yes, they were used for testing before the ej200 was avilable on da1 and da2 iirc
1 Like
Jup, it was a test aircraft. Pilots were quite surprised about this happening. Now if only I could find where I read it.
1 Like
That makes sense what an upgrade the EJ200 is
This is just cope. The actual document discusses the “strong points” and the “weak points” with no relation to the performance of the Rafale in that paragraph excluding the ranking.
And neither do any of the sources stating M1.5 …
If this were the case then both cases should be examined and compared. But this is not case.
1 Like
Then dont bother commenting?
Apparently the RB199 equipped Typhoon wasnt half bad. I was actually expecting it instead of the T2s we actually got.
Though what I find really funny was the plan to stick EJ200s into the F3
2 Likes
You miss it again, why should we trust Dassault and SNECMA over Eurofighter GmbH or the operators of the Typhoon?
You are stating that Eurofighter have lied about the capabilities of the airframe while treating what Dassault claim as empirical truth.
1 Like
and the CAPTOR-M, a mechanical radar, should be able to track 20 including air or ground simutaneously iirc and using Priority track, keep them all updated in the same way an AESA radar can and thats in addition to the 200 that the PIRATE can track
1 Like
If M1.4 was a “strong point” of the EFT, it means by definition that the Rafale was inferior in that aspect. It wouldn’t be a strong point if it was matched/exceeded by another one of the jets in the competition.
5 Likes
Objectively comparing radar capabilities is whinging now lmao, sure.
It can’t track 20 targets simultaneously within its field of search: Community Bug Reporting System. It probably can only continue to track like 4 priority targets whilst still searching.
its 20
The original variant of the radar can track up to 20 targets at once, while engaging eight of them simultaneously. The radar has two main mechanically scanned variants: CAPTOR-C is the original version, only fitted to Typhoons of the Tranche 1 production lot and CAPTOR-M is a later version fitted to Tranche 2 jets onwards. The two standards differ in both hardware and software.
1 Like
Have you read the document? It states that a supercruise of M1.4 was one of few “strong points” compared to all the “weak points” such as “data fusion” and “EW suite”.
1 Like
No, you are crying about how French mains would like a historically accurate radar. French mains have no issues with Captor-M being accurate.
1 Like
Probably?
It can or it cannot. Probably, likely do not really cut it and if you don’t know that’s also fine.
You also are not taking into consideration the significant amount of bribes Snegma and Salty sent to both the Fr*nch and Swiss governments
TBF, BAE does the same lmao
1 Like
States the radar is likely underperforming but its already vastly superior to all other radars in-game atm and explains that it is working as an ESA as per gaijins current model of ESA’s, contrary to what the person I was replying to stated → “crying” xD
Interestingly, it seems that Gaijin are very “aware” of the performances of the Eurofighter. They have rejected some flight model reports in the EFT due to their own internal sources from their consultants which makes sense since the EFT is used in 3 different tech trees in-game and I would not be surprised if their consultants supplied them with assorted amount of sources.
This ultimately means that the Eurofighter is both hard to buff but also hard to nerf since they have their own sources to compare with. In contrast with the Rafale there were limited amount of information and so they are forced to take our word for it.
2 Likes
