those ranges are right at the limit of a super etendard with drop tanks and 1 exocet in a low level mission profile firing from 20-30 miles out. you cant comprehend that maybe, running heavier loadouts on older aircraft than the super etendard would result in a much shorter range
1 Like
6 Likes
Idk about all that but it does seem a little dodgy that the in game turn time ends up so far below F-4 and on par with F-104
That’s because it’s extremely incorrect
I said the turn performance is slightly better then a F-4E with slats
Not that hard to believe
To them it is and today feet pics confirmed that I was correct with his math so there’s really nothing for them to go on now
1 Like
At least I know the most basic principles of jet propulsion
And I don’t rock up with advanced math formulas that I don’t know how to use
that was with the F-4 loaded up with AIM-7 and AIM-9 though no? or is this a different source
You dont Bro, you claim you know while not knowing the same advanced fórmulas you need to calculated the propulsión based on the bost basic of principles, seriously stop sinking yourself
1 Like
If you really want to get into the vectored part you can’t use the basic gross thrust either.
F-4 with 4 sparrows 70% fuel
Vs Gr.3 80% fuel pylons and guns
Squish (Feetpics) and Matrix in this topic:
6 Likes
Man, STOP you aré making It worse
when you consider the % of empty weight full internal fuel takes up for each aircraft, the fact that an F-4E always has its gun and ammo attached, and the 4 sparrows each weighing about 450lb which is more than your sources say for all the pylons combined, that is arguably still in the favor of the harrier.
@kizvy lmk if i missed anything important
Hardly?
The harrier could say in that fighter for over 3 times longer
are you mixing up ferry range with combat radius?
1 Like
No on full after burner the F-4 would have to bug out in like6 minutes the harrier could keep the fight up for like 20
yeah because the F-4 is going to be on full afterburner the entire time.
The F-16 has its peak then rate at sea level around 400kts which is the same data point we were arguing about with Harrier. So do you think F-16 sustains less turn rate than Harrier at 85% fuel?
Its peak rate isn’t even close to being at .6 it’s at like .7 - .8
The circle is unrelated just a scribble from earlier
Harrier sustains 14 a second under the conditions shared
Like you did earlier
If you put in the data for 12 degrees AOA and then add the net thrust of the engine you get
The correct sustained G for .6 Mach that matches the data from the E-M chart