Then I would imagine it would say “greater maneuverability at longer ranges” and not “greater maneuverability and greater range”.
The only thing I can think of that could make an impact like that is a center of mass shift.
While the outside is the same, the inside is completely different it seems.
The datalink is already different
The seekers are already different
The motors are different
The proximity fuzes are different
The batteries and other electronics are different
Would it be a surprise if the servo-motors and other tvc components are different?
“Inside however, it will be an entirely new missile”
Spoiler
1 Like
the fact the “plus grande manoeuvrabilité” is paired with “allongement de portée” makes me think they refer to the manoeuvrability on the entire launch envelope
And a longer burn will do just that tbh
Same. Maybe the servo-motors could be changed, but even with that the degrees of freedom would remain the saim. maybe the servo could activate faster, but that would not improve the maximum G load, just the response time. I also think that the other internal changes, overall better deltaV are what is giving the missile better maneuverability, as the missile weight is unchanged
This is good, thanks for sending it. I was trying to think like Gaijin, how it will be in the game because you know Gaijin.
Enjoy the video everyone!
2 Likes
The EAP slander was lovely… “Encore Au Parking”, I’m definitely gonna use that
3 Likes
M88 engines when compared with other engines, including the M88-3 engine which has similar specifications as the future M88 T-Rex engine for the F5.
1 Like
Does the PESA RBE2 have the same gimbal as the AESA RBE2?
No, it has less gimbal at ±60
1 Like
Do you have a source? Someone is trying to tell me the PESA has more but I doubt it.
are there any major differences between the rafales operated by france versus the ones operated by greece? I’m curious if they’d be indentical ingame when israel inevitably gets one
The Greek ones are still F3-R, that’s all I know. For all game matters it would be pure copypaste I think. As for more specific specs like avionics, idk
I assume if it was different they would’ve named it a different standard, like how the Indian standards have specific names (like ISE for the F3-R equivalent) due to being different to French ones
1 Like
2 Likes
iirc the only difference would be Israeli TARGO-II Helmet mounted display, otherwise its just a F.3R we already have - only Fance’s own new F.4.2 or Indonesian F.4.1 would make differences atm.
7 Likes
Thanks!
1 Like
Is a 10° difference significant for gameplay? Just curious
That you’ll have to ask people who are great at gameplay stuff if a difference of ±10 would make a difference. Maybe @MBDA_MICA can answer
1 Like
Keep in mind that in WT, the radar gimbal is not circular but square. This means that flying perfectly straight gives you more radar gimbal in the corners of your screen than on the sides. You can use this to partially offset a worse gimbal limit, though it also means that jets with 70° of gimbal can utilize this too over those with 60°.
After that, it comes down to the player whether they use this to their advantage. It’s worth noting that this becomes especially important with HMS targeting. In search-and-track mode, a reduced horizontal range starts to hurt. Particularly at distances where the enemy aircraft is no longer visible to the naked eye.
7 Likes