I never mentioned uninstalled static thrust of F-15E; I never mention uninstalled thrust in general.
I never mentioned static thrust of any jet cause that only matters for the acceleration to rotation. Not acceleration in-air, not climb, not acceleration post-mach.
There’s a lot of factors, and static thrust is a tiny component while at-speed thrust has more uses.
Someone mentioned 58000lbs of thrust my ass cooked so I probably misread someone else’s reply as yours 😂
What are your findings?
The bypass ratio is the largest of the eurocanard engines (J-10 is higher, but is being restricted more so by the small intake).
Thus with high bypass ratio compared to its’ peers and a relatively high pressure ratio the afterburning performance in supersonic can be much higher than other engines in similar static thrust class. The dynamic (optimal) thrust will be much more, AT LEAST twice as high as the max thrust on mil power and likely a lot more than that. Engines one generation older than it such as RD-33 actually produce a higher offset than this with much lower pressure ratios and temperature limits.
Another example, the J-10B’s WS-10 engine which has an even higher bypass ratio and lower overall pressure ratio than the EJ200; ~75 kN thrust static idle with full mil power and ~160kN dynamic thrust with full afterburner at 1.3 mach sea level conditions. That is a 2.13x the static mil thrust.
A lot of the TL;DR behind my posts:
Typhoon likely competes with F-15C in time to climb.
F-15E’s time to climb is ridiculous due to its stupid TWR.
I have no proof of Typhoon being better, equal, or worse than F-15C at this time.
I have a strong estimate that F-15E is fastest to mach 1.5 at around 10500 meters from brakes.
It time to climb at these times noteworthy to compete with one another for combat? Not really.
Neat data tho.
The F-15E simply won’t beat the Typhoon in this regard. The wave drag of the airframes is going to be vastly different, the engines of the Typhoon are simply better in that region of flight. It doesn’t even take a hard look at the data to say that it all supports this.
This is like comparing American muscle to an equally well powered Ferrari and trying to claim that the Ferrari is somehow losing the quarter mile. The difference from this comparison to the real world aircraft is that the Muscle would at least have the advantage of gear ratios in the car comparison.
Here’s a diagram I made that I think what Tranche 1 can offer. The brimstones are just there for cope, I don’t expect them.
References:
It’s missing some brimstones, but yeah they are a Tranche 2 onwards thing.
Depends on what block of Tranche 1, block 5 carries LGB and dumb bombs. But has no targeting pod integration. Unless it has the SRP 4.2 upgrade where it gets LITENING 3 support.
Tranche 1 Block 5 SRP 4.2 has LGB’s and LITENING III.
Tranche 2 Block 8 is similar to Tranche 1 Block 2 (and earlier) in it was Air to Air only.
Tranche 2 Block 10 is the first fully air to ground capable EFT.
Tranche 2/3 Block 10 (and higher) with P1E (and higher) has support for Paveway 4 and other smart weapons.
Tranche 2/3 Block 10 (and higher) with P3Ea has support for Brimstone 2.
GBU-54 is still in integration
im using actual data not anything in game btw
So the laser guided bombs without targeting pod are just dumb bombs combined with ballistics computer?
well in reality sth like buddy lasing is a thing as well
Is that 4 or 6 120s?
8 aim120s
Also manually imputting GPS coordinates for GPS guided bombs. (which they were on the Typhoon)
That would require a doxxing mechanic in the game
Yep it would. But there are 2 ways for something like a Typhoon to drop ePaveways without having a Tpod installed.
Neither in game yet, but both could be cool to have in some form or another.
The target point / mission point or whatever it is could be used to drop GPS weapons. Most modern jets can designate target on ground via hud and make steerpoint or tgt point out of it.
Yep, thats how I would enable GPS guided bombs to be used without a Tpod
