a goddamn bomber that was called a fighter-bomber because it had a gun and to keep pilots (who always want fighter assignments) happy. *I did find a single photo of an F-105G WW being tested with a pair of SIDEARMS in place of the SHRIKE. But at that point the F-105 was no longer in use by any active duty USAF squadrons.
The dual sidewinder racks are a part of the F-105D's weapons delivery manual, so even if they never flew with them in active duty, it's good enough for Gaijin. With the upcoming ordnance customization feature I do hope we'll have the ability to mount assymetric missile loads on aircraft like the F-105, since if you're actually using it as a bomber either in air or ground, you should never need four Sidewinders anyway, but we'll have to see if Gaijin gives the F-105 that feature. We might be waiting a while for that, but the ability to carry a dual Sidewinder rack on a single side and either an ECM pod (if we get things like that) or just an extra 750lb bomb, sounds good to me. As for the bomb racks, you'll find a large number of images from Vietnam of F-4E's flying with the MER filled completely. It might not have been standard, but again, it's enough for the game that it happened at all
@@theScottishKoala You appear to be correct. The information I was looking at covered USMC F-4Bs that probably didn’t/couldn’t carry a full load due to various circumstances. The hot and humid air and high hour J79s in desperate need of maintenance plus limited access to aerial refueling assets cutting down CAS loiter time, etc.* *Yes. I love figuring out what circumstances can effect mission planning in all its glory. Too many years of old school board war games that required all sorts of logistical planning. Many games of TOBRUK where the Italian player used more water than the Germans or the Brits. If you can’t make pasta troop morale drops. 😆
First of all, to all the people just telling you to go away to DCS, go away yourselves! I will never understand why people have this mindset of, "Just let the game have problems, what's wrong with you?! Why do you CARE about something?!?!" More importantly, I love learning this stuff, even if 90% of it won't make it into the game. As always, I'm not just here for your videos on War Thunder, I'm here to be more informed about aviation in general, no matter the topic. On a side note, I've been looking at the F-104S ASA/M as the next likely Italian top-tier fighter, and I've got a question about it if you're more familiar with it than I am. Could it carry four AIM-9Ls, two Aspides, AND still carry the M61 Vulcan? From what I've read, the improvements to the plane seem to have allowed this, but I couldn't find any hard confirmation.
Imagine being a China main. The J7E is made up of a total of I think it's 78% different parts of Migs, and the cockpit is totally different, including 2 radar screens.. that's how different it is, but in reality, it's just the same all the other Migs. Sucks.
The viggens are missing the RB-04E and RB-15F, and even the BK-90 Mjölner sure i get why mjölner might be a bit op in a sense with 24 smaller heat shell in it but they are missing alot of the potential for AJ 37
RB-15F and BK-90 were introduced with AJ*S*-37 specifically, not the AJ-37 we have in game. On top of that, adding anti-ship missiles for top tier aircraft is pointless since 9.7-11.3 naval isn't a thing yet.
F-4J should be able to fly without using any of the weapon stores. Currently, the least amount of ordnance you can carry with it is a gunpod and two AIM-9Ds. This makes assessing true performance really trick. While it is not an *inaccuracy* I’d love to see it no less. As far as I can remember, all non-internal Vulcan Phantoms have this issue. F-4J should get a rudimentary IFF system in PD mode. Yes, irl, the radar/fire control system itself could not differentiate between friend or foe, but the RIO could determine if a selected radar return was from a friendly or foe(I think it was based on velocity). Since War Thunder does not have a multi-crew system at the moment, the pilot should get IFF for radar in PD mode, as IFF is a very important tool in BVR, especially in SIM, where everyone likes to hug the ground at top tier. F-4E should have the ability to carry a pave tack and a pave spike pod. These pods are EO laser designator pods that can allow the F-4 to acquire and drop laser guided bombs. The F-4E is also missing LGBs, even though it was among the first aircraft to use it(yes, I know it does not need them, but I still want them) MiG-21 Bis does not have its historical R-60Ms. While the Bis was not given these missiles for balance reasons, all aspect heaters are the norm for Soviet top tier atm. Furthermore, the Bis SAU has them and is perfectly balanced. R-60Ms could also help to somewhat justify the 20k repair cost of the Bis. Similar to the Bis and its 20k repair cost, the F-5E could be given the AIM-9P-4. This would be fairly balanced as the P-4 does not have the aerodynamic/seeker performance, or IRCCM capability of the Lima, and the F-5E would only carry 2-4 based on if Gaijin decides to give the F-5E its historical capability of carrying two underwing missiles along with two on the wingtips. This way, the F-5E could be used to introduce all aspect heaters to NATO in the most balanced way. F-4E’s AN/APQ-120 has a ground mode where it can be used for terrain mapping and/or detecting and targeting ground targets. AIM-7Fs are unrealistically nerfed. Their max speed is decreased from Mach 4 to just Mach 2.9. They also turn much worse then their irl performance, which was only slightly worse than that of the E-2. MiG-21 Bis and Bis SAU can run on max reheat for eternity, whereas irl, they could only do it for 3 minutes. I think you have already covered this in the first or second one, though. Can Gaijin plz stop pairing US and Japan against a Germany and Israel pair in prop brs? Super sus. AIM-9G still has a 4G launch limit on the F-4J. No other Golf carrier suffers from this issue. When firing the 4 Vulcans in the F-4E, bald eagles do not spawn in the air and hand out freedoms to everyone. When firing the 30mm on the MiG-27s, the plane does not explode. Iirc, the Yak-38M used R-60Ms. If Gaijin adds them to the 38M, it would need a br raise. For the love of all that is holy, can the AV-8A please lose its 240 flares? HOLY FUCK is that thing the most annoying premium to fight in the game. JA Viggen should get a radar gunsight, as it does not have any tracer rounds for its gun.
Most of these we already brought up, such as the Pave Tack/Spike pod on the F-4E and Paveways for it, or its ground radar. As for the AIM-7F, no. All the official manuals and such state a maximum top speed of Mach 2.9, not 4. F-5E was also incapable of carrying underwing Sidewinders, that was reserved for the likes of F-5M or F-5S (which could also carry AMRAAMs)
@@theScottishKoala What are your sources on that max speed of mach 2.9 claim? I haven't seen anything that would indicate that the missile can't exceed mach 2.9.
while sure i do agree DCS has a level of realism that is higher than war thunder i still agree that some of these thing you point out in these videos are out right egregious short comings like that Jag using bombs that are 40 years too old and those RWR things would sure be nice like the range to whats locking you i would like some of these addressed
The AJS made it capable of carrying four Mavericks at the same time, yes, but the AJ model could carry them on the outer pylons OR the inboard ones. There are sources in the description, and photos of the AJ model carrying two Mavericks on the outer pylons long before the AJS upgrade existed
F-5E could carry Radar Missiles AiM-7's, and it could carry both Radar and heat seekers, I love this aircraft as it was the inspiration to the f-16 wing design, but since we don't have an f-16 then the closest thing I got is the f-5E and they fucked it up
F-5E never carried AIM-7's, possibly you're thinking of the F-20 Tigershark? Either way, the SUPER modern upgrades like F-5M or F-5S have carried AMRAAMs, and the Taiwanese version was updated to carry Sky Sword (similar to AMRAAM) but I don't think they ever mounted the Sparrow
@@theScottishKoala really? I saw a video that showed the f-5E being able to carry sparrow in one of the pictures, but I can't find the video any more, it was someone talking about what war thunder forgot to add in specific aircraft, but yh, it was probably the F-20, idk I saw the video and the guy didn't show what kind of aircraft it was it looked like an f5e but I guess not idk, but I'll keep searching, again the video probably showed it to be the f-20 ill try finding it, but I didn't know.
@@theScottishKoala found it, at 1:37, it doesn't tell which type of F-5 but all it says is F-5 documentary, my bad if I got the f5e mixed with something else. ua-cam.com/video/MTSxNLaQ7YE/v-deo.html
@@WOLFER. F-20 was initially known as F-5G. It's basically an F-5E but with a single engine similar to the F-16 (it was actually the competitor to the F-16 but never entered service). It looks very similar, especially from the front. Easy mistake to make. Either that, or it could have been talking about one of the upgraded models with AMRAAMs, which visually are almost identical to the F-5E
@@theScottishKoala ah ok, btw I've been meaning to ask thus question, should they add vapours to the aircraft so we can better identify if the aircraft is pulling hard or not, cuz all though ps4 doesn't have the new rwr sound, it might not get this small feature I'd it does become a thing. (And yh apparently ps4 and maybe xbox don't get the new rwr sounds, but the new gen consoles do) I don't see the reason as to why it can be, although it could be sony being a b*tch again idk, but we I was wrong and mixed it up, thank you for letting me know ow which did and didn't. Peace ✌
SPO is also present on Mi-35M in cockpit and its antenas are outside modeled on it. It should be also on Hind D and Hind P. Maybe for the next video? Well I do hope Gaijin will work on RWR. That thing at the moment is obsolete.
I’ve always wondered what’s peoples stance on ships with missile launchers not rocket launchers maybe if they had some sort of counter would people try it out just something I’ve always been curious about
Unfortunately there’s just not a whole lot of actual gameplay to be had when it comes to more modern ships with SSM’s - if a missile is launched at you it’s pretty much game over.
You forgot the block to sparrows that the f4e that got nerfed to a 3 mile launch range even tho irl they could launch 6 miles or that it took them 3 years to give us the block 2 even tho they never had the block ones mounted on the f4e
I am sure they are working on it all. They also have a number of inaccuracies in helos and ships as well. for example the Koln should have ASM but I am sure at this date and time it would be unbalanced AF
I mean I enjoy these videos in the sense that Gaijin "could" improve the game in that way. I have got to admit the British Bombs thing is a massive handicap to aircraft that rely on bombing targets to get kills.
FINALLY SOMEONE NOTICES I’M TIRED OF BEING STUCK WITH 1000 POUNDERS THAT ARENT EVEN GOOD. For missile warning they were in game for a while, but removed since this was op at the time. Now since there’s basically only missiles now, it’d be perfect and help a bit. They could add it a bit later when we go to 4th gen.
The only aircraft actually in service with a MAW is the A-10C and late F-16C Block 50s starting in the 2010s, otherwise only radar guided missiles will give you a warning.
@@theScottishKoala Regardless of nation, without a lead computing gun sight the guns for these aircraft will be extremely hard to use if not impossible.
Pretty sure it is. The stat card says 2.9 but that’s only counting it’s secondary burner. Could be wrong though, yet to see anyone actually go and test the numbers
@@patriotic-panda There are ship targets in both Air rb and Air sim. Once again there are WHOLE GAMEMODES that are around people over look. EDIT: theres also ship targets in Air AB too.
Italian Air Tree is one big innacuracy
Italy is a one big inaccuracy
Yeah it’s literally nato planes from the USA Britain
Mfw Italy is only nation without rank VII aircraft.
@@Yeeter_Inbound yeah cause it got non of its own
@@Yeeter_Inbound probably gonna have to wait for gen 4 at this point
Didnt know that the F4 had such a helmet feature. Thought it was special to the Mig29 because it is always reported as a surprise to the western world after the fall of the soviet union.
It was a surprise that the soviets made one.
Most modern aircraft have one
Mig 21 bis has it too
The F18 hornet and the F16 have them too
Not only mig 29 su27 and mig 23MLD had that also
@@commandergeokam2868 The MiG-21 Bis does not have a helmet mounted queuing system
The RWR missing the functionalities it had is actually game breaking in Sim.
Once again, the F-4J should have IFF in PD mode.
Does the FGR.2 and FG.1 also get it?
The f4J in air realistic in pd mode is so much more unreliable than in a custom battle or squadron battle, i want to see that fixed and the IFF, I swear to fuck the f4j will lock on to the single friendly plane every single time or switch to friendlies mid lock that arent that close to the target
@@invertedv12powerhouse77 F-4J's AWG-10 Pulse doppler system was unreliable irl, due to it being a early system
@@datoneslav6902 interesting they kept it then, the USAF had a pulse doppler system in its first few dozen models of the E and they were all replaced rather quickly (i think after the 28th they replaced all of them to the current radar setup)
@@invertedv12powerhouse77 they kept it because a, it was all they had and B later the AWG-10 would be upgraded to partially digital, improving reliability, also the F-4e never had PD radar, rather the first 28 had a incomplete An/APG-120, which was replaced later with a shrunk down version of it for the F-4E with a ground clutter filter
The AJ37 should be able to carry 2 antiship missiles. It should also have a terrain following radar
Another thing missing from every Swedish jet from the J-35B onwards is the STRIL 60 data link system that at the time the AJS 37 came about had turned every plane into an integrated node in an interconnected command and sensor data web
@@SonsOfLorgar So in other words, you could share your radar locks or what?
Afaik yes. The datalink was 4 viggens + ground control from what I've gathered.
@@icaindianen that would be good, if radar targets became visible to closest allies. Not to mention soon we will enter eletronic warfare era. And ECM could be nice.
@@icaindianen that was only on the ja37
Koala, dive into the French jets, you'd have enough material there alone for a part 5.
Lol
Part 5 6 and 7
This one isn’t even inaccurate, it’s just pure lazy: the swift f7 exterior has a different cockpit to the swift f1, however in cockpit view it has the same. This sounds minor but it’s actually a major concern especially in sim, it blocks a lot of your view on your side, and I submitted a report to gaijin and they closed the report with no explanation
Same is true for the F-4's - the F-4E's cockpit at least is a copy/paste of the F-4C's (not sure about the other Phantoms). Gaijin are just lazy when it comes to cockpits. They'd rather get 50 new models out per patch than get ten out that are actually good quality
How many of the inaccuracies from your previous three videos have gaijin addressed or accepted as bug reports? It seems like there's quite a few that they could address pretty easily
6:26
@@theScottishKoala yep, there's quite a few, are there any examples where they've just straight up said we won't be doing this and never will?
Like, spooling up and turning on the cooling on my missiles over and over is one that just drives me fucking crazy because it's so dumb
@@MCXL1140 yea that’s infuriating. Getting a clean lock finally and boom gotta wait to spool it again
@@MCXL1140 actually as for missile cooling, Gaijin did confirm they are planning to rework that. Devs told me that for the moment at least they have no plans to work on RWR, but they said much the same about supersonic jets, capital ships, and a bunch of other things too… who knows
@@theScottishKoala As much as it's easy to get trapped in a negative spiral about this game... very often. I do feel like the game is still improving.
The only think I directly wish they wwould address ASAP is that the grind and moreover, the sim economy is just completely busted now.
I have pitched the idea on reddit of having the tech trees be split up by era, so that you can start the grind at each era of tanks/planes. That way a new player who just wants to do cold war stuff can skip over WW2 and go right to Korea or Vietnam.
It would also benefit the matchmaker to just separate out these things that way anyway, IMO.
But even just addressing the pace at which you progress, and the outrageous amount of SL some trees cost to play would be a good thing for the game as a whole.
The F-8E had access to AIM-9Gs which it doesn't get in game :( and it's missing gun grouping functionality
I Think its pretty wierd that Gaijin never included the fact that the Viggen can't do high G turns without the engine choking and cutting out, it feels like a pretty essential thing in how it moves and how you're supposed to fly it...
They will probably never add that because it would incredibly limit certain planes in game, it would be cool for sim but in rb and ab it would make you easy prey.
@@voidgaming3700 that's like saying Gaijin should remove the ability to stall your aircraft because it would be frustrating and leave you defenseless
@@voidgaming3700 lmao Javelin would like to say hi........ I understand it would be frustrating but knowing an aircraft is performing better than its IRL counterpart makes no sense. you either dont add it or add close to RL. Javelin is the opposite. gets it airframe hard limited based on a first production Javelin pilot note and all subsequent pilot notes have no mention of the same "airframe limits" while having airframe updates through multiple versions lol.
The Viggen is equipped with an engine auto relighter which will activate on high G turns meaning while you should "loose thrust" the engine would never actually turn off as say with the TF-30s in the F-14A under similar situations.
You are thinking of the AJ-37. The JA-37 that came after it had better engines that did not suffer from compressor stalls at high AoA.
Funny thing, F104G in italian tree has flares, but F104S which comes after it, dosnt.
It has been even reported and archived on WT Forums back in 2020.
Idk if you went over this or not. But the F3D-1 is missing its tail warning radar and I belive ECM capabilities.
Wasn't that an ECM variant? We have the night fighter variant in game.
@@frisos8850 The F3D was designed from the start as a carrier-based all-weather night fighter, The F3D-1 introduced ECM capabilities to the plane but was always intended to be used in a AW CB NF role, There was a dedicated EW/ECM variant the F3D-2Q
1:32 F-8E(FN) didn't have RWR sadly. Only part of Aeronavale's F-8 fleet received SHERLOC RWR as part of the F-8P upgrades in the 90s.
Q-5’s in China have lots of inaccuracies, the Q-5 early is actually the Q-5A and the Q-5A is actually the Q-5B, also all Q-5 variant’s could carry missiles such as the PL-2 up to the PL-7, the Q-5’s are also missing some hard points, (I don’t know how much of this applies to the A-5 or much information about the hard points) Also all Q-5’s had targeting computers of some kind.
A-5 iirc is a specialized A-5D for Pakistan, so its going to be missing quite a bit as of now as it was one of the more advanced versions, not quite sure if it was the D model but its a later model compared to all the other models we currently have in game in the regular tree, I know that for fact, so more than likely the A-5C is the Q-5C or D, my guess is D but it could be C, it does say 5C in the name so, that very well could be.
Also surely the buck S2 should get the same 1000lbs bombs that the buck s1
This may be a minor thing but in the viggen (all versions) you could actually pull the reverser whenever you wanted, having it on meant that the reverser would deply automatically once the main and nose gear hit the ground.
I don't know if it's an inaccuracy but the IRST Pod underneath the MiG-23MF's nose is right infront of the gun, and when the gun is show it passes straight through the IRST Pod...
Also the F-1 and T-2 are missing their AN/ALE-41K chaff pods
British bombs were brought up on forum many times and there were many bug reports... Gaijin just doesnt care. Why should they... its just some british problem.Nothing serious for them.
If there was a way to make money from it it would’ve been fixed upon introducing those planes, maybe
Aren't tier 1,2, brit bomber load outs still innacurate? 😂
I would love to see anti ship armament for top tier sim where theres sometimes aircraft carriers as targets which bring in a hefty load of points and arent exactly easy to kill without guided armament
Would ADORE seeing more naval/coastal based warfare for top tier air
as a player who is heavily getting into naval these days i agree with this, i think we might see anti ship missiles get a major expansions this year, i hope that also means they will address the excocet launchers on the albatross class boats, that strela launcher on the Pr 12412, im not too sure about that asroc launcher on the Chikugo as thats an anti sub weapon although in saying that so are RBU launchers on the russian frigates and we have access to those
@@legend2460 lol, 4.3 planes vs strela's, still it could be fun, for the boat at least.
The F3D-1 is labeled with the wrong tracking RADAR: APG-26, which should be the APS-26 (I also have contradicting source saying APG is correct)
G - Fire control or searchlight direction
S - Detecting and/or range bearing, search
The APS-21 search RADAR should have a 20mile(32km) range; 17mile(28km is modeled)
It is also missing the rear facing ANQ-28 tail warning RADAR. Gaijin, on the F3D-1 wiki page, says it should have this, but it is not in game.
Note on the TWS thing - The MLD should have TWS for 1 target, as should the F-1, T-2, and EJ Kai. The other problem is the way Gaijin has modelled radar means that fixing that (along with other radar changes you have mentioned) are probably going to mean a *complete* rewrite of the radar code in-game. Its already a totally buggy mess (look at how radar missiles will still track without a lock, or will follow a target not locked, or will fly into the sun).
Oh and IFF in RB please
Dunno if you mentioned this in a previous one, but the Harrier jump jet can pull its nozzles forward of the vertical to perform a “full braking stop” and slow the aircraft incredibly quickly
It can already do that in game - it puts them to 100°, which is its maximum IRL
both viggens are missing trust, acceleration and most notably top speed (both were able to go over mach 2)
The viggen can reach Mach 2 in game
with the current state of top tier Sim, i would KILL to have a RWR with more information like that... right now your RWR is nearly constantly active at all points of the map and your being locked 75% of the time if not pinged. knowing the targets estimated range or if a missile is actively trying to murder you, or hell, even knowing if its not just some random AI gepard locking you would make top tier leagues more enjoyable and not the definition of stress and red herrings as it is rn.
The thermal HUD would be sooooooo nice for the A-7E. The increased spatial awareness in SIM without necessarily having to enter the disorienting FLIR viewer.
We all can't forget how 90% of every rank 6 and 7 jet, besides German, French, Chinese, and Russian are missing their realistic missiles.
Not really - depends on their time frame - the Russians and Chinese are missing just as much keep in mind
@@theScottishKoala You also need to consider that the Germans and Russians are the only nations to have all asp IR aams. If they could at least add AIM-9P-4s to things like the F-4EJ Kai and F-5E that would balance it out a bit more. I dont want to make everyone cry by saying about AIM-9Ls so ill leave those out.
It seems that ever since the MiG-23M was added, the American-Japanese win rates (for me at least) tanked worse than anything.
the british not having proper bombs for their time actually is really annoying, cause it means the canberras are unable to destroy a single base with their 1000lbs bombs (it might be able to just barely destroy one by getting its health so low it automatically drains, but ive personally not had it happen) and whats even weirder is that the bucc s.1 has the correct h.e m.c bombs, but also has the gp bombs mixed into it
3:24 idk if it was only for the later AJS variant, not the AJ, but the Viggen ground radar could be used to track airborne targets, though as you can imagine it being an air to ground radar it was extremely limited in what you could do after you locked.
You should play DCS though. Not as like you said in the video cause "muh accuracy", but because its a pretty fun game with a fairly good community. Planes rad, the more games we can fly in them the better.
Here is a inaccuracy, The MiG-19PT in-game is carrying the sapphire radar despite the fact that the PT variant never carried it only the P variant did the P variant could also carry air to air rockets and had lead calculating gunsight with the radar
MiG-19PT was a single MiG-19P modified with launch rails for K-13. Nothing else different about it from the MiG-19P
The F8E should have the RWR, I love the Crusaders in sim, they’re really good but the one thing that saved my life the most I’m the F8U was the RWR, told me to look behind at the exact moment, not whenever I need to which was often, but still the extra RWR helped, pls Gijian I love the F8E, it doesn’t rip as bad.
In regards to the RWR comment. On the Jugaur A, something like the RWR ID system is there. (Or something with the spotting system.....not sure.) All you get is a marker with vehicle name, as if you have spotted an AI plane, but the direction and how well it works is not trustworthy.
Really? Never noticed that? On the RWR screen?
@@moritzaufenanger2537 Nothing on the green RWR thingy, but in the RB airspace.
You just get a floating Red vehicle name tag, no range or player name though, just vehicle type. It may just be a Spotting system thing though.
It may be the spotting system loading the full textures and due to them having their radar on, the range at which they are detected is more then thoses "gone dark".
The Tea Drinking Owl. It’s a spotting system thing. Happens to me all the time in rwr brs.
@@theteadrinkingowl.2295 Ahhh i knownwhatbyou mean, its like bugged and always moves with the heading of your plane and then suddenly disappears
I have reported this issue with the AJ 37, gaijin is just lazy
I don't know why people would be hating on you. I see it as pretty realistic as it isn't supposed to be a sim, as it's marketed to people who get bored of long gameplay games,like me. I like these videos because it peels back a layer of glory for the game, that doesn't mean I hate the devs or the game but it does make me conscious that most games need change to get better.
Eh, I say some controversial things at times… some people hated what I said in other videos, and for some reason latch onto hating anything that comes from me… I don’t get it, but then again I’m kinda dumb 😂
By the way, there is an extremely old inaccuracy that has been around since the Catalina 5a was added. The PBY-5a had two different landing systems. It had the wingtip floats like the pby-5 as well as wheeled gear for landing on land. They even start the 5a in water. Easy way to implement the alternative landing system is simply cycling the gears, first two button presses toggle the wheels, then next two toggle wingtip floats. Alternatively, put it in the flight menu or just a different key. Instead we get spontaneously exploding landing gear (test fly the 5a and press the landing gear button once before you start moving, it's good for a one time laugh).
I wanted to add something preemptively since it appears even Gaijin may have made a mistake and I could see it appearing for a pt.5.
There are some images from a Museum article implying the F-4EJ Kai could carry JDAMs. This is untrue according to all source documents and there are no images of one in active service carrying them. The Kai upgrade package was started before the MIL-STD-1760 wiring standardization was implemented. Before, each pylon had to be purposefully wired for a specific ordnance type. The JDAM requires this wiring package (first noted in revision c) to function, and as such could not be programmed from the cockpit.
The only iteration of the F4 that I could find that was upgraded to modern standards is the F4E/TM for Turkey
Gaijin knows about this - the EJ Kai actually HAD JDAMs on the dev server because of this, until it was reported that it couldn’t actually mount them
Gaijin prefers standard loadouts for aircraft so its unlikely we would see the LAU-88 Triple Mav loadouts. As far as I understand the reasons are the same as for the F-16, being wing stress and issues concerning rocket exhaust damaging the tail plain.
Is that Skyrim music I hear my guy.... you have earned my Respect
The Syrian su22m3 should get flare dispensers above the engine and could carry about 136 flares as opposed to the 12 fares we get in game on the right hand side of the aircraft. It should also have a missile launch warning (although that was mentioned in the review) as well at the ability to identify what type of threat the radar lock was from as well as multiple other features of the spo-15
Sorry forgot about the bit with the rwr😅
Should still get it’s proper flare count tho
gayjin:no we are not planning to add those ting however we are planing to add more premium vehicles! yay!
I agree with most of you point here just not at 4:02 since that system was added in later versions of F-4J and wasn't present at starting J version of the Phantom
There are other factors that define our F-4J as a later model, specifically Block 46, which would therefore have access to VTAS as well
Laughs in DCS AJS37 Viggen with the negative drag, going faster than it should.
The F-5E carried the AIM-9P5 which is an all aspect AIM-9J with a fairly long range front aspect lock range. I think they should be added as 2 AIM-9J’s against 6 all aspect R-60’s isn’t even close to fair
It been confirmed by the devs the F-8E missing its RWR, is not a bug. The one currently in game is an early production variant that didn’t receive the RWR upgrade.
That's a pretty stupid excuse when A: it's not accurate to an early model either, and has the name "F-8E" rather than its early name "F8U-2NE"... and B: the EARLIER model F-8C (F8U-2) DOES have the rwr!
It's not a "bug", but it's still an inaccuracy, just one caused by the devs being INTENTIONALL moronic rather than just accidentally
I feel like the helmet mounted sights wouldn’t be used much at all except for like Sim, but most people wouldn’t care enough to point the seeker at someone
In Air rb you would likely lock up by rotating the external camera and dead zones would have to be calculated, the MiG 29 was the first aircraft to use an HMD system with HOBs (R73) it would be a nice touch if Gaijin added a helmet feature instead of the likely enormous locking ring.
It could work very well in RB. You know the select target feature where you press X or MMB or whatever the default binding is these days, where you're pointing at an enemy and it highlights their silhouette and username when within visual range? That would be the in-game RB version of your pilot "looking" at the enemy. They just need to make it so the uncaged seeker AIM-9s prioritise the target you're "looking at", similar to how they work with radar locks. There's no excuse besides Gaijin being lazy.
@@lukewhitehouse4103 the problem with this is it gives some control methods a large advantage over others, vr would murder everything while flying realistic on controller would make it basically impossible, if not extremely hard to use. To keep a level playing field I’d prefer this to stay out of rb and ab but would be fine in sim
@@GrundleLongDong Have you tried playing Warthunder 3rd person in VR...
Gives you no advantages at all. I haven't played using a controller always mouse and keyboard.
Also not to be that person, but RB players want realistic mechanics, what are console players going to do when we have higher fidelity Radar controls that allow a player to use the mouse to select multiple Radar contacts.
@@lukewhitehouse4103 nope it was the f14 they had been working on it 2 years after it’s release
The AJ 37 could also not use the gun pods and RB 75s at the same time. it has to do with the anaologue dial you chose the weapon with, it had limited options. It CAN use gun pods and RB 05As however.
the Nesher should also have ccip idk if you added that last video
Cool vid keep up the good work. Btw has there been any plans for what will happen next to convertible rp, I don't think I've heard of many people using it to speed up a tech tree, instead people go for a premium pack or account time. What if the convertible rp allowed to be used on any vehicle modification research (freely instead of with GE) that way a lot more people could find a use for it, the GE research boost of researching new vehicles wouldn't need to be removed so gaijin would keep their income and the grind through the tech trees would be kept at whatever length gaijin want's to keep it. It might also help with the top tier stock grind "crysis" that everyone above rank 6 starts to face.
I mean, honestly, ASMs would be a cool thing for people who like going after ships in maps that do have them. Why not? It doesnt hurt the game.
We have TORPEDO BOMBERS and no one complains about them lol
Gaijin dosent even want to model the basic functionality of the Russian rwr in the cockpit.
the reason i think war thunder should have this stuff and be acurate like vtas and hud flir is because its alot harder to pick up a hotas and play program the hotas to bind the keys to start dcs opposed to war thunder sim
The MiG-23MLD radar set doesnt have pulse doppler. Instead, it uses MTI standing for "Moving Target Indication" to filter out ground clutter at low altitudes. I see this misconception in the war thunder community a lot, but pulse-doppler isnt the only method used to filter out ground clutter. Also since we are on the topic of inaccuracies, none of the FOX-1 missiles act like they should in game and magically all have datalink which they use to track targets.
The Sapphire uses MTI up to about 2km, due to the way MTI works it has a short range and relies on return from the ground to do its calculations, above that altitude it switches over to a pure Pulse doppler LD mode.
@@southernbear736 the Sapphire-23 radar doesnt use a pulse-doppler mode for look-down/shoot-down capability. It uses something called envelope detection for it, which only really works on flat terrain. This is the LD/SD mode you see in game after going above where MTI works. While its true that the MiG-23MLD radar set should be better at doing this due to superior electronics, its still not pulse-doppler. It does however use the doppler effect to scan targets, but it is still a different technique and far simpler than true pulse-doppler. And before you ask for a source, its Alexander Mladenov's book called "soviet cold war fighters"
Mommy
6:27,The F8U does have RWR in game, unless you're talking about a different kind of RWR.
Yeah, it received RWR after we included it’s not having one in part 1
wtf happened to the "your favourite mbt is shit" videos im still waiting for one about the abrams and the leclerc
The whole problem with "play DCS" is I cant fly ANY of the top tier jets except for (off the top of my head) mig 19, saber, 17, 21bis, hind-p, and the ground viggen. Yeah the feel of dcs is way better and radar/IR working is fantastic but I cant fly an su-22m2, mig-27k, 23mld, etc etc. The fact gaijin doesnt want to (or cannot because of any myriad of reasons) implement the realistic functions of aircraft when they themselves have used the "historical accuracy" dogma for so long is absurd. Don't commit to the bit if you can't follow through. Or, communicate your difficulties to the playerbase so players dont sit there foaming at the mouth. Latest Q&A case in point.
That helmet mounted sight would give the f4 an actual use xd
With regards to the GP bombs instead of the MC. Pretty much every British aircraft that carries 1000lb bombs in-game could and probably did use the MC bombs at some point.
If anything gaijin is making aircraft that got the M.Cs were nerfed to using the G.Ps. The Hampden used to have them but gaijin changed them to the GP bombs for some reason. Its probably some kind of balancing attempt or gaijin genuinely thinks they're the same bomb (MC has at least 100kg more explosive mass in-game so unlikely).
Every time i want to get back to british tree and i realize they have no other bomb than 1000 lbs I'am regreting even thinking about it.
Like there is this 540 lbs for Jaguar and sea vixen(yet sea vixen still carry 500lbs in all loadouts except just 4x 540 lbs)
Even as someone who couldn’t give less of a shit about air modes this is still pretty interesting just to listen too
Please for the love of anything that is considered holy in this messed up world, keep this kind of video's going!
TLDW: Radar, radar, radar. Everything about every radar is wrong
Do you have a source on the "only two Rb-75s on the Viggen" statement? I understand they were a direct upgrade from the Rb-05 MCLOS rocket that it could only carry two of initially, however I'm certain it could carry 4 of the 75s, two on the fuselage and two on the inner wing pylons. If this is wrong though, I'd love to be corrected on that!
The AJS model brought the ability to carry four simultaneously. Check the sources in the description, there’s a list of all available loadouts for the AJ37 and none of them list four Mavericks. I’m not sure exactly why, but it was a limitation of the aircraft until the AJS upgrade
the skyrim music lol
F-4EJ Kai has a copypasted RWR from F-4EJ. In real life it was digitalized J/APR-6.
It's heater missile should be a selection from AIM-9L or Type90 AAM(aka AAM-3).
It's BVR missile should start from AIM-7E-2 then final to AIM-7F/M.
Dude I even put in a bug report with all the necessary documents about the F-8E RWR and Gaijin claimed that the F-8E is a “Early” model. Like brah what???
"Early"... yet they give it the name "F-8E" rather than "F8U-2NE"... despite giving the F8U-2 LATER modifications yet not referring to it as F-8C...
Consistency brother, do you speak it??
@F22 Rapt but there isnt? they are the exact same in most situations
@F22 Rapt yeah… it’s kinda stupid it’s being at the same br… withholding the RER from it though is a pretty moronic way to address that. Hell, if the F-5A can be 11.0, the F-8E can easily be 10.7 and get its RWR
You forgot the fact that the mld is supposed to be a truck, even the phantoms out turned them
He forgot to mention it because this “fact” is untrue. MLD pilots were even able to out-dogfight F-16As. The MLD is in no way a slouch in a dogfight. In fact, almost all of the changes that make the MLD an MLD are those that increased its maneuverability and flight performance.
Yeah, you're thinking of the MiG-23P perhaps, the PVO's model. Many early models of the MiG-23 used by the VVS were also limited to around 4.5 - 5G's to account for structural weaknesses which could cause the wings to snap, but the ML versions didn't have this issue, CERTAINLY the MLD didn't!
As for G loading limits... the F-4 would be limited to 6.5, the F-8 would be limited to 6... and the Yak-38 would be one of the most manoeuvrable aircraft in game! In War Thunder though, because we're using a flying-point model in RB, and G limits aren't really a thing, we can pull whatever the airframe is capable of
1:10 i fucking love that reaction XD
Koala, I know I’m a little late here but another inaccuracy is with the centerline MER on American aircraft. Every load out option where they are included Gaijin gives them six bombs. While this might be possible on something like a Strike Eagle, it wouldn’t be used on earlier a/c.
The bottom shackles of the rear row are empty to prevent any chance of fin damage on take off. A bomb with bent fins can go anywhere. Including up into its own plane.
And then there are the dual rail Sidewinders on the F-105. No. Just no. *IF* a 105 carried a Sidewinder at all, it would be a single missile on the outside rail with an ECM pod on the opposite side. There is nothing to indicate the Thud ever carried the twin rail* in combat let alone two of them with FOUR AIM-9s. It’s a goddamn bomber that was called a fighter-bomber because it had a gun and to keep pilots (who always want fighter assignments) happy.
*I did find a single photo of an F-105G WW being tested with a pair of SIDEARMS in place of the SHRIKE. But at that point the F-105 was no longer in use by any active duty USAF squadrons.
The dual sidewinder racks are a part of the F-105D's weapons delivery manual, so even if they never flew with them in active duty, it's good enough for Gaijin. With the upcoming ordnance customization feature I do hope we'll have the ability to mount assymetric missile loads on aircraft like the F-105, since if you're actually using it as a bomber either in air or ground, you should never need four Sidewinders anyway, but we'll have to see if Gaijin gives the F-105 that feature. We might be waiting a while for that, but the ability to carry a dual Sidewinder rack on a single side and either an ECM pod (if we get things like that) or just an extra 750lb bomb, sounds good to me.
As for the bomb racks, you'll find a large number of images from Vietnam of F-4E's flying with the MER filled completely. It might not have been standard, but again, it's enough for the game that it happened at all
@@theScottishKoala You appear to be correct. The information I was looking at covered USMC F-4Bs that probably didn’t/couldn’t carry a full load due to various circumstances. The hot and humid air and high hour J79s in desperate need of maintenance plus limited access to aerial refueling assets cutting down CAS loiter time, etc.*
*Yes. I love figuring out what circumstances can effect mission planning in all its glory. Too many years of old school board war games that required all sorts of logistical planning. Many games of TOBRUK where the Italian player used more water than the Germans or the Brits. If you can’t make pasta troop morale drops. 😆
First of all, to all the people just telling you to go away to DCS, go away yourselves! I will never understand why people have this mindset of, "Just let the game have problems, what's wrong with you?! Why do you CARE about something?!?!"
More importantly, I love learning this stuff, even if 90% of it won't make it into the game. As always, I'm not just here for your videos on War Thunder, I'm here to be more informed about aviation in general, no matter the topic.
On a side note, I've been looking at the F-104S ASA/M as the next likely Italian top-tier fighter, and I've got a question about it if you're more familiar with it than I am. Could it carry four AIM-9Ls, two Aspides, AND still carry the M61 Vulcan? From what I've read, the improvements to the plane seem to have allowed this, but I couldn't find any hard confirmation.
F3D AAM. I forgot the exact type and designation.
like the TES music in background
Imagine being a China main. The J7E is made up of a total of I think it's 78% different parts of Migs, and the cockpit is totally different, including 2 radar screens.. that's how different it is, but in reality, it's just the same all the other Migs. Sucks.
The viggens are missing the RB-04E and RB-15F, and even the BK-90 Mjölner sure i get why mjölner might be a bit op in a sense with 24 smaller heat shell in it but they are missing alot of the potential for AJ 37
RB-15F and BK-90 were introduced with AJ*S*-37 specifically, not the AJ-37 we have in game. On top of that, adding anti-ship missiles for top tier aircraft is pointless since 9.7-11.3 naval isn't a thing yet.
@@captainedward8278 aren't Rb-15 also capable to lock on to ground targets or AOE
@@Lord_Squirrels Newer variants which were not used on AJS-37 have such capabilities, yes.
@@captainedward8278 ah okay, i thought the RB-04 also had that, might have heard wrong or seen wrong
F-4J should be able to fly without using any of the weapon stores. Currently, the least amount of ordnance you can carry with it is a gunpod and two AIM-9Ds. This makes assessing true performance really trick. While it is not an *inaccuracy* I’d love to see it no less. As far as I can remember, all non-internal Vulcan Phantoms have this issue.
F-4J should get a rudimentary IFF system in PD mode. Yes, irl, the radar/fire control system itself could not differentiate between friend or foe, but the RIO could determine if a selected radar return was from a friendly or foe(I think it was based on velocity). Since War Thunder does not have a multi-crew system at the moment, the pilot should get IFF for radar in PD mode, as IFF is a very important tool in BVR, especially in SIM, where everyone likes to hug the ground at top tier.
F-4E should have the ability to carry a pave tack and a pave spike pod. These pods are EO laser designator pods that can allow the F-4 to acquire and drop laser guided bombs. The F-4E is also missing LGBs, even though it was among the first aircraft to use it(yes, I know it does not need them, but I still want them)
MiG-21 Bis does not have its historical R-60Ms. While the Bis was not given these missiles for balance reasons, all aspect heaters are the norm for Soviet top tier atm. Furthermore, the Bis SAU has them and is perfectly balanced. R-60Ms could also help to somewhat justify the 20k repair cost of the Bis.
Similar to the Bis and its 20k repair cost, the F-5E could be given the AIM-9P-4. This would be fairly balanced as the P-4 does not have the aerodynamic/seeker performance, or IRCCM capability of the Lima, and the F-5E would only carry 2-4 based on if Gaijin decides to give the F-5E its historical capability of carrying two underwing missiles along with two on the wingtips. This way, the F-5E could be used to introduce all aspect heaters to NATO in the most balanced way.
F-4E’s AN/APQ-120 has a ground mode where it can be used for terrain mapping and/or detecting and targeting ground targets.
AIM-7Fs are unrealistically nerfed. Their max speed is decreased from Mach 4 to just Mach 2.9. They also turn much worse then their irl performance, which was only slightly worse than that of the E-2.
MiG-21 Bis and Bis SAU can run on max reheat for eternity, whereas irl, they could only do it for 3 minutes. I think you have already covered this in the first or second one, though.
Can Gaijin plz stop pairing US and Japan against a Germany and Israel pair in prop brs? Super sus.
AIM-9G still has a 4G launch limit on the F-4J. No other Golf carrier suffers from this issue.
When firing the 4 Vulcans in the F-4E, bald eagles do not spawn in the air and hand out freedoms to everyone.
When firing the 30mm on the MiG-27s, the plane does not explode.
Iirc, the Yak-38M used R-60Ms. If Gaijin adds them to the 38M, it would need a br raise.
For the love of all that is holy, can the AV-8A please lose its 240 flares? HOLY FUCK is that thing the most annoying premium to fight in the game.
JA Viggen should get a radar gunsight, as it does not have any tracer rounds for its gun.
Most of these we already brought up, such as the Pave Tack/Spike pod on the F-4E and Paveways for it, or its ground radar.
As for the AIM-7F, no. All the official manuals and such state a maximum top speed of Mach 2.9, not 4. F-5E was also incapable of carrying underwing Sidewinders, that was reserved for the likes of F-5M or F-5S (which could also carry AMRAAMs)
@@theScottishKoala What are your sources on that max speed of mach 2.9 claim? I haven't seen anything that would indicate that the missile can't exceed mach 2.9.
The F4J doesn't have the Napalm canisters
You should play DCS tho. I fly the F-16 for multiple hours a day with only using keyboard and mouse and an Xbox controller.
Love your videos. all these thinks would make it better tbh... Keep up the content!
while sure i do agree DCS has a level of realism that is higher than war thunder i still agree that some of these thing you point out in these videos are out right egregious short comings like that Jag using bombs that are 40 years too old and those RWR things would sure be nice like the range to whats locking you i would like some of these addressed
IIRC AJ37 maverick are correct. The AJS mod made it capable of 4 mavericks
The AJS made it capable of carrying four Mavericks at the same time, yes, but the AJ model could carry them on the outer pylons OR the inboard ones. There are sources in the description, and photos of the AJ model carrying two Mavericks on the outer pylons long before the AJS upgrade existed
@@theScottishKoala Ah I see, thanks for the clarification
F-5E could carry Radar Missiles AiM-7's, and it could carry both Radar and heat seekers, I love this aircraft as it was the inspiration to the f-16 wing design, but since we don't have an f-16 then the closest thing I got is the f-5E and they fucked it up
F-5E never carried AIM-7's, possibly you're thinking of the F-20 Tigershark? Either way, the SUPER modern upgrades like F-5M or F-5S have carried AMRAAMs, and the Taiwanese version was updated to carry Sky Sword (similar to AMRAAM) but I don't think they ever mounted the Sparrow
@@theScottishKoala really? I saw a video that showed the f-5E being able to carry sparrow in one of the pictures, but I can't find the video any more, it was someone talking about what war thunder forgot to add in specific aircraft, but yh, it was probably the F-20, idk I saw the video and the guy didn't show what kind of aircraft it was it looked like an f5e but I guess not idk, but I'll keep searching, again the video probably showed it to be the f-20 ill try finding it, but I didn't know.
@@theScottishKoala found it, at 1:37, it doesn't tell which type of F-5 but all it says is F-5 documentary, my bad if I got the f5e mixed with something else. ua-cam.com/video/MTSxNLaQ7YE/v-deo.html
@@WOLFER. F-20 was initially known as F-5G. It's basically an F-5E but with a single engine similar to the F-16 (it was actually the competitor to the F-16 but never entered service). It looks very similar, especially from the front. Easy mistake to make.
Either that, or it could have been talking about one of the upgraded models with AMRAAMs, which visually are almost identical to the F-5E
@@theScottishKoala ah ok, btw I've been meaning to ask thus question, should they add vapours to the aircraft so we can better identify if the aircraft is pulling hard or not, cuz all though ps4 doesn't have the new rwr sound, it might not get this small feature I'd it does become a thing. (And yh apparently ps4 and maybe xbox don't get the new rwr sounds, but the new gen consoles do) I don't see the reason as to why it can be, although it could be sony being a b*tch again idk, but we I was wrong and mixed it up, thank you for letting me know ow which did and didn't. Peace ✌
SPO is also present on Mi-35M in cockpit and its antenas are outside modeled on it. It should be also on Hind D and Hind P. Maybe for the next video? Well I do hope Gaijin will work on RWR. That thing at the moment is obsolete.
I’ve always wondered what’s peoples stance on ships with missile launchers not rocket launchers maybe if they had some sort of counter would people try it out just something I’ve always been curious about
Unfortunately there’s just not a whole lot of actual gameplay to be had when it comes to more modern ships with SSM’s - if a missile is launched at you it’s pretty much game over.
You forgot the block to sparrows that the f4e that got nerfed to a 3 mile launch range even tho irl they could launch 6 miles or that it took them 3 years to give us the block 2 even tho they never had the block ones mounted on the f4e
I am sure they are working on it all. They also have a number of inaccuracies in helos and ships as well. for example the Koln should have ASM but I am sure at this date and time it would be unbalanced AF
And apaches should be able to use brimstone missiles and agm114 l
The F104's NASARR can lock a target up to 40km away.
See Periscope film
The AJ37 doesn't even have a pd radar lmao
Is....Is...Is that Skyrim music in the background of this video?
the JA37 should have a radar reticles for its non tracers rounds and also for its anti air rockets.
I am more worried about lack of interes from Gaijin to fix old shit like flying with 1 wing
6:44 I don't got the money for DCs
I do think a middle launch warning. Would be awesome .
the mid 23mld is missing 3ton of thrust on its engine!!
Personally I’d like to see war thunders f14A (no pheonix all other gaijin nerfs apply) vs a fully capable mld, my money is on the mld
How about no? It's OP as it is.
ngl i need more of these
I mean I enjoy these videos in the sense that Gaijin "could" improve the game in that way. I have got to admit the British Bombs thing is a massive handicap to aircraft that rely on bombing targets to get kills.
FINALLY SOMEONE NOTICES I’M TIRED OF BEING STUCK WITH 1000 POUNDERS THAT ARENT EVEN GOOD. For missile warning they were in game for a while, but removed since this was op at the time. Now since there’s basically only missiles now, it’d be perfect and help a bit. They could add it a bit later when we go to 4th gen.
Missile warning for Sidewinders was kinda bogus… RWR warning for Sparrows and such would be great though
The only aircraft actually in service with a MAW is the A-10C and late F-16C Block 50s starting in the 2010s, otherwise only radar guided missiles will give you a warning.
@@southernbear736 few Russian aircraft have it as well
@@theScottishKoala Regardless of nation, without a lead computing gun sight the guns for these aircraft will be extremely hard to use if not impossible.
The AJ37 air to ground missels can’t be fired at night in war thunder :/
That’s accurate to real life actually
Lol, well shit I’ll be damned
would be kind of cool to see you play a bit of DCS tho, might get badly destroyed in PVP tho.
Oh I will be aggressively shit. That’s half the fun! 😂
My RB 75s doesn't wanna track moving targets, what am I doing wrong?
Skyrim soundtrack in the background?
one more thing is the aim7F is not mach 4 off rail in game and it was irl
Pretty sure it is. The stat card says 2.9 but that’s only counting it’s secondary burner. Could be wrong though, yet to see anyone actually go and test the numbers
Manuals state a max speed of m2.9 not mach 4
@@theScottishKoala hey that could be a cool vid testing the fox ones in game
people forget there are other gamemodes other then ground RB and AB, Anti ship missles would be useful in Any air mode. and fun.
Anti ship missiles on planes that can’t even see those ships
@@patriotic-panda There are ship targets in both Air rb and Air sim. Once again there are WHOLE GAMEMODES that are around people over look. EDIT: theres also ship targets in Air AB too.
@@GingahJ there are ship targets in air RB, but not generally at top tier, for some reason
You have documents for F105? Because i do and there is absolutely nothing about CCRP mode like its presented in WT. Its similar but its not true CCRP.
Check the description for sources