Rafale’s SPECTRA RWR should have an accuracy of 1 degree. // Gaijin.net // Issues
Rafale’s DDM-NG should have an accuracy of ~1-2 degrees // Gaijin.net // Issues
Thanks to @joze5 and @_OceanFish for their testing.
10 Likes
I don’t really care who made it worse at dogfighting, the fact is Rafale is now nerfed, it proves that everyone can influence how it performs, not just the so-called “French Bug Reporter”. And regarding people who doubting it, there’s nothing wrong doubting it because everyone had their own biases, everyone from this thread already pretty move on regarding Rafale being nerfed, because even if it’s nerfed, it still being the best in the Air RB (Again I had to say this because most player are playing Air RB). I don’t know why you would totally bring up that issue again.
You didn’t address my point here, the fact that F-4E had to suffers from almost 3 years (before being a top dog again at its BR) and how Mirage 2000 also dominating its BR Bracket for almost 3 years too, really says a lot that the BR is very compressed again, I don’t know how advocating for removing something that already accepted is something sensible.
it’s also still the best in sim so it’s a moot point (iff hmd plus the mica plus ridiculous acceleration)
1 Like
I don’t imply Rafale being underpowered in Air SB also, I only said it because of my background as Air RB Player. Just to make it clear.
1 Like
Excuse me but the fact Typhoon HMD indicates radar scanned ennemy also acts as a semi IFF as the HMD won’t show the allies since Radar have IFF and HMD is a projection of radar acquired data + actual helmet display.
2 Likes
you can look through your camera and it automatically locks onto targets that you selected unlike eurofighter, visually id ing them (although I think eurofighter should be to do this too) . It also adds a pipper to the enemy target on the hmd so that is a moot point, although it can only do that for the target you selected and not every target so fairs. But the thing is not having to use your radar to iff is a humongous advantage in sim because you can become a giga ratter.
It’s cycling one by one tbf, and that visual spotting is pretty useless when it goes beyond more than I guess 30 KM, unless Gaijin buff those render range (which would help every other aircraft)
1 Like
Nowhere in the MICA VL brochure does it say that the reference target is at sea level. By testing against a sea level target he is ensuring the missile bleeds the maximum amount of speed due to its initial turn and is spending the maximum amount of time accelerating in thicker air. A target at the same distance but a higher altitude would probably produce a higher top speed for the missile. Basically he only bothered to show a worst case scenario and nothing else.
I base it on what we know about modern BvR combat and optimizing missile launch ranges. We can just look at how other missile manufacturers advertise their max range as well. We can also reference ESR-D for probable launch altitudes and conditions.
ESR-D has a time to climb and reach Mach 1.6 at 36,000 feet. The M-88 engine diagrams also have thrust curves for 36,000 feet. Safran advertises that Rafale can click to 40,000 feet in under 2 minutes. We know that Rafale and Eurofighter were initially derived from similar requirements. We know the reference target for AMRAAM was head on at 30,000 feet and Mach 1.5. We know the reference target for R-77 range is based on a head on target at high altitude.
Why do you think the French would not launch their BVR missiles from high altitude and not use similar testing/calculation standards similar to everyone else?
1 Like
vl mica makes sense to test at sea level because it’s also used on and advertised for ships if i recall correctly
Only if the target is in the FoV of the radar, the radar is actually pointing at the target and the target has been detected by the radar. At which point, in a furball, the EFT is no better off with or without HMD as the target is probably being displayed in the HUD and not the HMD.
The advantage of the DL IFF, is that it DOESNT require a radar to show whether the contact is freind or foe. This gives you massive situational awarness and the ability to operate with radar off with 0 worries of any TKs and in a furball, you can see who is who at any angle. Even behind your aircraft if necessary.
1 Like
actually the scorpion hmd turns off if you try to look straight behind you. it’s dumb
Okay, fair enough on that, but still, you get IFF in angles that far exceed your radars FoV and IFF without even the radar being switched on. Making IRST ratting very effective
1 Like
also i lied, i think they fixed it, you can now look straight behind you with ur hmd still on. i think they completely fixed the hmd, it even doesn’t turn off when you look slightly off your hud.
They did correct HMD angles for a lot of aircraft last major.
1 Like
Rafale missing automatic input for damaged control surfaces // Gaijin.net // Issues
Thanks to @Kishin_SR6 for testing with me.
6 Likes
Yeah and based on those tests if you augment launcher speed and alt you could hit way beyond 80km with an AMRAAM same goes for MICA you directly claiming you have to go to the most extreme launch conditions to have a decent range is stupid when you know AMRAAM and MICA have relatively close max range performances.
Because everyone else is not launching their missiles in the most extreme conditions either. They do tests according to what could be similar to a combat scenario and determine the “maximum launch range” but it could be more in better conditions or less in worse conditions. For example based on the AMRAAM test, in better conditions you could get a better max range, says 110km and in worse conditions you could get less max range, say 60km. Making the AMRAAM a missile able to reach a max range depending the conditions of 60-110km same goes for MICA (More like 50-100km) or any other MRAAM in the world most of them depending on the conditons should have a max range of between 60-100km+ the difference at this point only relying on who has best kinematics. Most missiles max range are more of an average than an absolute number. Otherwise most companies wouldn’t add those two signs “> or +” when doing brochures for their missiles.
2 Likes
Dropping its missile count to 6 would limits its match impact via its combat endurance. Its a super easy way to reduce how damaging the Rafale is the the game as a whole without hitting it with ahistorical nerfs.
This would be true for all gamemodes and isnt specific to only RB or SB. I’m not sure why this is a complex point for you guys to understand.
Similarly, removing the HMD wouldnt stop the MICA from being the best missile on the best airframe, it would just limit how easy it is to use the MICA from the notch.
These 2 points are easily the best avenue to take to balance the Rafale while remaining historically accurate.
3 Likes
This is the issue with ya’ll “Absolute historical accuracy” people. WarThunder is a game and the sole fact there is proto vehicles or not yet in service vehicles in game throws your point out of the window. This is a game with inacuracies and favor treatment. Learn to put up with it or stop playing the game instead of bothering people and starting useless arguments in threads made to enjoy a vehicle not to fight for 3 hours straight because some hotshots that hate Rafale are unhappy.
2 Likes
Yes, WT is a game, it requires balance, which the Rafale is demonstrably not??? This isnt even a case of “absolute historical accuracy” its the optimal solution to balance the Rafale without having to hit it with ahistorical nerfs.
3 Likes