5 JASSM would be historically accurate payload for F-15E, so would the 28 GBU-53, but neither will come this update for "“balance” (i dont think JASSM should come, but with AASM, GBU-53 is starting to look quite feasible)
same would probably apply to typhoon. I mean, 18 60km missiles? that go decently fast? come on
Not really an issue when you have things like AGM-65, AASM and KH-38s kicking around.
Assuming SAL only still, you could fire them at longer ranges, but still have to move into 20km to target something with your laser.
You can still only guide them onto one target at time.
The main advantages of going from 1s to 2s (besides historically accuracy) is:
Just puts the Typhoon more on par with its competition with FnF AGMs (and most often you’ll probably only run 6 with 4x paveway IVs)
if added they should be limited though, unless counterparts with similar numbers are added (like GBU-53)
and all this talk of brimstone 2, but still no LJDAM for US stuff when we were the first to use them :P
Anyone else thinks the Typhoon doesnt sound quite right, to me its sounds like its misisng quite a bit of bass
So. just finished spading the Typhoon, so i’ll give a better opinion now.
First things first, this thing G-Locks all time. Gunna be the biggest handicap for it in a turn fight. ACE is gunna be a hard requirement for it. But overall, I think the FM feels fine, I didnt feel like i was running rings around anyone, but its hard to truly judge because everyone is in the Typhoon.
As for afterburner thrust/acceleration.
Using this document as a baseline for comparison:
Running max fuel, with a 4+4 fit at a 30° climb angle, brakes off to 36k ft + Mach 1.6 took around 2 minutes.
Now this doc does state “under 2 minutes 30 seconds” and doesn’t specify by how much under that actually is, so its hard to tell whether what we’ve got is correct or not solely by the use of that doc, but I would be confident to say its not far off
There are certainly a number of issues with wise to speed to be addressed:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/uM50xadDrBYA
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/j5yHCfIPWJ7j
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/VthxlDYIxu05
but its possible that the devs have given it not enough thrust in dry heat and too much in reheat, but how much of an impact that would have overall is hard to tell. Either way, I would strongly doubt for any major nerfs to the Typhoons performance, if anything, I’d say overall, the Typhoon is massively underperforming compared to IRL, perticuarly with its sensor suite
All IRST is underperforming in game right now. It’s nothing new.
It probably has something to do with how the game calculates heat in general.
Radar is probably as well. Its suppose to have a track rate high enough to do some things usually only E-scans can do, but its no faster than blue vixen. I suspect its mostly placeholder at the moment. THe issue is finding a good source, closest found hints at a 333° per sec rate. but its probably not good enough for a bug report
I think the FM in general is okay.
I dueled one of my friends in a Gripen earlier, I could energy fight them extremely easily although in a horizontal fight it seems to be a closer fight.
Below 500 km/h Gripen seems to have slightly better pull, but above that speed the Gripen cannot keep up at all.
Might need some tweaking there and then, especially what you said about dry thrust.
yeah, feels more like polishing than outright problems
Am I missing something or does that document not contradict this bug report:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/j5yHCfIPWJ7j
I.e. the document you just gave says the max speed is Mach 2…
Part of the issue there is gripen’s FM is just kind of sad compared to where it ought to be.
Hmm… it might. This doc is from Flame as well, so not sure, unless there is some context I dont know about. But that’ll be an @Flame2512 question for tomorrow
I see.
My friend does much more dogfighting than I do, so it is probably just skill difference.
Is there a comparison between EFT and Rafale, or J-10A?
I would like to see that.
Thank you.
Okay, just found something a tad interesting, and I have no idea if this needs bug reporting or not.
When you have Litening III pod equipped, you can still view the PIRATE feed. In both the Harrier Gr7 and GR4 the Tpod overrides the inbuilt camera and you cannot access it.
@Gunjob Does this need a bug report or do you think this is intended?
Partly true. The MiG-29’s IRST is tuned correctly for non-afterburning targets (15 km detection for a side on MiG-21 at full dry thrust).
The main problem that all IRST’s (and IR missiles) share is that afterburners do not provide nearly the increase in heat signature that they should.
Another problem is that a couple of IRST’s are simply not tuned properly. Su-27 is a major example. The manual provides that it can detect a Mach 2 afterburning MiG-25 from 90-100 km HEAD ON. 14 km for a head on non-afterburning target on the deck and 50 km for rear aspect.
What do we have in game? A cap of 30 km (can’t lock anything past that). One of the hottest planes in the game, the F-14, is detected from like 10-11 km with no afterburner head on. IRL test was done with Su-15 with around 14 km detection range, so if you take a comparable aircraft, the J-8B, you will get measly 4 km. Locking a side on target in a match, the most I was able to get was around 20-25 km, for a supersonic F-15 on afterburner. Nowhere near the performance we should have.
The 30 km cap was “fixed”. Nothing really changed, however. The IRST is technically capped only at 100 km, but the range gates are still at 30 km, so we are stuck with that.
Currently, both the Eurofighter and the Rafale IRST have the same exact problem. Both are technically capable of more, but are capped at 30 km.
If they don’t change anything, these seemingly advanced IRST systems will all be barely any better than the one on the MiG-29.
Ridiculous
Not a huge loss, they’re utter trash in-game anyways, and borderline useless.
