I imagine the gripen gets maws, But whats the maws coverage like? for example on the M2K its basically only below and has a massive blindspot above
Honestly sounds like someone who doesn’t understand how top tier works
Yes, Gripen is unholy in close combat
However, counterpoint is it is pretty much useless in BVR. It has to push a merge.
On the E its 200 degrees coverage with UV warning. Not sure about C or where the blind spot is however.
1 Like
just to know, how does the 15J win-rates compares to 15A or 15 Baz?
i recall the case of Apex Predator update when gaijin couldn’t understand how the italian F16ADF was performing better than the american one
2 Likes
the part that makes me laugh is “is an extreme version of the draken/viggen”… you are comparing tail-less deltas with a conventional configuration delta. the most banal aerodynamic configuration after the mig-21 one, a second gen jet aircraft, done in the 90s that is LESS advanced than other second generation aircrafts like the draken, because said planes were SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED to beat the mig-21 on same ground by making MORE EXTREME DESIGNS. draken and viggen are double deltas, F-4 is double delta, stop embarrassing yourself.
Cause American players bad
That why gajin think the Gripen is too strong as the people using it are people used to fighting mig29s and f16s in a tornado
1 Like
yes i know, mine was a rethorical question
In what ways is the Gripen underperforming compared to real life? And what evidence is there that the first flight model, the one on release date that out-turned and out-energied the F-16A, was actually more accurate than the current one?
After the changes I barely beat a MiG-29SMT in a dogfight. It was nearly outturning me.
actually a gripen C can beat a F-16A without difficulties, being even better at energy retention pulling the same Gs.
we have jas39 pilot Mikael Grev who told this, and other encounters, on Hushkit and Aircraft Interview. Mikael piloted both gripen and viper so he knows what he was saying
the actual dogfight was Gripen C vs F-16A MLU
because that’s what happened irl and there are testimonies from pilots from both sides? like, is not hard to actually check for something before making a shitty figure, people should start questioning themselves before stating something and be sure their claims are backed up by sources and not countered by easy to find evidence
The Mikael Grev interview that I saw only spends like a minute or two talking about dissimilar air combat and doesn’t really go into any details. The words that he uses is that the Gripen “carves” better than both planes and doesn’t really elaborate.
The Hush kit interview has the following;
“I’ve flown against F-16s and F-18s. No surprises really, they are what they are. The F-16s are a lot like the Gripens but you can claw yourself closer and closer to their behind, if that is your goal."
What he is describing is a close match-up between an F-16. We don’t even know what the actual parameters are; i.e fuel load, starting distance, roe, etc.
I’ve flown both the patch day Gripen and the current Gripen. The patch day Gripen flight model was not a close match-up to the F-16; it wasn’t close match-up to anything in the game.
clearly the gripen had no fuel and ammo and the F-16 was 100%fuel, 3 additional fuel tanks, and 8 gbus. i wonder if you guys actually think the bullshit you say and are convinced or you are just so delusional that you try to convince yourself
cannot wait to see you complain about the next eurocanards, they are even better than the gripen, especially the eurofighter in a ratefight
Did you even play the old flight model Gripen?
I actually did and I tested it against F-16A…it was not even close…the Gripen would just win with no effort required.
You’d have to purposefully die in it before, now it is a lot closer to what “realistic” Gripen FM should be but still off… unfortunately it likely is overperforming against the real thing still but that’s neither here nor there.
