CAC Sabre / CA-27 (A jet that should have been added years ago)

Machinery of War Discussion Aircraft
,
21

Undertiered

15bis is a mix of being possibly slightly undertiered as well as simply being a very versatile aircraft regarding its flight characteristics

CL13 Mk5 is fine at 9.0 and I don’t think it invalidates the Hunter at all.

I have zero idea how this somehow affects the hunter since you didnt go into detail

It definitely isn’t just top speed… it has very good guns, very good speed, very good MER, good accel for that BR and type of aircraft etc. Good ratefighting, etc. It wasn’t fine to face 7.7s in 2019 and it isn’t now either.

LAUGHABLE. Sorry, but stop looking at stat cards. The G.91 I can assure you is not just “80kph slower”. The G.91 struggles to break 1000kph sometimes.

Name them, you haven’t done so yet.

2 Likes
22

Better in almost every way top speed is the only issue which is pretty irrelevant when it takes the hunter 3/4 of the map to reach its top speed.

Much better bar guns and top speed again.

Its only tangible advantage is being able to run away, and considering its famous for compressing at high speed and causing crashes, i’m sure you can imagine how well it does at dodging aim-9b’s.

Which it can’t aim because it struggles to pull any significant amount of lead or G.

its the best at its br. when its on min fuel or has been flying for 10-15 minutes.

it has absolutely horrible acceleration until the other aircraft literally start to hit their airframe limits.

By that logic so is everything else at it’s br which pretty much universally outclass it.

I took it into a test drive before writing this. On min fuel which you can actually take in a Gina because it has reasonable fuel loads. I hit 1080 after using 3 minutes of fuel.

Cl-13 Mk.5, Lim-5P, Mig-17, and before you say top speed. you can’t hit it min-fuel and you can’t hit it unless you have used 10 mins of fuel when taking 18. And lets not even be patronising by suggesting that its acceleration or turn rate are good.

If I could only pull 5g’s below 1000 I’d expect to be rate fighting well considering I can’t turn tightly enough to sheer of speed.

We agree is has good guns (irrespective of whether you can aim them or now), we also agree it has a speed advantage over other aircraft at the br (even though it isn’t considerable). But where we don’t agree is on how that could possibly make it worthy of being 9.0.

You seem to forget that if a Hunter is downtiered there are other aircraft also downtiered on the enemy team which will almost entirely outperform it.

Hell it wasn’t even a good airframe for dogfighting IRL but more better as it could carry suspended armament.

23

I disagree but to move on and bring on another point, the Hunter also doesn’t have to be better than the CL13A Mk5 in any way to be at the same BR. Ideally that would be the case but the amount of decompression to achieve that will never happen with gaijin at the helm. Even so, it is already pretty comparable in overall performance once all stats are accounted for…people very much overrate the CL13A Mk5 is my experience.

Except, the F-86F-2 is just a F-86F-25 with better guns. The Hunter F1 has similar flight performance overall again, accounting for all stats involved.

You don’t know the Hunter then. It has extremely good MER in the horizontal and can ratefight many planes and easily win. It also DOESN’T have nearly as bad of accel as you’re claiming.

easily, if you die to 9Bs in anything short of an IL-28 you are at fault.

I am them fine. Anticipate enemy movements, control your energy/speed, and take good lines.

Massively exaggerating accel being bad (It’s literally at the very least average for the BR)

Look, I’ll even be willing to listen if you find data that supports this but nothing has ever drawn this conclusion for me.

?? What does its BR have to do with not compressing the game further

That’s cool but also not at all the point. The G.91 simply does not go, on average accounting for all scenarios in a game, go anywhere near as fast as the Hunter does. The G.91 has bad MER. The Hunter has good MER.

Relevant to this, you don’t own the G.91, I do. I also own the Hunter. I also own the MiG-15bis AND the CL13 we talked about earlier. In fact I also own the F-86F-40 variants and the F-86F-2 to compare too.

Ratefighting efficiency is not at all related to the pilot’s skill in managing their own turn. You sound like you full pull yank the stick binary on/off in every direction.

24

Ehh I think 9.3 with or without missiles from the explanation it’s just a better f86f (20mm one). Would be unbalanced at 9.0

25

Honestly, I never thought I’d see a discussion of CL-13 Mk.5 in 2024 lmao.

CL-13A was indeed decent aircraft in 9.0, but the reason it was OP was due to the lack of counterparts on the enemy team and unbalanced matchmakers.

When CL was implemented in the game, it was untouchable because Germany was counted as red team in matchmaker and, NATO team didn’t have Hunter.

Balance has been pretty decent since MiG-17 and Hunter came in around 2015, but became OP again in 2018 because matchmaker was changed to WW2 style Axis vs Allies from NATO vs Red team/mixed and event FJ4B spam.

26

I don’t think its OP I just think its better than the Hunter F.1. As i’ve already said the Hunters only advantage is its absolute top speed which it can’t reach on a full fuel load. The MER argument only applies because it quite literally cannot turn hard enough.

I don’t think any of the planes I’ve mentioned are OP, just better than the Hunter. If they switched its fuel load to something reasonable like 10 minutes then whatever but for now, its still a brick (as it was IRL) which is worse than the 9.0 mainstays and much more in line with 8.7’s.

27

Funny since this doesn’t matter at all regarding MER and I already explained that

28

the CL13B Mk6 is bullshit enough already, it’s only direct competitor in a pure 1v1 is the Ariete. MiG19 is a close by if the nr30s didn’t behave like plinkers 50 percent of the time. No thanks.

29

Meanwhile G.91Y/YS

1 Like
30

I think it would be a fine addition. Br likely 9.3.

31

I think if Cl-13 MK.6 remains at 9.0, the CAC-27 will be the same br as a slightly worse dogfighter but packing a better punch.

1 Like
32

It will not necessarily be worse. At certain speeds and altiudes it should be superior even while the 30mm reduce the time to kill.
CL-13B Mk.6 has such a energy retention coupled with Cal. 50 that some fights are more drawn out than they really have to be. 9.3 would liely be the most reasonable.

1 Like
33

I think it will have better 1 shot potential, but afaik it has a slightly higher climb rate, slightly faster, slightly worse wing loading and a slightly lower T/W.

I dunno, I still think it should still be the same br as the MK.6.

But I prefer not to argue over it, its just a difference of opinion.

34

It’s just going to be comparable to the CL13. It would be 9.0 if it arrived today.

1 Like
35

I would not mind it being 9.0 to be sure but Gaijin placing aircraft appart because one has 5 rounds more while A-10 and SU-25 remain undertiered…

1 Like
36

You’re not considering all the times there are aircraft or tanks introduced at the same BR as far worse vehicles.

37

Rather depends on the particular vehicle. I assume the worst.^^

38

i’ve heard wonders of the Gina Why

39

Why do you people insist on using discussion threads and not just getting the suggestion approved? I swear…

40

to see what people think???

1 Like