In STR? I would assume it’s one of the best 4gen in the world in that regard, typhoon or rafale is probably king IRL.
In game we now have a su-27sm with the same sustained turn rate as a rafale
This plane was nerfed 3 times because of the baby plane sort of capabilities it was given to have some insane retention at its release. Nothing you see is accurate in any case, and gaijin doesnt have concrete info other than the prototype manuals, that indicate it worser than how its in game, btw prototype variants were much lighter than we have in game. A jet with similar wing scale whilst increased weight(which they try to compensate with engines) will still have worse wing loading
Alot of overstated capability, the modeling of eurofighter is far more accurate than rafale and gripen which are over performing. Both have bug reports stating performance otherwise is not accurate.
Give me a minute ill start finding you the bug reports
Rafale:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/vBzbHgSGY6qS
Gripen:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/CjPzh5Jy67q2
Just another random comparison.
A slowish sustained turn speed of 500kph the base su-27 flanker does the same 21deg/s as a block 10 F-16A.
At 500kph IAS on min fuel the block10 F-16A has a TWR of 1.18 and the su-27 a TWR of 1.2.
| Aircraft | Empty Weight + pilot + oil (kg) | 30% Fuel (kg) | Total Weight (kg) | Thrust at 500kph IAS (kgf) | Thrust-to-Weight | Turn Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| F-16A | 7,690 | 992 | 8,682 | 10,280 | 1.18 | 21°/s |
| Su-27 | 16,420 | 2,820 | 19,240 | 11,588 × 2 = 23,176 | 1.20 | 21º/s |
F-16A has a small disadvantage in TWR but a small advantage of lower wing loading. At that speed they have similar STR. At high speed the su-27 is better by around 1deg/s.
And people will still call the su-27 FM bad. On a real match, due to the massive size/weight of the flanker, it is also less affected by weapon loads, the F-16 is the opposite.
Will the F-16 have an advantage on unsustained turns aka “W mashing” turns? Yes, but the flanker has very good sustained turns and amazing low speed nose authority.
Idk man, seems kinda inconsistent to me but even then, l
Once Gripen starts to actually pull flanker copes, especially when gripen has better low speed perf and sep lines so eh
That’s an advantage of all 2 engined aircraft.
Like, with combat load J-11 goes to 17.9 - 18.0 from 20.5 on minimum fuel clean.
And Gripen gets 17.9 - 18.0 with a combat load of fuel and weapons from 20.8.
The margin of error of 0.1 is due to rushing for a close enough result rather than waiting for a perfect SEP 0.
Does it matter a whole lot? Eh, the Su-27 is still only 0.3 better than the Gripen for air RB and sim. Nothing really changed.
Do better yourself then. I think its good enough, in 2 mins I got a few seconds of very consistent turn rates which is enough to pull an average of decent approximations. More reliable than looking at statshark turn graphs
Ok let’s take your results as valid for a Moment.
Whats a (in your own words) 0.2 dps difference in STR even gonna do?
Lol, It certainly won’t make up for the flanker’s somehow inferior low speed performance, nor Will It make up for the flanker’s worse bleed rates and lack of lift
at least after the latest changes the flanker has actual hands in a dogfight, but it’s still not close to where It should be
What? It was a 1deg/s buff overall with the recent changes. That is a big difference.
The 0.2 difference you are talking about is related to the gripen? Yes that is to point that the flanker can now sustain similar rates (technically higher) as the gripen which is crazy
Which Is Crazy because uhh
Flanker matches the STR values from the manual pretty well
Within an acceptable margin of error up until 800kph (After which It overperforms greatly) which Is the speed regime you’ve been mainly coping about
You know what Is also Crazy? The fact that somehow the gripen has better low speed perf than the flanker, or how it’s also overperforming in STR, but i guess the baby plane Flight model gets to stay baby plane
How does the gripen have better low speed performance when the flanker has similar sustained turn rate at slow speeds and far better manoeuvrability at high angle of attack/very slow speed turns?
The only thing gripen does better is roll rate and instantan turn/lower bleed rates at unsustained turns. Everything else the flanker does better
Simply because It has much more lift, allowing It to pull more Gs at lower speeds, and doesn’t fall out of sky as fast and hard as flanker when doing those maneuvers
If that was the case, why does the flanker has similar energy retention at those speeds? They aren’t pulling much Gs at slow speed either way because they would be too slow
Lmao thats the strong suit of the flanker. High alpha manouvers at stall speeds, something the gripen can’t even do, it will just drop the nose.
See for yourself lol
Specifically because the Energy retention Is similar, the plane that has the better lift boundary almost automatically wins, now combine that with the fact that the gripen has much better bleed rates and you will see how It mogs the flanker fairly easily
Gripen pulls enough AoA to the point where it’s actually Dangerous for the flanker to fight against
an even Better example would be a rafale and maybe a J10A
Nonsense, you have to understand that the Flankers only follow the laws of the Russian Federation.
1 Like
You keep posting statshark stuff which is clearly wrong. Tomorrow if I find the time I can post 2 videos again from the su27 and gripen at like 400kph or 500kph and you will see that statshark lines don’t match for the gripen.
Statshark is overestimating the gripen at slow speeds from medium to low speeds, while overestimating the su27sm at slow speeds and underestimating it at high speeds.
Again, don’t rely on StatShark to make such conclusions. I literally posted those videos you asked of each at 750kph in sustained turns, you can clearly see the su-27sm doing almost the same if not slightly higher STR than the gripen.
At 750kph statshark graph says the gripen does 22.36deg/s but ingame it does a bit over that, more like 22.5deg/s.
And the graph says the su-27sm does 21.8deg/s while in-game is almost 1deg/s more, at ±22.7 which is a big discrepancy. WTRTI with an actual fly tests is more accurate than posting those graphs.
If the margin was less than 0.5deg/s we could write it off as human error. 1deg/s is a lot, and since I found similar discrepancies for different jets, I just don’t trust statshark for that, people take it as gospel because it is easy and accessible.
The statshark line matches the IAS from the manual at 5000 meters up to to 800kph within a 0.5 dps margin of error but eh, sure
if you think the flanker Is so wrong then you’re free to bug report it, suit yourself i don’t care
Lol, you mean like 0.2 dps difference that’s going to do nothing?
Wow, 0.14 dps difference, literally unacceptable