that depends on plane/engines
for example the xb70 theoretical most efficient cruse speed involved using afterburners (mach 3)
That implies double the range but it’s less than half the speed in the case of F-14B, it’s not particularly useful given the lack of a payload.
The Eurofighter is only marginally better and once again, isn’t cruising.
There is no official definition, it’s a marketing ploy.
The F-22 meets the real world use case of the term, where it can actually set the cruise throttle setting while traveling supersonic and massively increase the effective combat range and speeds (up to 1.8 mach on mil thrust) or 1.5 on cruise setting.
so why is it then that your defenition is the correct one?
2 Likes
It’s what USAF defines it as, not Eurofighter GmbH or Lockheed
Did you read?
Supercruise, supersonic cruising, this is by the very name not what the Eurofighter does. It is supersonic at mil thrust. Dry supersonic. Not cruising.
There is more to this than just saving a little bit of gas as opposed to afterburning, it means you can cruise above the wave drag boundary without afterburner, which allows you to reduce throttle in the envelope of airspeed where drag is reduced. The drag wall incurred by going supersonic is not overcome until surpassing the majority of aftershocks created through what is known as wave drag.
Of course none of this needs explaining here, the F-14 can’t supercruise and was never said to be capable of it by the American terminology unlike the F-22.
at like 13k ft i think i got it to supercruise
Seems a bit biased and regional.
Alas, the acceleration should and could be higher. Same for the top speeds in most conditions.
I don’t really think that evidence is conclusive on the matter, and no it is not regional or biased. If you can’t let go of the fact that the Typhoon is mostly marketing lies, then perhaps you should whine about it in the correct thread.
Let’s see it that way.
Many planes can possibly cruise without AB over 1 mach …without combat load , which is effective is not supercruise.
For F-14B/D , maybe it was possible …without any AIM-54 , without using the wing/glove pylons and maybe 2 Sparrows in the underbelly that won’t produce enough drag. However , that’s not combat load… even if it was possible.
Yes naked the plane could go over mach without A/B .
It’s very difficult for a plane without any capability to carry a combat load configuration internally , to have “supercruise” . Also most planes that are said to achieve supercruise break sound barrier with afterburner and then maintain with military…that’s not real supercruise. You can say it’s a work around for fuel economy.
Not without burning much more fuel than necessary and taking entirely too long to do so, not to mention without ordnance.
That’s what I’ve been trying to say also, but Eurofighter crowd is upset that their plane isn’t as capable as an F-22…
Are they? Bit of a strawman.
Most complaints I’ve read and also share this opinion that using your own definition of super-cruise isn’t a good argument, I don’t think anyone I’ve seen comment is under any illusion that the F-22 isn’t super-cruising more efficiently.
At first you took a firm stance it couldn’t super-cruise at all, once that was disproved, you switched tactics to using your own definition of the term. Now you’re shadow boxing a strawman of the “Eurofighter crowd” that from what I can see doesn’t exist.
Eurofighter can super-cruise. It does save more fuel than using reheat. F-22 can super-cruise at lower throttle settings saving even more fuel. Both statements are true.
3 Likes
Any update on the IRIAF missile quantity fix? Could you bump it maybe?
1 Like
Bumped it for you.
4 Likes
The F-22 does what suits the wording, the Eurofighter doesn’t.
You proved that Eurofighter states it can supercruise, but by stretching the use of the term. That is not honest marketing.
Someone should really make an F-22 history and performance thread
That would get closed faster than German typhoon thread
1 Like
Maybe, but seeing as there is a Foxbat thread (not in-game yet), and F-22 is talked about a good bit, it would be nice to have a thread specifically for it
There are already F-22 threads and they are filled with nonsense and conjecture
1 Like
Fair enough. Hopefully we’ll really need one in December