Yeah, it should have a flight control system that prevents it from losing too much speed ingame, but I have my doubts on their ability to implement something like that
How would that work without limiting its pitch?
Potentially force the throttle up in sharp turns too? I know quite a few jets do that to avoid just killing the engines at high AoA but it would have the effect of making it harder to stall too.
i mean the horizontal scan is ok for me, i only hate the vertical axis, the captor-m radar just brings problems we didnt had on the previous jets or at least i didnt had
I guess I got used too much to the ESA’s, the update rate is way nicer, even when using the wider bands. The Captor, for me, feels usable only when the band is so narrow that the update rate is ok, and even then the targets still drift all over the place🫠
It probably does. Not much use in ripping around full force at mach 1.5 and killing the pilot, and also bleeding a ton of speed
Basically what’s being done with FBW controls on most jets sine the f16 then
Yeah, I’m not claiming it to be anything absolutely crazy (though the F-22’s FCS can manipulate pretty much anything that could act as a control surface, this is probably more for low speed)
Pretty sure thats how all modern FCS’ work…
i know Rafale can do a similar thing to act as an airbrake, but theres just a lot of control surfaces on the F-22 and theyre pretty big
Yeah forgot we where the only community that had players that teamkill and revenge kill (spoiler it’s a big no)
I know, just meant to make sure you don’t lose your time too much trying to fix the unfixable
Those weights are minimum fuel for both, still the difference is very small. If anything the rafale would carry even less fuel for a proper comparison if I adjusted for fuel consumption/time
You can also use SS for comparing TWR through the flight regime
An interesting point of note being that the EFT gets absolutely neutered by high speed and high alt in-game with both an atrocious drag curve and horrid engine thrust degradation despite being designed to perform in said high speed, high alt regimes…
Because it’s stated performance values from Airbus are a clear marketing lie. The airframe is simply too draggy obviously.
Just like to point out the lack of performance on the EF2000 is the fault of the developers being stubborn and arbitrary and not the fault of any community member or the Rafale.
Because I know for a fact someone definitely blames the FR tree playerbase and the Rafale for the missing performance of the EF2000.
Debatable, a select few French bug reporters decided that they would have a crack at nerfing the Eurofighter using manipulated/misinterpreted sources and funnily enough, the devs did the right thing and actually read the sources, resulting in a buff for the EFT.
The correct statement here would be ‘no matter how hard Rafale players try to stay dominant, they can’'t seem to do so without exploiting the bug reporting apparatus)
And how many more reports were made to try and nerf the rafale, with all but one being shot down because they also misinterpreted sources without any shame either ?
You mean the turn rate nerf due to the French community ignoring the bingo fuel warning and then attempting to gaslight the community into thinking that the bingo fuel warning was irrelevant to the fuel weight? Even though I had pointed out the warning much earlier and also the specific instance where it shows the fuel weight?
People are not wrong when they characterize the French bug reporting community as acting in bad faith in my opinion.
And you absolutely refusing to consider that most planes overperform in high altitude scenarios and painting it like only eurocanards are isn’t bad faith either ? Give me a break.
At least on the matter of the bingo fuel after some discussions (most) people finally arrived on the same conclusion. You are just like a broken record repeating the same stuff over and over again.