There exists some nice data about the EF inlet I already wrote down earlier in this thread. In short:
Mach 0,5 → 97% pressure recovery
Mach 1,0 → 100% pressure recovery
Mach 1,5 → 96% pressure recovery
Mach 2,0 → 90% pressure recovery
Mach 2,5 → 80% pressure recovery
Pressure recovery should translate nearly direct to engine thrust, but that’s just a guess on my part.
it’s impossible
…for Russian jet engine technology perhaps.
Joking aside - you’re looking at a few % (2-3) of losses with a well designed inlet.
The pressure recovery rate never reaches 100%
They’re not talking about 0% intake loss, that is impossible as there is not zero friction.
What they’re saying is they can achieve bench test static pressure only at mach 1 👍
Show me an engine that has only 2-3% channel losses and you will win a scientific prize of achievement.
Doesn’t the SU-27 currently have that range of channel losses? At least when it comes to in game I have no clue about IRL
No the channel losses and thrust of the Su-27 are incorrect, Gaijin has chosen to use tertiary sources for the modeling of that aircraft and it is one of the most underperforming and flawed ones at rank 8.
That’s ignoring the likely overperforming afterburning thrust, which the devs then massively increased the airframe drag to overcompensate. And hence we get utter terrible energy retention while maneuvering.
Ever heard of Concorde?
Y’know - the Mach 2.0 jet airliner that could actually generate more thrust the faster/higher it went thanks to some very clever engineering. Plus it did it without afterburners (a high-mach no. supercruise in effect).
In the 1960s.
German Eurofighter naming bug report
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/9Rmw9hMaJ83E
hopefully it doesn’t get denied again :(
The F-106 supercruised up to 1.5 mach in 1959 - 1960 what does that have to do with the concorde? It had an efficiency of 43% which was best in class at the time but laughable by the standards set by the EJ200. The channel losses are in full effect there as well. You can’t escape physics. 100% bench vs installed thrust is not feasible because no matter what you do, there will be inlet loss coefficient and nozzle loss coefficient. It is not possible unless you have designed some materials that have zero friction.
I’d love to discuss this but it will derail the topic, which is the performance of the EJ200. @kensai16 and @Crazed_Otter are welcome to submit bug reports asking for 90kN thrust, they will be met with the same answer by the devs. Not that they are experts more than we are.
I never said there were no channel losses so i won’t file a bug report about it. The thing I’m mostly interested in would be the thrust curve used in game for the engines at different heights, AoAs and speeds but I doubt that we will ever see these graphs.
Additionally the part about the EJ200 being throttled (for reduced wear and doubled service life of all parts) and not running at its full potential power it was designed for currently is of interest to me.
Edit: And another thing would be the pyrophoric flares of the BOL launchers of the EF.
Do not fret. I have personally reached out to the Bundeswehr to gather the necessary information.
Now we wait.
Hopefully our NATO alliance will be enough for them to share to a US citizen.
Hopefully, i put all i can find in that bug report
Sorry, You might want gajin convert to CAPTOR-E AESA radar like RBE2-AA AESA radar from french Rafale ?
@Fireball_2020 and @Flame2512 supposedly have hard data on channel losses, which is what is used to model the thrust in-game. They also likely have the data you are asking for.
CAPTOR-E still isn’t fitted to German Typhoons yet, although Gaijin might consider a newer Typhoon variant to add to Germany in the future.
Currently, only Kuwaiti and Qatari Typhoons have CAPTOR-E, and they are only the Mk0 version. German Typhoons will get Mk1
At the same time, CAPTOR-E will be much more capable than RBE2-AA and I think asking for it right now is too early.
But why? AFAIK the Eurofighters with the CAPTOR-E only entered production last year. All until todays EFs use the CAPTOR-M (which is still one of the if not the best mechanical radar with AESA-like abilities).