this is best I could pull though still very close
we should of received MSIP F-15Cs all around this update even with out aim-120s we would still have gotten a better radar, new engines HMD
2 Likes
They’ll reference the manuals first before the SAC though both are primary sources.
we’ll probably get 15cs next update or the patch after that along with amraams or before them
I assume this F-15A is just meant to close a gap between F-4E and spamraams.
2 Likes
yeah, still pretty disappointing though. we’ll have to deal with ers for the time being.
i wonder how they’ll handle fox 3s for soviets. the r77 outperformed the early amraam, so im guess they’ll only add it to the 29 considering the flanker we have in game never carried them, and have the eagle have quantity over quality
here are my results, testing every 5,000feet, clean airframe, min fuel, full ab, in test flight so conditions should be repeatable and close to standard atmosphere.
tested on dev server ........ reference
50,000’ @ 1210kt (2.16M) … < 1434kt (2.5M)
45,000’ @ 1307kt (2.32M) … < 1434kt (2.5M)
40,000’ @ 1336kt (2.35M) … < 1375kt
35,000’ @ 1332kt (2.3M) … > 1290kt
30,000’ @ 1202kt (2.04M) … ~ 1200kt
25,000’ @ 1094kt (1.82M) … ~ 1100kt
20,000’ @ 984kt (1.6M) … < 1030kt
15,000’ @ 927kt (1.48M) … < 950kt
10,000’ @ 863kt (1.35M) … < 900kt
5,000’ @ 822kt (1.26M) … < 840 kt
S.L. @ 787kt (1.19M) … < 800kt
Looks like the manual at 10,000 and 40,000 feet for a little bit less weight.
The tropopause isn’t modeled in game, pretty much everything isn’t correct on high alts.
The tropopause marks where the standard temperature stops decreasing.
Are you saying war thunder’s atmospheric model has ambient lapse rate (2C every 1,000feet) continue indefinitely? I mean if anything, that would increase Mach numbers due to artificially colder temperatures.
i would agree that the 10k and 40k data points look okay, and really everything between SL and 40k is okay-ish. + or - 50KTAS i would call par for the course.
But the top two data points we are talking 130 and 210ktas respectively. that’s more what i was reffering to.
Feel free to record it and make a report, the same was done in the past for MiG-23 and others top speeds being insufficient and Gaijin did not make much adjustments because no one in actual matches is every doing this and it doesn’t really matter much.
you know, its almost like they are looking at the f15C. here’s a document showing its speed profile with the 220’s up high and it matches my test results really well.
As I said, you’re welcome to make a report if you think it’s inaccurate. Says F-15A/C on the manual which is the foremost primary document so anything that isn’t more authoritative than that is going to be thrown out usually.
Yes.
This only affects the thrust calculation in game as I understand.
If F-15 underperfoming in speed below 9km, then it’s missing thrust, if no - it’s fine.
thats what im saying, colder temps the engines perform better you go faster, IE higher Mach numbers. the tables themselves show this trend. i get this is a niche thing that likely wont see much use, but i kinda grew up around this bird, and its always been characterized as a Mach 2.5 aircraft… seeing it stop at 2.3M is kinda sad :/ even if its not useful, its more about honoring the airplanes legacy.
Another bug report; low speed sustained turn rate underperforming by 0.5-1G (below 0.4 mach).
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/xywUJ4tRxUDO
3 Likes
That graph is wrong, clean it does M2.34 with 102% thrust, which I don’t even think we have in game but the speeds match up so.
Max speed looks alright for me, it shouldn’t rip from reaching max speed though unless its between 27 and 37k ft as engine pushes it more and more.
This is for 97.7% engine trim. Much lower thrust than 102% trim
And the turn rates chart are for a 97.7% trim engine, 102% should provide even more G’s.
2 Likes