The thrust isnt mediocre though. They’re smaller and lighter engines than F404’s for example, but have pretty much equivalent thrust, lower SFC, and if what DirectSupport said is right, much better high alt performance to boot. Thats not the mark of a bad engine.
1 Like
Correct, I already claimed it shouldn’t have an excess thrust to be able to hit Mach 2.8 in-game if aircraft limitations weren’t a factor.
First off, we’re supposed to examine aircrafts independently and judge them with the according sources rather than trying to compare with other aircrafts which is problematic in of itself. Model both aircrafts to the best of sources available and see where they fall, not by engaging in “This aircraft should be better than this because online discourse said so”. Those working on the Eurofighter flight models have a big problem to deal with, which is that the engine has taken quite a bit of thrust loss and documents on the prototype are being used for the Eurofighter and often times are being preferred over other more newer sources. It’s a whole other set of factors you have to take into account if you want to compare both aircrafts, factors we don’t have sources for on the Eurofighter or among other things.
I already have sources needed to prove Rafale should have excess thrust allowing it to achieve atleast somewhere in the region of Mach 2.4, rather than Mach 2.8 in-game.
The problem is that the excess thrust allowing it to achieve 2.4 without physical limitations still means it would out-accelerate the Eurofighter post-Mach (Eurofighter in-game I mean, not sure about IRL Eurofighter).
1 Like
I see you didnt read my little note in the spoiler lmao.
2 Likes
Fair enough, I’ve been hearing so many EFT vs Rafale comparisons it’s an auto-response from me.
1 Like
Can it hit mach 2.8 or does it just have the thrust to be able to hit that (how do you even come up with the 2nd one btw?)
In-game it cannot hit Mach 2.8 as the airframe would disintegrate, but yes it has enough thrust to do that. But Gaijin could make it have a thrust-drop off after Mach 2.3 for the engine’s thrust which wouldn’t affect the post-Mach acceleration anyway. And wdym by coming up with the 2nd one?
Oh ok.
What I mean is, how do you find out it does 2.8 specifically? Do you just run the numbers assuming the airframe doesn’t break?
1 Like
Statshark graph, though you could also make a user mission with increased VNe if you wanted a more accurate number (statshark isnt perfectly accurate, but its good at giving you an idea)
4 Likes
Which reminds me, did anyone even verify statshark’s claim of Rafale doing Mach 2.8 with increased VNE?
@dark_claw may have tested it out to that speed, they were the first to bring up how massive the buff was.
Who knows. The community has been very touchy recently and many post get hidden for seemingly no reason (not saying many post shouldn’t have been hidden tho)
Mainly for the types of comments you’re making, I’d advise not typing anything offensive or rage baity if you don’t want it to be hidden.
@sudo_su1 Don’t abuse the flag system. Thanks.
4 Likes
LOL, now people think I’ve been flagging the posts here
For the sake of clarification, he’s referring to me posting a clip of sarcastically flagging vizender’s post …
1 Like
Which is abusing it as it had no reason to be flagged. Not really sure your point, but anyways don’t discuss removed comments and keep it on topic o/
2 Likes
Is there a reason why NCTR isn’t shown in the cockpit for sim?
Croatia (by their minister of defence) might look to upgrade and modernize rafale’s armament.
(I heard a lot those f3r were still pesa for some reason so maybe that ? those rafale could be modernized up to the f4.1 standard, and, as far as i understand, putting mica ng on them is possible after it has been tested etc…)
The students were offended that their plane was being humiliated
I would say the light theme for starters
20 Likes