Oh yeah, the EFT radar right now is a pile of crap.
If it was just Blue Vixen it would be fine, but holy moly, its so much worse than the Blue Vixen, its really wierd and annoying
You’re also arguing that they can’t kill an enemy in 3 hits.
Prove it.
No, I’d rather them actually model it as the best mech-scan radar, like it is, and not a blue vixen C&P.
Knowing Gaijin though they’ll half-ass it.
Oh yeah, absolutely, but as a placeholder over the holidays, its really wierd that the radar is somehow worse than the radar its C&Ped from.
There is prove buddy :3. This missile same as Hellfire. Im always talking fact what actually happen in the game.
“The Eurofighter FM is overperforming in terms of angle of attack due to the limit being set at 29 AOA on SAS Damping. It is also likely overperforming in terms of bleed rates / specific excess power in sharp turns since this has been a common problem for Gaijin’s implementation of canard fighters.”
Subjective opinion I think.
High-performance air superiority fighter - designed towards the end of the Cold War to knobble the very best the USSR was fielding. Turns out it has good flight performance. I know, shock, horror. Who knew?
Combine that with War Thunder’s flaky G-limits not really being a thing and the problem isn’t really an EFT-specific one.
I know the resident-forum-lunatic wants it nerfed. However he knows as much about aircraft design as my Labrador Retriever. So I wouldn’t take his word as gospel…
4 Likes
Prove it.
It’s still funny to me how Gaijin can make the Captor-M so horrendous ingame, it performs like AN/APG-59 on the Spey Phantoms.
The conditions were stated in the image I originally posted, so I don’t know what he’s going on about. Anyway here they are again.
Keeping in mind those are minimum requirements, so could be exceeded.
9 Likes
Answer my question before… Stop blabbering :3
I will give my proof after yours.
All player know how inconsistent Hellfire with laser guided in the game. Even already become long discussion since long time ago
Yeah… Its really wierd. Though… Gunna say “called it” I knew the Typhoon was gunna have Blue Vixen C&P and radar issues on launch
Eurofighter has better energy retention that is just as good as the Gripen. It’s actually better at high speeds and slightly worse at low speeds.
Still haven’t proven anything.
You’re the one that first started about the effectiveness of Brims, so prove it.
I’m asking you first, then why I need to answer your question right now before you give your answer? Both of our argument will end up being flagged after this lol if you still like this.
You started the discussion first without giving any evidence.
Please provide some or stop blabbering.
This is not really a subjective opinion though. I have provided sources.
I will list some of them again since they were already buried.
These are claims from Justin Bronk.
It is this Justin Bronk by the way.
So yes…when it comes to making claims about both of these aircraft…this guy is a subject matter expert and not just some enthusiast on a web forum.
No way, on another thread I said hornets and TVC was king of low speed, looks like I was right
So for the sake of argument we can just go for 100% fuel. Technically it would be 90-ish percent.
Just pulling STR numbers from Statshark. Statshark only allows data to be generated for up to around 30,000 feet so I cannot get datapoints for higher altitude.
Sustained Turn Rates
Sea Level STR = 19 degrees per second
10,000ft = 15.2 degrees per second
20,000ft = 9.7 degrees per second at Mach 1.2 / 11.2 degres per second at Mach .8
Instantaneous Turn Rates
Sea Level = 28.4 degrees per second
10,000ft = 20.8 degrees per second at Mach .6 / Up to 22.7 degrees per second at Mach .8
20,000ft = 15.3 degrees per second at Mach .7
So from the looks of things it looks like Gaijin tried to match the STR numbers in this chart. You have slightly less STR at sea level, spot on at 10,000ft, and too much at 20,000ft.
For ITR numbers…they are not high enough but also might be broadly consistent with how everything in the game underperforms in terms of ITR at altitude due to the way that Gaijin approximates flight control system limitations. This is an issue I have observed with other flight models as well; specifically the Mirage 2000.
Rafale’s canard is pushing nose down to prevent pitch-out departure whereas Eurofighters is aiding overall positive lift and creating the instability is my understanding of the differences so that doesn’t really apply.
Eurofighter must be more careful not to depart from controlled flight due to this for the same reason as F-16.
I don’t trust stat shark at all but if that’s the case, seems pretty accurate.
It’s absurd
All data that they’ve find, you mean? I don’t think the devs have seen everything available.
Look up what that means. How does the in-game model violating the laws of physics lead you to believe it’s subjective?
Or not met.