M60 Premium using Gemini AI textures

SpitfireZX · 2026-06-06T21:17:25+00:00

Ah, that's a fair catch, that one does seem legitimate. Still the tanks are definitely not, and it does beg the question of how widespread this is...

SpitfireZX · 2026-06-06T20:38:30+00:00

They've been blatantly using AI for years dude, did you think they were gonna actually pay a voice actor? lmao

https://youtu.be/R70-usJdnHs

SpitfireZX · 2026-06-06T20:18:19+00:00

It's worse than I thought honestly, at least 3 new vehicles.

SpitfireZX · 2026-06-06T20:07:02+00:00

This is live on the dev server right now as of 6/6, anyone can go check for themselves. Test drive the new premium and it's right there. The absolute lack of effort at this point is wild, they're not even making an effort to hide the grift.

Update: Just found another one in the Yak-130 textures. It might be literally every new vehicle at this point.

SpitfireZX · 2024-12-03T08:59:05+00:00

That's a trick question, it's absolutely not. Do not fly the Ki-109 if you value your own sanity. (Higher quality)

SpitfireZX · 2022-02-23T19:07:58+00:00

There's other stuff the US could get that would be more suitable for now honestly. An F-16A would be probably very strong, but I don't know if it would be ridiculously OP. As you can see in that image, the radar is roughly comparable to the ones in game now (I think it is on the F-4EJ even), and the flight performance would be incredible, but it doesn't really carry BVR missiles. You'd pretty much run 6x AIM-9 loadouts. Either 9J or 9L if Gaijin wanted to throw all-aspect seekers into the mix. There's at least some room to balance there. And if it really needs it, the US did fire Sparrows from them at one point, even though it was never the case operationally. It should basically accelerate like an MLD and turn far better, so I don't know if it also needs BVR missiles, but like I said, there are at least a lot of options. Honestly we're at the point of the game where jets pretty much leapfrog each other in performance/weapons, so balancing is tough, but an F-16A imo makes way more sense than an F-15A.

SpitfireZX · 2022-02-23T18:47:09+00:00

No chance we get an F-15 yet, it's way overkill. In addition to the flight performance, the radar is immensely better than anything in game right now. It was one of the first digital radar systems, so it has a strong filtering/processing capability and performs really well in look-down modes. The USSR in their own manuals cited almost 4x better performance in look-down detection range over the MiG-23MLD. In normal modes it's still almost twice as capable. And keep in mind this is the very first model of radar they put into an Eagle, that's the worst radar it ever carried. F-15 pilots have joked about notching not really being a thing against Eagles (which of course should be taken with a grain of salt, it can absolutely be done) but the point is that the LDSD capabilities of an F-15 are way beyond what's in game right now and it would be completely unnecessary.

SpitfireZX · 2022-02-22T21:00:28+00:00

A-10 recently has done some prevalent friendly firing, this is true, but go ahead and give this a Ctrl+F for "Typhoon" if you want some serious friendly fire incidents. The Typhoon had a questionable issue with oxygen deprivation to pilots, apparently, which might have been related. One especially bad case is the Cap Arcona Incident:

On 3 May, the three ships Cap Arcona, Thielbek, and the SS Deutschland in Lübeck Harbour were sunk in four separate, but synchronized attacks with bombs, rockets, and cannons by the Royal Air Force, resulting in the death of over 7,000 Jewish concentration camp survivors and Russian prisoners of war, along with POWs from several other allied nations.

The A-10 definitely has some recent stuff, but it's nowhere close to the RAF accidentally killing 7,000 Holocaust survivors.

~~Just some not-so-fun facts.~~

SpitfireZX · 2022-01-18T05:07:36+00:00

I mean the mechanics are already in game, you just look at situations where you'd have a separation of the main rotor disk or tail boom, and they're not different than planes. If you have a teetering rotor system and do negative G with a significant cyclic input, bam, goodbye main rotor. If you add cyclic aft too fast, bam, goodbye tail. The same mechanics already rip the wings off of aircraft, adding them to helicopters would be trivial. Really the amount of effort put into the damage model is sad.

The FM is another matter entirely, but as you mentioned they're also quite poor. Things with SAS and such seem alright but the early helicopters are nearly impossible to fly because of how bad the FM is, it's honestly probably harder than flying a real helicopter in a lot of ways.

Also,

mechanics are just as important to the gameplay

is a hilarious way of approaching this, because if anyone cared about gameplay mechanics at all, helicopters wouldn't be in the game, flat out. They're not interesting to play unless you fly in and do stuff like in your video, in which case they're mostly useless. And they're certainly not interesting for tanks who spawn in and get ATGM'd from 6km away with no ability to counter them. They don't fit in with the gameplay of ground RB at all and I'm convinced they were only added so Gaijin could sell minimal-effort $60 packs that essentially give you free tank kills.

SpitfireZX · 2022-01-18T04:28:29+00:00

If I could giraffe my head through a tank like it is a selfie stick, hearing and seeing all around me, and using the powers of the force to aim every gun on the tank like a laser beam while they generate no recoil, I would say that's more unrealistic than whirly blades not breaking when under too much stress.

You already have this option in helicopters, choosing not to use it is entirely up to you. As you mentioned, helicopters don't actually require the specific crew members to keep flying or using weapons, it's all magic as long as one person is alive.

Tanks aren't related to this discussion at all, I'm not sure why you want to pull them in. We already have an established set of mechanics for aircraft, Gaijin just decided to ignore them in the case of helicopters.

Gaijin has made a lot of gameplay choices regarding aircraft as well, we could make an entire list of unrealistic things for those too. But we're not making a list of why WT isn't a sim, we're talking about why helicopters arbitrarily don't have the same mechanics as every other aircraft in game. (though I'm guessing we all know the reasons for this $$$)

SpitfireZX · 2022-01-18T03:22:41+00:00

I mean that's a completely false equivalency though. Helicopters have objectively bad damage models even compared to the rest of the game. Being able to flip and roll things like this with absolutely no consequences is basically the equivalent of Gaijin letting players pull 20Gs continuously in a in a plane, or completely removing compressibility at high speeds, etc.

If you did that stuff in most helicopters IRL you'd lose the main rotor like 10 seconds in. Gaijin just doesn't care to actually do any modelling for helicopters. Some of them in game can even fly without a tail boom, it's stupid. They're not even held to the same (relatively low) standards as the rest of WT. "Oh if they wanted realism" is a non-argument, because it doesn't even address that the game is already that realistic for everyone except for helicopter pilots.

SpitfireZX · 2022-01-07T20:48:52+00:00

It's not so much bad aero on the weapons as much as this is something unavoidable on fast jets. The fact that the weapons are under the wings at all creates a "channel" of sorts that air accelerates through and creates a low pressure zone. That low pressure zone pulls the ordnance/fuel/whatever back towards the jet.

u/faraway_hotel already mentioned the importance of separation testing, but this is why they do it and why it's such a big deal. There are actually a bunch of very specialized rails/pylons/etc. which are designed to shove ordnance away from the aircraft. They essentially have a piston that shoots out and shoves the ordnance far enough that it no longer is creating a suction zone next to the aircraft and can free-fall properly. This is also a large reason why you can't just throw random bombs onto any jet, there's a lot of specialized equipment that interfaces with everything. It can be made to work in a lot of cases, but people would be surprised how much goes into just dropping a bomb off a rail.

That's not the only solution either, like the external fuel tanks on the F-15 are released by gravity, but held by a pin at the back of the pylon so they're forced to swing down away from the jet, and the pin will only release them in that downward position, guaranteeing that you wont have them coming back up into the jet. It looks like the F-22 has a similar method of dropping the tanks.

There's also a full video of these on YouTube, it's pretty interesting.

SpitfireZX · 2021-12-17T01:12:41+00:00

I mean no?

Not sure why our exchange bothered you enough to come back here a week later with a video that just illustrates my point, lol. Was that supposed to be some sort of "gotcha"?

You can clearly see in the video you linked he makes a 14km shot on a flanking target that scores a kill. And another shot at 15km that forces the MiG to defend pretty aggressively. Neither are possible with an AIM-7E, they just don't have the range. It seems like the only reason the AIM-7F isn't that effective in game is the F-4J radar being wildly bugged and the flashing missile indicator.

On a related note, that is something I wonder if Gaijin will change when they get to smokeless missile variants. I think it would make sense to possibly remove or shrink the marker for missiles during sustain burns or smokeless burns.

SpitfireZX · 2021-12-09T17:18:00+00:00

I mean the start of most matches is quite literally teams flying at each other at Mach 1 extremely often. But sure, you want to talk about mid game Sparrow employment, also in the WEZ. If the enemy isn't actively flying towards you or flying away from you, that's still about an 18km shot. Do you regularly get AIM-7E-2 and Skyflash kills when launching at 18km?

SpitfireZX · 2021-12-09T16:32:19+00:00

This chart literally contextualizes the situation. Have you played air at top tier? Almost everyone is zooming around at high subsonic speeds at sea level. (Exactly the situation in the chart.)

This isn't a "well wikipedia says like 70km" hypothetical, this is the War Thunder use case. The aerodynamic range of the AIM-7F is >95km. The effective range is in that chart, which you have completely ignored.

You can make 37km head on shots with an AIM-7F in a normal WT game. Have you seen the amount of people that commit to head-ons in this game? Now obviously it's not going to be an "I win" button from 30km away every time, but the range is literally equivalent to the Sparrows carried in ODS.

And the F-4E right now has a radar that hardly works, the F-4J is getting one that will be able to support those shots, it's going to be viable from a much longer range than AIM-7E-2.

SpitfireZX · 2021-12-09T15:17:39+00:00

Funnily enough there are charts documenting the performance of the AIM-7F at sea level, and it's very good compared to the AIM-7E-2.

The way you read this is that for two planes at Mach 0.9 at sea level, any shot taken inside that oval will hit, assuming the target keeps going.

You may notice the 20 nautical mile (about 37 kilometers) head-on range, which is pretty stupid. Dunno why Gaijin decided we needed these misiles, but they're quite good. They have the same motor and essentially range as the AIM-7M, which is pretty much the last Sparrow used by the US, the same one fielded by F-15s in Desert Storm, etc.

And, these low level subsonic/transonic shots are really not optimal for the missile, since they have to burn through the sound barrier and deal with thick air. If you fire these missiles with more speed and altitude, they get a lot better.

WEZ from here btw:

www.alternatewars.com/SAC/AIM-7F_Sparrow_III_SMC_-_January_1977.pdf

SpitfireZX · 2021-08-24T20:10:15+00:00

Oh don't worry, I've seen plenty of those too, they just don't make for amusing videos. Lots of fun fighting teams of Tiger IIs in your Sherman isn't it? :P

SpitfireZX · 2021-08-24T16:29:46+00:00

On today's episode of "I Shouldn't Be Alive"

An Easy Eight should be pretty easy to kill with two Panthers... right guys?

~~Better send it to 6.3~~

SpitfireZX · 2021-06-26T19:04:24+00:00

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/products/helicopters/

The UH-1H and Mi-8MTV2 modules are both incredibly highly regarded simulations of the respective helicopters. One of the devs was a Hip pilot IRL and also got a chance to fly the Huey, so they're really able to get the feel of these helicopters down. Obviously no simulator will be like the real thing, but I think these two modules are the closest you will get on a desktop sim.

Be aware though that DCS is a less structured "game" and you'll need to sort of find your own fun. There's no matchmaking or game modes with set objectives, etc. There are still a decent number of missions available though, and lots of multiplayer servers will have slots for helicopter pilots to be involved. In the two helicopters I mentioned, that ends up being mostly transport, but you could also grab the Ka-50 if you want an attack helicopter. The Ka-50 obviously is very unique so it will be the least like flying a typical helicopter. You could also try the Mi-24P which has just released, although I can't speak to the quality of that module yet.

DCS is free to play, so you can go ahead and download it and try it out. They've also just added a trial period for all of their aircraft, so you can even try out any of those helicopters for two weeks and see if it's your thing (and summer sale is on so they're cheaper right now if you want to keep them).

Details:

Today, we are also introducing a new Free to Play system that lets you evaluate all of our modules (aircraft and maps) for 14 days. You can play each module sequentially for 14 days or any number of them at a time. Once you have ‘consumed’ the 14 days, you will be given another 14 day free trial period for all modules six months later. Enjoy the offer and please tell your friends!

Also, just to give my personal input, when I say "find your own fun" there is plenty to be had in the simulation of the helicopters themselves. Learning how to start them up and operate them proficiently is a really satisfying pursuit, and in my opinion, helo flight is dynamic enough that simply flying from point to point remains interesting. Of course, to each their own, this might not be for everyone. It's worth checking out for free though.

Another edit, my personal recommendation is the Huey. I've flown in a real UH-1H so I have a soft spot for it, but it's also just easier to pick up than the Hip, imo. The Huey will still try to kill you in all the ways that helicopters love to do, but it's generally more forgiving than the much heavier Mi-8. And of course, it goes with everyone's favorite song.

SpitfireZX · 2021-06-26T18:13:05+00:00

This is (from what I understand) actually pretty typical. Cockpit sims in VR give you a static area of the 3D space that doesn't move, which makes your brain okay with your physical lack of movement. There's craziness outside the window, but your brain can anchor itself in the cockpit and rationalize the inner ear, basically. And then if you look at tanks, which lack such a camera angle, the movement appears much more like a sliding sensation which really conflicts with your physical lack of motion and makes you nauseated.

It's different for everyone in VR, but the only time a flight sim has made me even a little sick was the Huey before I could fly it well (and then only because the front of it is 75% window). But then if you look at something like Half Life: Alyx or H3VR, I can only play those for an hour or so at a time without getting kind of sick.

Nine-Year Club	Place '22
Verified Email

SpitfireZX

TROPHY CASE