Thst sounds like clear manufacturer lies to me
3 Likes
Yeah, that was a good one. Even got edited out a few minutes later but the damage was already done (the internet never forgets). The point of “manufacturer lie”, which would be a reason to sue the manufacturer as the product doesn’t deliver the promised performance, was ignored at that and the military and government will sue you if you lie about equipment purchased in a billion dollar manner (even to just get a tiny bit back of that investment as “tiny” equals dozens to hundreds of millions in such cases).
1 Like
11.000 kg is weight with gun ammunition, pilot and liquids or without it?
Definition of military empty weight according to the KSE-Contract from 1990:
Empty weight means the weight of a vehicle excluding the weight of ammunition, fuel, oil and lubricants, removable reactive armour, spare parts, tools and accessories, removable snorkelling equipment, crew and their personal equipment.
So even if we add the ammunition (150 bullets at 516g = 77,4 kg) and a crew member (100 kg with equipment) it should bei 11.177,4 kg at most. But as empty weight is defined without all that it should be 11.000 kg in game too as that is what empty weight means.
2 Likes
Thats interesting. So you’re saying the 60/90kN should be considered installed thruat as the engines can actually output 65/95kN but are throttled down intentionnaly via software to improve lifespan?
Do you have a source for that, id love to take a peak!
2 Likes
Empty weight in game includes ammunition weight an etc
That kinda defeats the definition of “empty weight” as things as pilot and ammunition should be variable depending on the ammunition type and equipment used for example.
1 Like
There are many articles which state that and it is also a logical consequenz as the EJ200 uses the XG-40 core which was designed for the higher thrust levels. It get’s for example noted here: Eurofighter Technology and Performance : Propulsion and also here: https://web.archive.org/web/20160304003108/http://www.cockpit.aero/fileadmin/data/cockpit.aero/archiv/2010/1005_web.pdf (page 8)
4 Likes
That’s pretty much it and how it has been explained to me multiple times. Thrust figures given for an airframe like the Typhoon will usually be ‘as-installed’ with all the related factors taken into account such as tweaks to longevity, efficiency of fuel burn, etc. It will rarely if ever be the absolute maximum the thing can pump out in theory.
The reason is simple and generally SOP for the industry as a whole.
A customer will be interested in the overall package - e.g. they might specify an aircraft that must develop X amount of sustained thrust (e.g. for a reasonable lifetime rather than knackering them after an hour of exceptional use) from it’s engines.
For the example of the Typhoon - the high-end of energy leaving the tailpipe is at least 90kn for sustained use. Anything beyond that is in the realms of lowering the engine lifespan, ruining the fuel burn and generally blasting through components at a greater rate. EJ200 uses a lot of onboard management gubbins to regulate that.
You seem to misunderstand? The 69/95 kN settings aren’t some kind of “overdrive” setting but the design-thrust of the engine. The current 60/90 kN are downrated via Software to extend the engines lifetime beyond its designed lifetime and as such reducing lifetime costs (like lowered combustion chamber temperatures/pressures and reduced high pressure compressor speed below the nominal certified values).
6 Likes
I wonder if the M1.5 supercruise figure is with the war setting.
Gaijin seems confuzed about the supercruise claimed number, saying it would need unrealistically high thrust or unrealistically low drag to do so. And extra 9kN per engine might be the magic ingredient.
3 Likes
We’re probably getting our wires crossed a bit. I would consider the lesser of the two figures (60/90) to be the conservative, super-safe, super-fuel-efficient figures to be banded around. In other words - I agree with you.
That is my theory too as I wrote here: Eurofighter Typhoon - Germany's Best Fighter Jet - #4339 by kensai16
1 Like
from what i found it is throttled down its current setting IRL so the engines static thrust at 60kN and 90kN as the 15% and 5% increase in performance is disabled by the DECMU as like you said it will figuratively blow up the engine and the option to turn it off is more of the mentality rather blow up a few multi jets than get the country captured.
I still think the thrust value given is static as there is no real way to get an accurate thrust reading when installed as subsonic airflow vs trans sonic vs supersonic airflow change how the intakes slow the air down and the fact that in the test stand, it’s a climate-controlled room bringing it optimal air quality in optimal temperatures. however, I don’t think that the S-duct on the typhoon loses ~6% thrust it probably around ~2%
1 Like
Just wanted to ask, bc it works perfectly fine for the realistic and arcade difficulty, it only doesn’t work for Simulator which seems weird to me from a gameplay perspective.
.
1 Like
Is there anything special about german typhoon that we can ask for in exchange for not having IRST? Not HOSBO or any armament exactly. Something else that could realistically be implemented in a matter of week or so?
2 Likes
not yet, we might get 8x amraams but i reckon everyone will get those if gaijins goes ahead with the double pylona
1 Like
AMK ig.
That would break the game engine, unfortunately. + the backlash would be extreme.
(it already kinda does with AE kit on Phantoms)
1 Like