Does rafale tell which target it’s tracking in cockpit and where ? Cuz su30sm tells in hmd plus sight where does rafale does cuz in sim
if the radar has NCTR it should tell what type of plane are you tracking in one of the MFD’s
I tried finding it in rafale never found it
The rafale gets nctr, but not in sim becuase gaijin don’t know where the nctr would display in the cockpit of the plane.
1 Like
Ah thank you that’s what I was looking for in sim never found it that’s why I was asking
You can’t know the load exactly if you don’t know the standard.
Assuming it’s an F4.1(And they load it to the maximum they can) if he’s not in a peace config as you say he could be either in :
A2A mission which means : 8 missiles made of a combination of Meteors and MICA or just MICAs + supersonic fuel tanks on either wings or belly not the 3 at the same time or no fuel tank at all(Not likely)
A2G mission : 6 A2A missiles + AASM/GBUs + TGP + Supersonic fuel tanks or not
Reco mission : RECO pod + at least wing missiles (+Eventually fuselage pylons missiles) + supersonic fuel tanks
Simple travel : Some A2A missiles and the supersonic fuel tanks
Assuming it’d be an F3R :
A2A mission : Remove 2 missiles.
A2G : Remove 2 A2A missiles.
Reco : Nothin changes.
Travel : Nothing changes
And all this is assumptions there is a lot of variables to take in count especially for F4.1 where we don’t know if they frequently use SP3 pylons or not.
And if the pilot was effectively doing this just for fun which is unlikely then it probably would only have 2 wingtip missiles and the supersonic fuel tanks.
I’ll have to ask @WreckingAres283 to review my comment tho. He knows the plane and the loadouts way better than i do. I just made guesses based on what i saw and what is likely or not.
Its impossible to figure the loadout just on that picture, it could be any A2A kinda config.
3 Likes
Well the fact they are at M1.6 at least discard the subsonic fuel tanks options at the very least no? But yeah except that anything can be supended or nothing at all even.
Oh man will be random but wanted to appreciate your bug reports and threads are very nice
1 Like
The missile performances are all other the place, but to be short, energy is also impacted
Some interesting discussion took place on the MICA VL, and running some tests on stat shark (yes i know, not ideal, but it is what it is) and considering the slim amount of sources available, the most reasonable conclusion was :
- The missile most likely accelerates too fast (can even be hypersonic up high in game currently)
- The missile is far too draggy. At 50km and for a mach 2 shot, it would already be transsonic
- The missile is most likely missing loft (almost no loft - 5° - compared to the rest)
A fixed MICA would basically be an AMRAAM, but with TVC, instead of accelerating like crazy before decelerating almost as crazily.
As it stands, and with its current thrust and Cx, the missile would be unable to reach 80km, even if you removed the hard limit, as its battery time would kill it at 57km for the above mentionned scenario
and happy 405
3 Likes
Love your Rafale camo, funny seeing a fellow Gundam fan in the wild.
1 Like
No, those tanks were actually relatively recently qualified up to M1.6
I would note that this photo seems to have been taken as some form of gesture, trying to chase the sun. It’s not on an “operation”.
No clue, this squadron usually posts a bunch of similar photos for both mirage 2000 and Rafale
Rafale’s FSO-TV has insufficient zoom // Gaijin.net // Issues
Thanks goes to Mulatu for his source and assistance.
5 Likes
In that case would be great if you could provide others the full sources as well.
the guy known for manipulation and misuse of sources is highly suspect.
Pretty common most wont trust that guy anymore
Edit:
How is the discussion of sources for a bug report innappropiate?
If its validdjust share the sources and good the topic is finished. Flagging this just makes it more suspect and like u want to hide sth
6 Likes
This is the source
Just to give a heads up, MT is a supplementary source, so anything added over said pictures, for example ranges added by the magazine itself, will not be taken by Gaijin at face value, unless they decide to break their own rules.
3 Likes
That does indeed sound like a mulatu source in that case
1 Like
First off, I was deep asleep and never flagged your comment, there’s no point in making baseless accusations.
i never called you out specialy there, it was an edit for the general public
They’ve accepted and implemented reports with a single non-primary source and have implemented them. For instance a video showing HUD signage is pretty clear cut and doesn’t need to have written literature. Another would be a single secondary source book showing the HUD of an aircraft (which did get passed and implemented in the case of the F-16). But I’ll add other sources just in case.
But then how would the public hide something or share the sources if I am the one who had made the report?
