What other aircrafts does this apply to?
I mean if you want to go at the bottom of this issue you’d need to remake the entire physics engine
9 Likes
Remake it for what? The issue at hand is unreliable and inconsistent sources and claims.
1 Like
The reporting criteria has not changed.
Indeed the Austrian Brochure was rejected and not used.
The report had an additional source provided by the user at a later date,
- Dassault Aviation, Snecma, Thales - Rafale International Issue #10
- Aermacchi STR chart
- Rafale Solo Display 2018: Toulouse Francazal de l’intérieur
A new report is welcome if there is further corrective context or evidence to provide should there still be a remaining issue.
Reports are primarily actioned on what they are reported on. The devs review that specific information and make changes accordingly should the information line up and agree.
If there is further detail in the sources that can be used for other matters, additional reports should be made to report them correctly (as its one issue per source).
3 Likes
“Dassault Aviation, Snecma, Thales - Rafale International Issue #10” is a pilot testimonial that conflicts with the Aermacchi source used in the report. (Aermacchi says they should be the same, the testimonial says it should be better)
It has no configuration, no fuel weights for the comparison, and no point performance data. Additionally it has not been used as a setpoint to model the aircraft’s STR, the in-game performance is higher than what was included in the report.
2 Likes
Again, the bingo warning occurs later at 8:26, before is a low level warning telling you that the bingo warning is soon, check fuel. Which would be 500kg/s.
If you think the fuel consumption in game is too low please feel free to report this.
I’m also not sure what your point is, if you lower the fuel consumption then that means the STR would be taken at even less fuel… further nerfing rafale?
Nice user skin
Right? Always loved the Greek roundels
1 Like
I love the camo.
1 Like
The fuel warning clears when the bingo warning level is reset at 9:04, its part of the same sequence. 500kg/m for that duration of the video is also unreasonable, the plane is off burner for a significant portion of that. 500kg/m is also higher than what is physically possible in the game at those speeds, and we know from the SFC in other docs and thrust curves in the safran brochure that that the burn rate simply cannot be this high.
Not sure you understood what I meant, basically the initial fuel warning isn’t the bingo warning. So the fuel consumption required isn’t as high as you suggested, however yes, it’s probably too high and the fuel point they chose is potentially generous.
Updated Standards list again, specifically F.5.
3 Likes
Rj-10 is anti awacs, anti ship too and there is tp-15 only SEAD and anti-ship at least from what i understand.
As far as I can tell, there are rumours for a SEAD version of the RJ-10, as it seems to be considered as ideal basis for such.
Also, I can’t remember whether AASM-XLR range numbers were already mentioned somewhere, however it seems we can expect >120km, ofc depending on launch altitude.
It was aid AASM XLR more than doubles the range of standard AASM iirc so more like >160km as in ideal conditions AASM can reach 80km.
1 Like
Pretty sure it was that even the 1300kg fuel weight estimate gaijin generously gave the french players is still much too high a fuel load to be considered realistic considering known data.
iirc, the bug report that recently nerfed the Rafale took 1000kg as a conservative number, and gaijin for some reason popped it up to 1300kg for free, mitigating the impact the report would have had on the STR.
piiot was pointing out that for 1300kg to have been the approximate fuel weight at the time the part of the video was measured, the fuel burn rate would have had to have been much higher than possible, and does not match known numbers, nor those used in-game, among other things, such as the fact that apparently the clip that was “analyzed” doesnt have an actual STR pull, and the measured part gaijin used to implement the buff and now nerf has the aircraft both losing spd and alt, which would indicate the turn to have likely been an ITR pulln and NOT and STR.
Thats what I underatood atleast, @piiot can correct me if I misunderstood his points.
3 Likes
yes that tends to happen on modern stuff unfortunately, although i got to agree what makes a valid source to the devs eyes seems quite inconsistant
Regarding acceleration and drag though, all planes are performing weirdly
Hell i remember having a capture from a real rafale HUD and doing the same scenario in game. The indicated air speed in kts was the same, but the mach value was off by 0.1, which means something is very wrong with the basic physics, as it’s no small difference for a value that should be identical
3 Likes
Gaijin uses a set group of hard coded atmospheric conditions for varying maps (i think they have 3 iirc, desert, arctic, temperate) which would impact speed of sound. Irl the plane likely calculates speed of sound through the medium at that exact time, which could skew the number when compared to in-game.
Up to 2x at high altitude and 3x at low altitude for the XLR range