it’s possible on F-89D according to gaijin
if it did get them, it’d probably only be loaded into one echelon of the racks
all are fired at once, and proxy looks forward and not side to side
That or it can fire each echelon independently, as we both know, we lack anything to say such a thing
Not necessarily, AIM-26B on that platform might not force it up by a lot. I’m not sure, it’s sorta difficult to balance
Has anybody put in a report to add Older Falcons and The AIM-26B? If so, any word on if it’s been accepted?
check the original post
I don’t think that’s a good idea with how much it would jump up the BR in exchange for 1-2 better missiles
top speed and engine performance are getting buffs aren’t they? it’s missing almost 1000kg/f of thrust if I recall
if you have to reserch the missiles and dont get guns how tf do u stock grind it 😭
nerfs all around (except at high altitudes you’ll never see)
Current:
Sea level = M 0.99
10,000ft = M 1.10
20,000ft = M 1.13
30,000ft = M 1.17
35,000ft = M 1.14
40,000ft = M 0.99
50,000ft = N/A (Flight Not sustainable)
Correct / IRL:
Sea level = M 0.97
10,000ft = M 0.99
20,000ft = M 1.06
30,000ft = M 1.16
35,000ft = M 1.18
40,000ft = M 1.14
50,000ft = M 0.98
16% more thrust on afterburner
Current = 5820kgf
Correct = 6900kgf (including 5% channel loss like current military thust), manual states 7257kgf
so really its missing ~1100kgf
Not even mentioning the report to nerf its turn, which will cripple it
I think you overlooked the flight characteristic chapter in the manual when you made your report; the g load limitations chart has a VERY generous stall speed margin (130 knots vs 100 knots) to keep pilots out of trouble. I put a comment explaining it in more detail
But it seems that the FM has at most 5 to 10 % extra more lift than it should have, just like the current F106 FM.
On the other hand the report about speed vs altitude should improve it’s induced drag while raising the parasitic drag, so the speed bleed in turns shouldn’t be quite as bad;
The manual has a chart showing minimum speeds for level flight that you could verify in test flight to see if thrust and induced drag are balanced properly, but the results might be misleading if warthunder cheats a bit by not modelling intake efficiency decreasing at high AoA’s.
This report meets all standards set out by gaijin, and is valid,
an F-101C G load report, written by my good friend is labelled as “fixed” uses the F-101s version of this graph, and is “Fixed” and not “Not a Bug”, providing proof this report is correct
(correct within margin of error)
In additon to the F-101 case, the graph shows a max pull of 1G at ~150kt, and this manual also states no reccomended minimum speed or stall speed
We see that this is the case in game too within margin of error of gaijin
Whether if this is “correct” to real life, this is how gaijin interprets the data, (as proven by the F-101 above), if you wish to contest that, I cannot change that
I agree with the format of the report itself, it’s the manuals themselves that are written differently depending on the manufacturer. In the F101’s case, that graph specifies 150 knots at 10 000 feet is shown as true stall speed, while also showing that 190 knots is the minimum speed below which the airplane turns unstable and starts to pitch up by itself. Note that in this case, below 150 knots the elevator loses all authority, so being able to maintain a steady 150 knots should be next to impossible.
In the F102’s case, the speed region below which the plane starts to lose stability is simply omitted.
i feel like this plane is an AMAZING example of why we need dynamic BRs that shift based on the equipped research. maybe it can be 8.7 or even 8.3 when it just has super falcons, and let it research AIM-26es that would send it up to 9.0 once theyre researched
AIM-26 is just about a 10.3 level missile, it’s similar to an AIM-9C in range and better in pull once it starts maneuvering
I asked Smin a question on the rumor round up thread, and the answer makes me think that we can MAYBE use this video and an existing mechanic as precedent for a rocket gyro, the A-10C already has a system like this for its APKWS, pictured here:
Smins reply to my question about wether we could get this on the F-102 was this:
so maybe… maybe it’s worth a shot, if you need anything from me to make the report let me know
This is a worse Sea Vixen ATP. Therefore the gunpods or AIM-26Bs are urgently needed to keep its BR.
Gunpods are not magic spells. Rifle caliber, would require a chase to reliably shoot down. Not something to fly-by with
2 Likes
By all means, go for it.
If it falls on deaf ears, I’ll make a formal suggestion to propose this feature for planes that require radar to fire rockets.
I’ve never made a report, not sure how
You can use this template of my previously accepted bug report https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/hby3kDe71MEQ.
Just change the title, description, proposed fix, and source regarding the air-to-air rocket computer. Then, attach YouTube footage with the given timestamp. Try to provide a brief description explaining that the F-102A is missing a gyro gunsight tuned for rocket ballistics, as shown in the video. Upload a screenshot of the F-102A in-game to show that it is missing this feature.
Here’s the dev version:
If you need further help with this, send me a PM.