AeriaGloria Posted June 26, 2020 Posted June 26, 2020 Remember what we talked about yesterday? It’s photoshop, it does not have the clearance for that at all. Perhaps part of the reason Ra’ad 2 goes to traditional smaller tall, but it still has never shown to be fitted to JF-17 and it’s not in current plans. Eventually the Mirages that carry them will be retired and the JF-17 will take that role but no reason to spend money integrating a variant that may not even be used anymore by the time the Mirage fleet retires and JF-17 must do it. It was made by some person as a “what if” or they actually thought it could carry it becuase “how hard can it be to make missiles plug and play with airplanes” and then they pass it off as fact, or they made it with good “what if” intentions and now fanbois cling to it and spread it becuase now that they saw a photoshop it must be true and you have this effect where it spreads and is believed much faster then it’s disproven or not believed. There is no reason to trust it or believe it shows any reality. If it did there would be many reputable sources talking about JF-17 taking the nuclear role Black Shark Den Squadron Member: We are open to new recruits, click here to check us out or apply to join! https://blacksharkden.com
Chiron Posted June 26, 2020 Author Posted June 26, 2020 Remember what we talked about yesterday? It’s photoshop, it does not have the clearance for that at all. Perhaps part of the reason Ra’ad 2 goes to traditional smaller tall, but it still has never shown to be fitted to JF-17 and it’s not in current plans. Eventually the Mirages that carry them will be retired and the JF-17 will take that role but no reason to spend money integrating a variant that may not even be used anymore by the time the Mirage fleet retires and JF-17 must do it. It was made by some person as a “what if” or they actually thought it could carry it becuase “how hard can it be to make missiles plug and play with airplanes” and then they pass it off as fact, or they made it with good “what if” intentions and now fanbois cling to it and spread it becuase now that they saw a photoshop it must be true and you have this effect where it spreads and is believed much faster then it’s disproven or not believed. There is no reason to trust it or believe it shows any reality. If it did there would be many reputable sources talking about JF-17 taking the nuclear role its juts question lol
paco2002 Posted June 26, 2020 Posted June 26, 2020 its juts question lol Forums sometimes lead to this kind of misunderstandings, it will happen from time to time. Back into the Ra'ad topic, I highly doubt it.
AeriaGloria Posted June 26, 2020 Posted June 26, 2020 its juts question lol just keep a critical eye whenever you things like this. There are only a few weapons we don’t have in DCS, anything else is a fanbois fever dream. We can talk about new payload when Block III is announced Don’t trust anything becuase you see a picture of it, but only if other reliable places report it is practiced. Black Shark Den Squadron Member: We are open to new recruits, click here to check us out or apply to join! https://blacksharkden.com
hamza_Khan Posted June 27, 2020 Posted June 27, 2020 just keep a critical eye whenever you things like this. There are only a few weapons we don’t have in DCS, anything else is a fanbois fever dream. We can talk about new payload when Block III is announced Agreed. In my opinion Deka's JF17 (with exceptions like MAR, CM400 and a few more) and JF17 in airshows displaying weapons is the best source to see what Weapons JF17 can carry. But when open sources such wiki gets filled with bogus information, I can understand people getting confused especially those who are new to JF17.
Chiron Posted June 27, 2020 Author Posted June 27, 2020 by being a question ( got understand it as a fake news share ) then thx for replay i will not post again i will leave JF-17 forum to expert players like u
AeriaGloria Posted June 27, 2020 Posted June 27, 2020 (edited) by being a question ( got understand it as a fake news share ) then thx for replay i will not post again i will leave JF-17 forum to expert players like u I’m sorry, I should have replied differently. Knowing JF-17 is more complicated then I assume sometimes, especially concerning load outs, I’ll try to be more patient Edited June 27, 2020 by AeriaGloria Black Shark Den Squadron Member: We are open to new recruits, click here to check us out or apply to join! https://blacksharkden.com
AnarchyZG Posted June 28, 2020 Posted June 28, 2020 just keep a critical eye whenever you things like this. There are only a few weapons we don’t have in DCS, anything else is a fanbois fever dream. We can talk about new payload when Block III is announced Don’t trust anything becuase you see a picture of it, but only if other reliable places report it is practiced. CM-400 and C-102, C-102 is actally the more interesting one with its parachute loitering mode. I don't think we have something like that in DCS (closest behavior would be GB-6 SFW submunitions) [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] MATRIC developer Check out MATRIC and forget about keyboard shortcuts
Tiger-II Posted June 28, 2020 Posted June 28, 2020 It's not photoshop. In a link I posted recently, there is a photo of Jeff sat on the tarmac with these mounted to it. Motorola 68000 | 1 Mb | Debug port "When performing a forced landing, fly the aircraft as far into the crash as possible." - Bob Hoover. The JF-17 is not better than the F-16; it's different. It's how you fly that counts. "An average aircraft with a skilled pilot, will out-perform the superior aircraft with an average pilot."
AeriaGloria Posted June 28, 2020 Posted June 28, 2020 It's not photoshop. In a link I posted recently, there is a photo of Jeff sat on the tarmac with these mounted to it. The photo in this thread does certainly seem to be made with photo editing software. What’s this link? I have never seen a picture of Ra’ad on JF-17 that appeared genuine Black Shark Den Squadron Member: We are open to new recruits, click here to check us out or apply to join! https://blacksharkden.com
Xeno426 Posted June 29, 2020 Posted June 29, 2020 It's not photoshop. In a link I posted recently, there is a photo of Jeff sat on the tarmac with these mounted to it. Posted recently...but not here, where it would be actually relevant. "It's real, guys. Trust me."
Tiger-II Posted June 29, 2020 Posted June 29, 2020 Posted recently...but not here, where it would be actually relevant. "It's real, guys. Trust me." No - it's in one of the SD-10 discussion threads. I'm hiding nothing. I have posted dozens of links in the past month or two and read a ton of information. Finding a specific link will take me several hours; time I do not have right now. Motorola 68000 | 1 Mb | Debug port "When performing a forced landing, fly the aircraft as far into the crash as possible." - Bob Hoover. The JF-17 is not better than the F-16; it's different. It's how you fly that counts. "An average aircraft with a skilled pilot, will out-perform the superior aircraft with an average pilot."
AeriaGloria Posted June 29, 2020 Posted June 29, 2020 I searched many posts but couldn’t find it. Are you sure you didn’t just see pictures of the Ra’ad mod Hamza Khan made? It’s probsby the only way to see Ra’ad on JF-17 that isn’t photoshopped Black Shark Den Squadron Member: We are open to new recruits, click here to check us out or apply to join! https://blacksharkden.com
Recommended Posts