More Aircraft that Shouldn't be Added to War Thunder
Vložit
- čas přidán 27. 07. 2024
- ◄► Livestreaming weekly here on CZcams
Every Friday
═════════════════════════════════
◄► Check out our other channel Armor Cast for military reviews and documentaries
/ armorcast
═════════════════════════════════
◄► Support the channel!
pleds.to/thescottishkoala
◄► Twitter!
/ sc0ttishkoala
◄► Discord!
/ discord
◄► Merch!
teespring.com/stores/thearmory
═════════════════════════════════
0:00 Intro
1:51 IA58 Pucara
4:07 Westland Welkin
6:08 Fouga Magister
8:01 Fuji T-1
10:00 AC-130 Gunship
12:45 Interesting Aircraft that COULD be Added - Hry
Hornet kinda borked now though ngl...
Now that hispanos don't really spark its amazing I honestly find it easier to get kills with than the f-82
Yeah now that it got it's br upped it now fights 7.0 jets too. Shame because it is one of my fav piston planes
Speaking of that segment, maybe put Norway back into its previous position as a frequently occurring map?
Borked? :/
also to be honest why does everybody beg about the ac 130. Why not the Douglas Ac 47 Spooky. it seems more practical and its an older plane which was the largest part of war thunder right?
The AC130 could be a good april fools event, and will function like the nuke in game. Needing to acquire a certain SP to use it
But why...
It's not good idea, it wouldn't work at all i WT. Gunships work if enemy doesnt hava AA capabilities. Ac130 would go down in seconds after being deployed.
I have questions can ac130 fly above their missile range and help ground friendly?
@@BOTmaster15 spawn it above 15km, theres no SPAA capable of reaching that high
Would be bad ass it would be like COD death from above
@@soto1649 don't think too hard about it, an april fools events is just that, an april fools event. An event meant for trolling around
Why not have more AI bomber formations for interceptors and fighters to shoot at as objectives? And for player bombers to tuck into. Bonus points if player bombers spawn in as a bomber formation leader and the ai follows the player and bombs the objective.
Because war thunder is almost fun
@@masol3726 Yip, can't make it fun for some players and not the rest. So we all have to almost have fun, it is the only way comrade.
Literally everyone dream
It won't work
It will be awesome
You can do that just fine in the war thunder campaigns and missions
The F-117 being difficult to lock onto for SAMs could actually help with the SAM AA spam we see a lot, because then people would instead start using ballistic AA more rather than missiles.
i think the ac 130 would be cool as like a atrillery for mbt's
Huh not a bad idea
So kind of like a call in AI controlled vehicle
That would be a great feature since an SPAA could shoot it down and stop the artillery strike from happening.
Imagine it dropping you off when you spawn in a MBT
Yeah true like the Arcade battles aircraft callin where you need a specific amount of kills to get it
If the Sk 60’s in game, I don’t see any problem with the Magister being added. Also keep in mind it would almost never reach its top speed and most 6.0+ props can catch it. And yes the AS.11 is a well known loadout option on both the Magister and Zéphyr, which was used for training for pilots that would later fire AS.12s and AS.30s on larger aircraft.
The sk.60 is much MUCH more well armed though.
@@evanceier8577 hence its higher BR yes. It’s also 15+ years younger than the magister.
@@cedjoe6 I'm saying that justifying the addition of one using the other doesn't make sense since they aren't actually comparable.
@@evanceier8577 they are though, since they’re the same type of aircraft, though they’re from two different eras. Both would end up facing much older jets so they can stay competitive.
@@cedjoe6 I'm sorry I just think your logic is flawed on this one.
Agree to disagree?
Honestly, I would be in favor of the AC-130 being implemented as an artillery style call-in.
If there were multiple call-in options, with their own pros and cons, I think it could work well.
Worked for CoD
@@CharliMorganMusic Yeah cause call of duty is an infantry game not a veichle game lmfao
Exactly like imagine you could choose from heavy arty with a long reload or light arty with short reload.
Long range arty and short range arty
In fact for BR 5.0+ the Schwerer Gustav that one German can call once a game.
@@personthing88 They already did something like that but removed it
Yeah I feel like if they did something along the lines of what insurgency sandstorm does, then it’d be a lot more fun than “press 5 and wait for a mark”
When, and i do mean WHEN, the A-10 comes, i suspect that 1 of two things will happen.
either 1) the community will be annoyed because its cannon does not live up to its legendary status as a tank buster
or
2) the cannon will be overpowered compared to reality due to the fame.
I know which one I would i would prefer.
3)is useless because it gets easily killed by AA guns and other planes
It had like 90 pen right? That's probably what it will be and that will be decent. The things that will make it hard to balance are the 8 Mavericks and late sidewinders.
@@DarthCody700 Pretty sure the way the gun worked is that it focused a shitton of 30mm shells into one area, overloading it and eventually breaking through said armor
@@tiznaeshnishto2584 in an area of 40ft is saturated in the 30mm shells plus light vehicles are just gone from one short burst and being able to slap MBTs from the side is going to be fun
@@DarthCody700 try 150mm with DU APFSDS rounds. Hell, the GAU-13 pods on the A-7 have over 100mm, and the A-10 obviously has quite a bit more
The thing with both the Su-25 frogfoot and the A-10 thunderbolt is that they would actually fit in pretty well. Yes they would be sitting ducks in air RB but in ground battles i can see them working. I would however keep away those high-end missles purely to keep it slightly more balanced, we playing a game aftherall, it’s supposed to be fun, not 100% real life!
It would actually be fine with 50km ranged ground attack missiles, an enemy plane or even some sam's could still kill it
I’d be happy just hearing that 30mm in game tbf
Yeah, it wouldn't be able to have AIM9Ls. Its flight performance is worthy of 6.7, AIM9Ls are top tier missiles. It would HAVE to be top tier for air RB if it carried AIM9Ls. Anything lower than 11.0 and it would face too many enemies that don't have flares.
What? If your at 9.0 or whatever the hell you think it’s fun? No way in hell.
I could see the A model of it being added with its poor electronics and spotting systems but in general, despite what "the reformers" might tell you, it's not a good plane and one of the only reasons its still operational today is because insurgents don't have tunguskas
Love the Skyrim OST in the background. Makes me nostalgic. Maybe too nostalgic. I’d better see about finally getting breath of the wild before I start another stealth archer play through.
Ten years yesterday since that glorious piece of history released.... wow how time flies
@@theScottishKoala they even released a new anniversary edition! Time to get back at it again
@@rukinaa I swear if Bethesda release another version of the Skyrim edition I’ll lose my sh*t I’ve been playing that game for a decade now patiently waiting for them to release the next elder scrolls chapter
@@ra7238 I know, I was hoping for a new elder scrolls game aswell! Sadly that did not happen… fingers crossed we get one soon!
I'm a bit late, but I'm glad I wasn't the only one who noticed it!
The most British part of this video is your speed in km/hr and your altitude in feet.
As far as I know all aviation has altitude in feet, airspeed in knots, and distance in nautical miles. The difference is to minimise potential confusion in radio comms.
I can't understand why anyone would do this
@@oodlesofnoodles4660 You know what's less confusing? METRIC
@@CharliMorganMusic as if
@@CharliMorganMusic we use knots, or nautical miles, since they are based on the circumference of the Earth. 360 degrees, take one degree, divide it by 60, good job, that’s a nautical mile. It simplifies navigation.
Still waiting for the B-26 Marauder. You know, a bomber produced in the thousands? It'd also be neat to see the F-111, unless you already talked about that and I forgot
Honestly crazy that it still isn't here. I'm more interested in seeing the B-23 Dragon though, if for no other reason than IT'S CALLED THE FKN DRAGON!!!
@@theScottishKoala the B-26 and the B-24J have been planes I've been arguing for basically since I started playing this game back in beta. It kind of boggles my mind that the J model B-24, aka the most iconic variant (and I think the most produced?) still isn't in game. even if it's a foldered vehicle, I feel like its worth having.
@@theScottishKoala dude the f111 actually carried 6 aim 54 or commonly known as the Phoenix missiles
@@cristobalalvarez5491 No, the prototype F-111B which was the failed naval version was supposed to carry these missiles, but none of the production variants ever did
@I_Commission_DSPriscilla_Art you know… I wouldn’t put it past em
Interestingly enough, the Pucara was just discovered in datamining for the Winged Lions 1st dev server.
Gaijin probs leaked it on purpose for him xD
I think F-117 wouldnt work because of Sim Battles, since there, you would need to take off, try to find an enemy and spot the F-117 with your primitive radar while trying to get a lock with either Infrared missiles or Radar lock ( which for planes like the MiG-21 would not work in the slightest ) probably the only ones able to get a suceful chance to down the F-117 would be modern SPAA like the Tunguska and Roland but even, the F-117 can just spawn at 4km of altitude and bomb them with guided bombs
Or you could just shoot them down with guns. As far as I know jets are usually fitted with cannons that fire bullets and don't require a radar lock. The F117 is subsonic and would not be difficult to hit. Literally any SAM with manual guidance capabilities for their missiles could down an F117 as long as they can physically see it. The F117 also loses much of its radar deflecting capabilities while its bomb bay is open, allowing it to be locked on prior to dropping its ordnance.
@I_Commission_DSPriscilla_Art in all fairness if you get used to the trajectory of the missle manual guiding isn't too hard. It's one of the ways to counter long range cas.
@I_Commission_DSPriscilla_Art I hope you understand I'm talking about how easy it would be to shoot down an F117 in WT. In real life it was actually incredibly difficult and required a lot of prior planning in order to properly intercept one with a missile. In WT it really isn't difficult to hit a target at max range with manual guidance. At the very least the 2S6 has excellent thermals to help you guide your missile.
One of the primary weaknesses to radar stealth is that engines still produce heat, so planes with IRST or thermal sights could quite easily still pick it up. And as long as you've got guns on your plane the BR it'd be at would have to deal with planes that are just outright faster than it. Also, an extremely unusual shape would make it very easy to identify by sight. Radar lock is really the only thing that would have any issues with the 117, and even than the game has manual guidance that is far easier to manage than it would be in real life.
@I_Commission_DSPriscilla_Art My comment was following up on the other comments regarding how Gaijin could implement the F117 into the game while making it balanced. Gaijin developers try to be realistic when adding new vehicles or features into the game, so if they were to make a stealth plane then they would probably refine their radar code and use that as a balancing factor, ie the bomb bay disrupting the F117s stealth.
I do think the MIG-25PD could be added at 11.0, it would be a neat missile platform, I really want to try the R-40s lol.
edit: Paveways are already in game, they are on the Jaguar GR.1A, just with the british designation.
Yeah I think people would think it’s fast speed would save it from its poor maneuverability, while in reality it takes forever to get up to speed at low alts
maybe not the 25 considering it doesnt have a gun, i think the mig 31 would be a better choice
@@pancake5830 Didn’t know it had no gun
@@pancake5830 The 31 is a huge step from the 25. That would include simultaneous attack with 4 missiles each with 160km ranges, the only potential counter would be an F-14, which brings the same capability but with 6 shot simulatenous attack. Both aircraft would completely ruin the balance for other aircraft which could not hope to counter their range without much more modern weapons.
@@reillybrangan2182 keep in mind that the mig 31 weighs 21820kg vs the f14 that weighs over 3 tons less and has moving wings, which makes it an incredibly strong dogfighter whilst still having a top speed of mach 2.34.
in dcs for example (a very realistic flight sim with modern fighters) the f14 is one of the best dogfighters in the game
I've always imagined the AC-130 performing as a kind of Scorestreak, in-between Lineup vehicles and the Nuclear Bomber. Limited time usage as it circles around the battlefield, first arriving around 7.7 maybe.
So the Welken being added would be like real life? Good against high altitude planes but by the time it was introduced/ added to game there was less high altitude planes?
I think that the Pucara could be added to the game, since there are already turboprop planes like the wyvern and the A2D1, rather the Pucara for Germany, France or Great Britain would be a very good addition, because its firepower is not exaggerated. and its load is very good without becoming too much for an acceptable br, also its speed is high but not much, rather I dare to say that the wyvern is faster, if they put it a good br it would be 5.3, 5.7. Already if they put the missiles like the Martin Pescador or the guided bombs Dardo II, it would have to have a higher br of 6.0 up, obvious without exaggeration
Lockheed YF-12B: This plane can fly at 2,070 mph. That means it would be impossible to keep the plane on the air map (about 40.38 x 40.38 miles in size, or 1 min 10 seconds to cover the map end to end at full speed). It was also armed only with Aim-47 air-to-air missiles with a blistering speed of 3,069 mph. It only carries 3 of these missiles. No guns we fast enough to mount on this plane.
It would also take the entire map's size to complete a turn in it.
YF-12 could probably work on maps like English Channel, but even then it would just be a Mach 3.5 meme machine.
Crucified no. Me politely disagreeing with your opinion on the AC 130 yes.
Explain then
I'm sorry but he's right what exactly are you going to do with it if you take it into air battles you'll be killed easily
Explain your point
It coupe balanced in air and if it was added it would be either the worst or best cas aircraft in the entire game and could break the game in mixed battles or be the worst in the game
@@tundefilmsproduction7726 worse, its a support aircraft, its a easy target
You failed to mention that the a10 carries a LOT of countermeasures
Wait what countermeasures?
so does the jaguar A, but it's a very bad aircraft
@@LeMeowAuchaff+flares
A6M8. Basically the ultimate zero, both for air and cas as it could also carry a 500kg bomb
"I'd put my money on the A-10 Warthog coming in 2022"
damn, got that right
“A-10 coming in 2022”
What crystal ball do you own
I wonder if they’ll ever add trainer aircraft for tutorials and maybe a specialized training battle type or maybe an event almost like top gun. Id also love to see observation aircraft as-well maybe to mark targets and giving 3rd person bomb sights for bombers in RB if an observation aircraft is near the target, this could also allow for large tactical bombers like the Peacemaker and B-52. Idk could be something pretty interesting.
I like the idea of the A-10 and F-117 being added, for novelty and cool factor alone. Though I imagine that the A-10 will be a fiery deathtrap like every aircraft of mid-tier and above.
and then people will whine about it how easy it is to kill the A-10 despite the fact that in real life it eats shit too lmao
@@v0id683 took 18 sams
@@mr.mercuryidk3757 source?
@@v0id683 look it up lmao, they weren’t insanely modern but they weren’t completely obsolete, it was either in Kuwait in 1991 or in Iraq in 1999
@@mr.mercuryidk3757 "look it up lmao" isn't an source
Him: The A-10 should not be added to War Thunder.
Gaijin: And I took that personally.
The A-10 was part of the section where we listed vehicles that in fact SHOULD be added.
"I'd put my money on the A10 coming in 2022..."
That's one hell of a prediction, man! Bullseye!
exactly what i was thinking
The A-10 would be an amazing jet to dog fight with, because it detects all missile launches, yes even IR missiles. So you know when to pop flares and to evade. It also turns insanely well if your not fully loaded. I think for sure they would have to nerf it's payload to not make it extremely OP against ground vehicles, but we shall see what they do with it when the time comes.
12:30 who else was listening to the Skyrim Soundtrack in the background
Gaijin could always make modern vehicles with a ww2 performance have the mechanic of multiple spawns like reserve vehicles and a very low repair cost. Also make it an aircraft that you have to reach a certain br in a certain tree to unlock for research.
Edit: Like the osu aircraft or the french ww1 tanks.
So kind of like the Bronco argument, do you think we could see the AC-130 in the heli tree? If heli EC and air RB were slightly reworked, I think they could fit it in as a ground pounder, which it could do pretty well, since gun penetration is not a factor. They would also have access to flares and AGMs for protection
If heli EC is completely reworked maybe but then you would need to adjust multiple thing and find equivalent for other nation like for the bronco
It's fun coming back to this video after the A-10 was added
I wish we could have “variable BRs”, for aircraft that have hyper modern weaponry but performance of a WW1 triplane, where as you research modifications it’d raise the BR of the plane, like the A-1 Skyraider with AIM-9s, flare pods, or Hydras would drive the A-1 from 6.0 to 7.3 or something. It could let gaijin add a lot of cool vehicles
and obviously the toilet bomb would make it 11.7
A-1 never had Sidewinders in regular service. It served as the test platform for the AIM-9A, that's it. Never had flares either
@@theScottishKoala I don’t mean to be an “um actually” kinda guy but I found a photo of the flare pods, I posted it in #gaijin-please-gib chat in your discord
I just wanted to use the A-1 as an example, I don’t know any more examples
@@theScottishKoala Apparently it could use AN/ALE-29; I myself have absolutely no imagery for it, though.
@Zac Badham nah fam, replace the nuke in ground battles for a toilet for American teams at that br. Perfect.
I think the AC130 could be a squad vehicle that can only be operated by a squad of players, in which case I think it would be quite a cool vehicle to fly, but again, biggest target in the sky (though this could be solved by placing it at maybe 5000m-10,000m)
Doesn’t help - the AC-130 is already utterly useless in air battles, and at that altitude would also be useless in ground battles since it’d barely be able to penetrate LIGHT tanks top down from that range!
Gaijin are also strictly against multicrew vehicles in game
@I_Commission_DSPriscilla_Art Bofors says "no." There is no situation where that plane would do well. To do its job, it'd be like hovering an Apache in the middle of the battlefield for everyone to shoot at. Wouldn't survive in even a 2.3 battle.
Don't forget that the MIG-25 also eats its engines at those high speeds, it'd be interesting to see if it would be modeled with that "feature"
About the Pucará (and onter turboprop moden light attackers, like the Super Tucano), I think they could be a new class, with lower point requirement to spawn. They are not more powerful than AHs with rockets only that can be spawned at game start anyway, and would feed SPAA nice kill counts if properly countered.
This is one I’ve never really heard before and it’s one of my favorite aircraft ever. I would love to see you opinion on the B-36. It’s an obsoletely ginormous aircraft but by my observation it doesn’t seem to be too unbalanced in the BRs above the B-29. It has many different variants and I would like to have a voice for this aircraft. Again, I never hear anyone talking about it but I would like your opinion on it. Thanks :D
I think it could work above b-29 given that you have to be in hugging distance to lock onto it with missiles when only propellers are active
Gaijib pls gib XB-49
B36, B47, Canberra variants,
I would also love the B-36 and I think it would probably work better than the B-29 as a final send off to the heavy prop part of the bomber line. Plus I also just want to see how obscenely massive the B-36 would be in game
B-36 oh yes, especially with a pair of T-12 Cloudmakers in its belly.
The museum I volunteer at has an Israeli Magister which we were planning on adding 20mm cannons too (replicas of them)
If you ever make another video like this, I think you should include the YF-12, which was an experimental interceptor based off of the A-12, the predecessor to the SR - 71. This thing had the highest top speed of any armed aircraft, was equipped with only beyond visual range missiles, it also probably needed lots of altatuide and handled like a truck at speed. So, at least in the current state of WT, definitely not viable
Agreed, I think it would be woefully out of place, even as a premium
This is my simple opinion of Aircraft like the Bronco, and this can also apply to SPAA and other similar vehicles.
Why not simply have them at a high-ish RB, respective of their time period (give or take), but make their gimmick be lower spawn cost?
I would not see many complaints from people if the Bronco or Pucara spawns cheaper than an A-4B or F-84 to deliver it's relatively lighter ordnance relatively slower. This also works for many many other aircraft in the post war period that are modern but lacking, things like trainers/ emergency fighters, cheap light ground attackers, etc.
Very similar to how light tanks were balanced before
100% agree it shouldn't be added ATM. Because even though I personally have no qualms with it being high BR, Gaijin will do the way of the R3 T20, Firecrest, or PBV 301 and just cram it into a low BR even to the lengths of removing ordnance/ ammo types/ crew from it to 'balance' it at such a low BR. I once made a joke that if Gaijin removed the APDS and TOW's of a M2 Bradley they would put it at BR 2.3... sometimes I fear the idea of waking up one day and seeing that.
IIRC the one of the Bronco's primary roles was spotting for artillery and naval gun fire. so you have that be it's gimmick, it's an aircraft that can call in artillery fire.
@@MarkoDash you make that a mechanic, and you could also get stuff like Rosie the Rocketeer, an L-4 Grasshopper with artillery calls and six bazookas under the wings.
@@MarkoDash That idea honestly fascinates me as it would allow so many spotters into WT and even play a part in Air battles in terms of ground attack. As functionally there's little difference between dropping a bomb on a pillbox and dropping artillery on one.
I would love if AIr RB is fixed so that attackers actually mean something first. But it would work well.
F117 could be locked by radar tough, sams can use irst and even radar at some distances can lock it.
Serbia used 1960's sams to shoot 1 down and damage 2 more, without irst, they knew where it was coming tough.
Most sams in game could lock onto it at the distances most planes fly in game, im not so sure about air radars but they probably can too
None of our aircraft radars could lock it from any angle. Of course the MiG-23's have IRST as will later Soviet fighters, but as for ground radars, a few could lock it from closer ranges, not that it'll be AT closer ranges with two Paveways
@@theScottishKoala most sams have irst,if used correctly then yes it could stay out of range but even yourself in the video using the paveways got close.
Most of the playerbase would stay close even with stealth.
The f117 doesn't have an internal gun? Or gunpods, i remember reading, it might have been a prototype or other aircraft
@@Ropetor Yeah no guns, no AAM's. It was PLANNED to equip it with Sidewinders but that never happened
@@theScottishKoala that's it, after they where shot in Serbia they where put out of service and it was never upgraded
Lots of comments about your AC-130 bit, though, they could add one of the later variants with guided munitions mounted on the wings, though you are correct about flying and shooting and generally that auto pilot idea would be a solution, but I do agree, it would be easy pickings for Anti-Air
How you would feel about the Supermarine Type-545? A Mach 1.3-1.7 Capable fighter with 4 ADEN 30mm Canons, and 4 Firestreak missiles. Sadly it never actually flew. It was a week away from its first flight, when funding was pulled, and the project was scrapped. But it was a fully functional airframe, based off the earlier Supermarine Swift, with major improvements.
I’m always iffy on prototype only aircraft (especially non-flying prototypes) being added. Generally I only think it should happen when absolutely necessary to fill gaps in trees, which this aircraft is not really
The a10 is an interesting one, I've gone back and forth on both ends of the spectrum.
At this point all I want to say is, add it and see what happens. We won't know if we don't try.
It'll struggle at 5.0 and above. Hilariously bad against even early monoplanes.
@@CharliMorganMusic Well you can't expect a bomber win in a dogfight against a fighter now can't you?
People just don't seem to understand that the AC-130 was used for anti-infantry and not AT...
What about artillery vehicles? They were used against fortifications and infantry not tanks yet we have em in game.
Having refueler missions would be pretty sweet, maybe instead of capturing or destroying a point your mission could be to escort a KC-46 or DC-4 through a battle. IDK how accurate this could be but you could have a vulnerable refueler aircraft fr each team in higher BRs that could refuel, rearm and maybe repair jets.
You should do a list of planes that would be interesting to add to war thunder for jet game play and possibly even a video of possible add in planes and how they would extend br tiers or modify the current br
Personally I think they should eventually add the A-10 thunderbolt, that's just my opinion tho. What do you guys think?
It would just probably be a much slower Mig27M
@@claverse5478 yeah but it'd be american, plus the warthog is probably one of the best vehicles in air combat in the world surprisingly, due to its high manuverability and turn rate along with the ability to have an insane ammount of flares, chaff and missiles
@@allusivegore6299 I agree but you still have the problems of SPAAs since it's slower than most planes. The only thing that helps it would just be mavericks.
Imagine the meme ace potential with an AC-130
The A-10 would also have anti radar missiles with over 50km of range and over 20km of range on the thermal equiped AGMs
Coming back to this video after the A-10's release the A-10 part of this video really matches.
you again make the "timetravel" argument while ignoring several planes that already do, including the F4U-7 thats from 1965 in the version we have it and that fights WW2 planes
F4U-7 is just a variant of a World War 2 aircraft that happened to be USED into the 60's... same deal with the A-1 Skyraider. Completely different situation to the Pucara. Which is a completely new aircraft, ANOTHER ten years newer, yet would be an even LOWER br (around the 5.0 range max). If you can't see a difference there I don't know what to say.
The Sk60b as another example... I just think needs a br raise, as having those two guided AGM's at 7.3 is kinda broken, and raising it to 8.0 it wouldn't really be out of time anymore
@@theScottishKoala the a1 is post ww2 I thought?
@@theScottishKoala A-1 skyraider is not a WW2 aircraft
while yes, its prototype the YBT2D was build during WW2 it still took a while for the finished plane to materialize itself in the early 50s with the AD-1 (A-1A)
F4U-7 also is not a WW2 aircraft, as it does share barely any parts of original WW2 corsairs.
also, what about the BE-6? its a 1950s aircraft at BR 5.0 or so
@@IronPhysik Skyraider is a WW2 vehicle as much as for example the IS-3 is a WW2 vehicle - it entered service just after, but it’s very much a WW2 design.
As for the Corsair… it’s still fundamentally a WW2 aircraft - it’s just another F4U Corsair. Whether it shares commonality with the models built during the war is irrelevant.
As for the Be-6, I feel like it could do with a br raise just to keep it more in line, but at the same time it’s already not that useful (I’ve said the same in the past about the PT-76 for example). HOWEVER, there’s a big difference between a bomber from the 50’s fighting WW2 aircraft, and a counter-insurgency aircraft from the mid to late 70’s…
@@theScottishKoala
holy shit no
the late models of the 2 aircraft are absolutely not WW2 aircraft
the A-1 entered service after WW2 in 1946 and was quickly upgraded with modern tech to stay relevant
it is not and never was a WW2 aircaft nor design, because its WW2 "prototype" has VERY LITTLE in common with the serial A-1 models
saying that a AD-6 (A-1H) or AD-7 (A-1J) are WW2 birds is utterly stupid, because they feature stuff like ejection seats, modern 14 and 30" bomb racks and a low attack bomb sight in the AD-7...
next, the F4U-7 is also not a WW2 corsair as it is using AU-1 airframes, the AU-1 was a redesign of the corsair and saw lots of changes to it, the F4U-7 then took that AU-1 frame and replaced the original engine with a more capable one.
its exactly like the relationship between F-8 and A-7 or are you saying these 2 are also the same aircraft?
AC130 could be used as air support (like a bomber) in assault ground arcade imo. Maybe not for players to fly, but it could be good fun using the cannons on all those ground targets
Thank you for the excellent video! Cheers!
For things like the OV-10 they are extremely hard to implement but I have a feeling if they don’t have missiles and guided bombs they could fit around 7.0-8.0 like the A2D-1 although it still might not work.
Good points on these. End of the day some of these like the AC-130 would be difficult to use for the casual player. That being said, I would still campaign for it in game along with every other vehicle listed here. I personally don't always want meta. Sometimes I want something fun and different even if it's for the meme. I mean hell, I'd love to fly around in a L-4 Grasshopper with the bazookas strapped to the wings as a premium aircraft. As funny as the argument is, I will still die on the hill of "if someone bolted a machine gun onto a tractor and drove it into stalingrad, put it in game". Let's just have fun again :)
I also want Bazooka Charlie’s L-4, that would be fun!
Also, that Yugoslav tractor with the Dshk would be Bob-Semple levels of meme and can actually destroy tanks
Im a noob for not realizing that the meta changed from high-altitude fights to mid-low altitude fights lol
And I m just too lazy to climb to see that the meta changed
One that I think *could* be added, or explored as an option, would be the TSR-2. It's pretty legendary as a prototype, but I truthfully don't know how much is actually out there about it's performance or planned warload. From what I do know, the project was very far along when it was unceremoniously canned, so there may be actual flight test data that could be obtained.
I think the spooky could work as a event vehicle,
or, god help me, if they finally added 2 player bomber control. Adding the ability for one player to gun while the other flies could be pretty cool for the game broadly.
I do also think the spooky has a potential role in Sim battles, both as an AI plane and potentially a player plane.
Well if they have nuke on ground rb already then they can add the AC-130 as a kill streak I guess? I think the howitzer with overpressure can actually meme a lot of tanks especially NATO tanks with all the flat top design, but then again it was suppose to be operating under total air superiority so it just a giant ass target for all the SPAA and planes.
I was one of the people who begged against the introduction of a Foxbat. It's overall flight performance is the reason why. The subsonic speeds at deck is horrible for a vehicle with that kind of armament, making it the meta playstyle to climb until you can get an energy advantage over your enemies. Kind of similar to how frustrating a Yak-38 is since it has poor flight performance for its BR but amazing armament.
Thing is, the MiG-25 succeeds where the Yak-28 fails - keeping its enemies at arm's reach. The MiG-25 has no need to dogfight you if it can kill you with an R-40 from 25km away, but the Yak-38, in order to accomplish anything, HAS to get around onto your six for a close-range missile shot
@@theScottishKoala So isn't that what I said? As long as the Yak-38 gets behind you, which is very easy to do with an airspawn especially in a downtier it's a done deal except when it engages with you in any other way(dogfight, headon, etc.) it starts to diminish compared to other planes. But it sits at a BR of 9.3 because of it's poor flight performance.
My point with the MiG-25 is that if it engages with an enemy any other than way than long range missile sniping it diminishes even compared to 10.0 aircraft which is why it will probably end up way undertiered compared to it's actual armament performance, just like the Yak-38
MiG-25 wasn't really subsonic near sea level. It was operationally restricted in early service due to several accidents, but the restrictions were eventually lifted and its actual VnE was 1,300 km/h, which isn't great but still matches the MiG-21.
I think the c 130 should be a special none game ending call in it flys over and drops a moab on the battlefield and kills every tank in a huge radius. Could you do a video like this for naval stuff like subs, missile cruisers, and battleships
Idk if it will work or not, but I got thinking about the Tu-22, all I know is that it has plenty meme material given the Soviets called it "The Booze Carrier"
Tu-22 works alright, alongside F-105D. Problem is top tier bombers would just suck a player out of your team, since they’d be practically useless for actually winning games, so unless Gaijin introduces a change to the matchmaker which FORCES the same number of fighters and bombers on each team, they’d just be a drag on the overall game
@@theScottishKoala I see....OH! Another idea that I remember seeing a video of that is meme material, but also may be broken, it's a American recon plane but some madlad put bazookas on the wings
Edit: probably unlikely to be put in the game, but I think it would be a little funny if they did, since it pretty much looks like a civilian aircraft in shape
agree the A10 will absolutly come to the game. And alongside a permium A10 so every whale in the world can get his A10
prophetic
I don't think we should _not_ add aircraft because the BR's at which they'd be placed would be "too low for the age of the aircraft around it"
It's a silly concept to me. Why cater to a minority of the player base who wants "WWII only" or "WWII fights only WWII, Korea fights Korea, Modern fights Modern" when age of a vehicle largely irrelevant and the performance of a vehicle is the most relevant.
Add these planes in, put them at appropriate BRs for their performance, ignore the age/era of them.
If it's a minority, it's a very large one. Pissing off that many players for next to no valid reason is not a smart move, and I mean... look at what's happened to tanks with that kinda thing happening!
Certain time travellers like the F4U-7 (1960's variant of a WWII aircraft) or the Sk60b (which needs a br raise anyway) are okay, but putting a 1970's aircraft in amongst early Spitfires and Yak-7's just takes away from the feeling of the game without adding much in return - it's unnecessary since Germany and Britain who could GET it have plenty of existing CAS aircraft.
@@theScottishKoala From my experience, with the parts of the community I interact with, it is a minority opinion - I shouldn't have said that though, since it might not be the case for the larger audience.
Gaijin should host a poll/survey to get a larger user response to the question of if different era's of vehicles should mix or should remain separated. (The same way they did super long ago on if the community would rather have lend lease/captured vehicles over paper/fake designs)
I know the other comment you're referring to which mentioned the F4U and to be frank, in my opinion, that specific situation doesn't matter as much. I'm more along the mindset of . A good few years ago, yeah, I probably would have been against this sort of idea. Back when the highest BR plane was a sabre or super sabre even. But now, I see the "Old and new should be separate" opinion as more of an artificial limitation by the fanbase on a game which has clearly outgrown that original scope a decent length of time ago.
I mean, not necessarily to argue but rather spark discussion, outside of your already made standpoint that it would probably piss a decent amount of people off, what bad could actually come from adding a modern aircraft at a lower BR (given that it warrants the low BR and is not just some under tiered aircraft)? Because if you ask me it's not an "invalid reason" for making people upset. It's a way to add these more fascinating aircraft that would be vary unique compared to the WWII era vehicles around them. If someone new joins the game wanting to play the modern stuff, they'd have to suffer through all of the pre-modern vehicles simply to get to fly the planes they want to fly. Even if it's only every now and then, these modern vehicles that could go at lower BRs are the perfect solution for the people who are more interested in the more modern equipment. If the vehicles are properly balanced as they should be, why skip out on so many vehicles simply because the BR they should be at happens to be too low for a more modern aircraft?
What are your thoughts on Gaijin adding the Cessna A-37? It is comparable to (though roughly 100 knots slower than) the Saab 105 and was used heavily during the cold war era.
The end of the video aged well in terms of things being added. Love the A-10 lol
I need to jump the sword in defense of the pucara "not having a place".
It looks and performs not much diferent than ww2 planes it shares body plan with. Its as anochronistic as the hordes of postwar planes in mid tiers facing late ww2 ones. On in its ordenace section, other variants not only had better main armaments it ALSO carried guided ordenance . Namely matra magics and martin pescador air to surface missiles.
Honestly, the "you need equivalents for other nations" argument is bs. If we followed that line of thinking, no US Fighter could be added to the game since the US uses them all as ad-hoc CAS planes and other nations don't.
As for the AC-130, if a 105mm projectile hits the top of your vehicle you are automatically fucked, same with the 40mm, that thing is not gonna fire at any relevant armor from up there.
If they add the MiG-25, then the F-14, F-15 and F-16 should come right at the same time as they are 70's planes perfectly capable of countering it.
US aircraft having multirole capability is not the same thing has the US being the only nation to have a fixed wing aircraft in their heli tree... That just can't be the case
The mig 25 isn’t an equivalent to f-14/5/6, the mig 29 would be. There isnt really something else like the foxbat/hound in other nation, they are unique because they where fighting another peculiar aircraft (sr71). They would be nearly useless in low altitude (especially the foxbat) and would need IMO bigger maps to really work (to climb high enough and still have time to gain speed).
@@azzarnthelizard read again, I said counters, not equivalents. The only US equivalent would be the YF-12
@@ancaplanaoriginal5303 The late F-4 Phantom variants are perfectly capable of countering a MiG-25. F-14/15 would render it completely redundant (think F-104C fighting Viggens and F-4EJ Kai's)
Here’s a plane that I don’t hear brought up that much anymore: the XTB2D-1 SkyPirate. I think it could work as a rank 5 battle pass or event vehicle, as only 2 were ever built. If I remember correctly it had similar performance to the sky raiders, but with the ability to carry either 4 torpedos, 2 2,100 lbs bombs or gun pods
I agree completely
The foxbat would be practical in rb only because it would have a higher service ceiling and it can strictly used to down bombers
Good video bro!, now talk about your opinion about Cessna A-37B Dragonfly in War Thunder
Bit late to the video, but the AC130W Stinger II is the latest upgrade to the AC130 and carries Hellfires on the wings, as well as the 40mm Bofors and the 105.
About the Pucara…
Well, 1975 was the year when it entered service, the plane itself first flew in 1969. Armament wise, there are bombs, rockets guided AGMs and even AAMs in the later C variant.
Regarding nations that had it, only Argentina, Uruguay, Colombia, Sri Lanka and Britain used it, with Britain using an example just for a 25 hour flight test with no armament (as they didn’t knew what armament used and they didn’t had any during the tests)
It’s a complicated choice, as it’s base performance equals the mid tier (5.x/6.x) super/turbo props and the armament choices make it an absolute monster for ground RB, I think it could work eventually, but for now…it’s a bit complicated.
Forgetting for a moment that the IA-58C was a single prototype that never saw production... Now you're looking at an aircraft from ANOTHER ten years into the future (1985) which still performs like an A-1 Skyraider...
The Pescador missiles (equivalent to Bullpups) could potentially come in at 7.3 at minimum, but now you've got an aircraft from 1985 fighting against opponents from 1943... as I said in the video, this pisses a LOT of players off for very little gain. Giving it Magic missiles doesn't help it either, since it forces the br much much higher, AT LEAST 9.7... now it sits between the A-4E Skyhawk which carries more AGM's, and the A-7 Corsair which carries AGM-65 Mavericks and AIM-9J's, both of which can reach top speeds twice as high as the Pucara...
If it were a necessary aircraft to fill a gap in a minor tech tree, then I'd say add it with the Pescador AGM's at 7.7, but it just ISN'T necessary - it doesn't have any gap to fill in the German tree and can't go to any other
in some things ill agree, in others i won't. im curious about the IA-58A (the standard version) being passed to consideration pretty recently, idk what would be Gaijin's approach to this...but i hope they find a way.
Actually, the Pucará in later variants could carry Magic 1 missles, and the Pucará B variant was modified to use the Martin Pescador missle which was guided bi the copilot using a joystick, the copilot would locate the missle because the Martin Pescador had a flare on its back to locate it visually.
*by
I can agree, add the MiG-25 to the game so my 104S can outturn something
also some recommendations for Italian Aircraft that could be added if you do make a part 3: the G.91 R/1B, Ambrosini SS.4, SAI.207, and SAI.403. All are somewhat interesting and could breathe life into the Italian ground attack and fighter lines.
Italian Bomber line: hey.
@@1nv15BL3 what, the worst bomber line in the game?
@@risu6894 Yeah, I'm saying we need to add new bombers, not fighters.
The 105 used on the ac130 could also use sabo rounds. And the HE rounds are hot enough to melt tank armour, so it wouldn't be an issue against heavy armoured targets.
I could see the a-10 being a vehicle with sort of its own special class. Like helis and only being available in tank battles
I’ve said the same thing about the AC-130, the only way it could work is if the pilot kept the plane flying in circles when you’re on the guns, and even at that it’d just get destroyed by planes because it has no defenses besides flares
I do agree with your view on the AC-130, it definitely would be a pain to use, and wouldn't really work, but personally I'd like to see it just so I can scream "ENEMY AC-130 ABOVE" while in my tanks. Also, props on using Skyrim soundtrack, it was a good choice.
i KNEW i heard skyrim music coming from somewhere, it's in the background. i wasnt sure if i had it open or something
maybe planes like the pucara could be put in a scout plane tech tree, they could scout and carry small bomb loads
Well, you got A-10 in 2022 right, so good job, Koala!
The AC-130 could most certainly take out even the heaviest tanks even at top tier with its 105 howitzer. The M102 105mm howitzer fires a 15 Kg high explosive round. As an upgrade you could even have the m119 105mm Howitzer as a replacement. The m119 has ammunition with different uses. Such as HE, smoke(for "teamwork"), a round that scatters grenades in a large area and so on.
One slight problem with this. No doubt it would have to be a highish BR (later variants could carry Laser Guided weaponry), and it is a big target. Two factors that as well as being slow, would get it killed easily.
Nice vid. Just wanted to ask what are your predictions for the next major update? (also i got ur decal)
Awesome bud! Seen a couple of em in game so far! As for next update, it’s going to be very heavily focused on the Israeli aviation tree, so don’t expect much else, but we’ll also likely see more tanks like the Challenger series get dozer blades according to my contacts at Gaijin
Not gunna lie your voice is super soothing I used it to go to sleep last night
Sometime ago Spookston made a video about the best ground techtrees and i am curious about the best air ones
I love your voice, and you make good points, but I heard little because of how great your voice is, subscribed
I totally agree with you about the a10 it has the firepower to be a threat but the lack of speed won't make it a dream killer either. And would be like bringing a a p47 or p51 into top tier in the way it can dodge jets but would actually have the capability and countermeasures not to be completely worthless to the team.
What do you think about the he 111z (bomber variant)? I think it would be super cool but I'm not sure if it would work in the game.
With your insistence with the OV-10, Im surprised you made no mention of the Super Tucanos
4 months later, Gaijin is adding the A-10.
kinda reminds me on why Arma 3 has basically a futuristic Warthog as one of NATO's main aircraft (and only one prior to the Jets DLC), it wouldn't be super practical due to not having radar, and dying when so much as a Tunguska sneezes at it wrong, but also fun to ground-pound with laser-guided bombs and AGMs.
i legit just watched this for the first time and didnt realize it was uploaded before the A10 was added haha i was sitting here like "hes joking right?" then i realized its a old video lol
Same lmao, that’s why I’m here
Cover the cessna dragonfly, would be interesting to see in game and could fit many trees being an american aircraft that got exported to many countries, even australia ended up with 10
Just want to add one thing regarding the bushmaster and the AC-130 platform: the bushmaster is currently employed on the AC-130J Ghostrider. AC-130U Spooky's has the 25mm Vulcan, 40mm Bofors and 105mm howitzer, although there was a plan to employ a 120mm motor at one point.
25mm is the equalizer, not the Vulcan
@@theScottishKoala yes that's right. The Vulcan is a 20mm. And then you got the bloody 30mm Avenger.
@@brandondigiuseppe1111 the AC-130’s 30mm is not the avenger, it’s a Mk.44 bushmaster
@@theScottishKoala I was referring to the 30mm GAU-8 Avenger cannon the A-10s have as part of a side tangent. My original statement was the U variant of the AC-130 never had the Mk 44, the J models currently employ them along with the 105mm, the Gunslinger pod on the ramp, and Hellfires and SDBs mounted on the wings.
@@brandondigiuseppe1111 Problem with giving it Hellfires in War Thunder would be that it'd need an even higher br, where it would be even MORE of a free kill for all SPAAG's (imagine seeing one of those things flying around at 500kph in your CV90 with proxy fuse rounds...)
If submarines and modern naval ever become a thing in war thunder(i think they will be a thing in the future), i would see the P-3 Orion as a possible aircraft in war thunder. It could carry mavericks and harpoons, bombs and torpedoes and naval mines. Although It would suffer from being really slow, in ground and naval RB having the range of the missiles could help it to evade cannon spaa fire. SAMs? Would probably just die to them, and thus be hard to balance. What do you think?
What would you think about the BAC TSR.2, my personal second favourite aircraft, underneath the English Electric Lightning
If they bring the A-10 I hope theyll add a Rook too since it would give sovun a similar aircraft to balance things out