while i do agree that the eurofighter should added soon, my question is whether it would be added with the f-18. the typhoon is a major step in european air defense, i would imagine it would be its own update. i think it’ll be the f-18 update, and then a separate typhoon update
1 Like
Israel gets F-15 with F100-PW-229 engines and USA possibly (hopefully) as well in the upcoming update. There is absolutely no reason to delay EFT any longer considering the state of German top tier right now.
INB4 muh HoRnEt.
IDGAF about F-18. If I wanted to play F-18, I would play USA (I do) or any other nation that used it.
3 Likes
Yeah Imo I don’t like how top tier American built vehicles should be copy pasted in other countries, really UK Italy and Germany should already get the Eurofighter. I think the T.1 BLK 5 would be perfect.
4 Likes
Eventually, though I disagree with the notion that it could be added to the game as it is. It’s an air superiority fighter from the 90s/early 2000s and would be going up against airframes, even if upgraded, from the 70s with the same missiles. It would easily require at least a new BR. If the game isn’t ready for the Super Hornet, a multirole fighter of about the same time period (it is so different from the base F-18 that for practical purposes it’s a different aircraft), I don’t see how it would be ready for an air superiority fighter from the same timeframe.
The Typhoon was intially developed in the 70s.
Additionally, a vehicle’s date for service entry doesn’t mean it has better or worse performance. The Mitsubishi F-1 entered service after the F-15A, as an example. Additionally, the Su-34 is from 2006, the Gripen entered service in 1996, and the J-10 is from 2002.
Do you have any actual concerns about performance or are you just bitching about the service date?
Yeah, the service date isn’t the be-all end-all, I fully agree, but there is a massive difference between an air superiority platform from the 90s/early 2000s and a CAS or trainer platform from the same timeframe. As it stands, the Typhoon would have much greater manuverablility then the F-15 with the same missiles, and while it does carry fewer of those missiles, it isn’t as though it takes a small amount either. I don’t see how that can be added to the game as-is.
The F-15C is faster with a higher climb rate, better acceleration and TWR, and more powerful radar. Additionally, it is only slightly less maneuverable than the Typhoon with an instantaneous turn rate of 28.5deg/s vs 30, and a sustained of 22.5 vs 23. In-game, the F-15 actually sustains 28deg/s.
The Typhoon would certainly be a highly capable aircraft, but at least this version using only exisiting in-game technology would not be anything revolutionary.
1 Like
If they give F-15C BOL and an/apg63v2 or v3 (v2 would add a significant amount of weight but v3 is much lighter) it could compete pretty effectively
The typhoon has a higher t/w ratio
The Typhoon has a maximum thrust of 180kN or 18,348kgf and an empty weight of 10,995kg for a TWR or 1.67.
The F-15C has a maximum thrust of 28,500kgf and an empty weight of 13,473kg for a TWR of 2.11.
Calculate off gross weight or combat weight, empty weight skews it a lot
Typhoon max thrust are 20,200kgf, were did you get 2.11 from for the F-15C?
In War Thunder players aren’t at gross weight, everyone packs around 20min fuel. So sure let’s look at 20min.
The Typhoon has a fuel consumption of 22g/kNs when not at afterburner. I’m going to assume WT uses full throttle non-afterburning for fuel load calculations. This means at the full power of 60kN each. So 22g/kNs* 120kN*1200s= 3168kg
Again 18,348kgf/10,995+3168= 1.30
The F-15C weighs in at 16,583kg at 20min fuel so 28,500/16,583=1.72.
F-15C uses P&W F100-PW-220 which say the max thrust is 50.000 lbf which is around 22.600 kgf not 28,500 kgf
F15 = 22.600 kgf/13.473kg = 1.68
edit: this should be empty weight btw
I’m using in-game values
I am pretty sure the 60kn and 90kn are the static thrust at sea level.