It’s not, found the source. This is presumably without drop tanks
https://www.eurojet.de/aircraft/
Nah, I wouldn’t think so. Max supercruise speed should be around 1.75ish at 40-50 thousand feet, any higher and the engines don’t produce enough thrust on military power to get to 1.8. I don’t think I’ve ever seen 1.8 from an official source, highest I’ve seen is 1.7 +. Ofc atp it can engage afterburners and reach its Mach 2.0 temperature limit but that’s not supercruising atp.
1 Like
except every other source gives 1.5 as clean
and if it was 1.5 with missiles you would expect to see sources showing a higher speed clean
Do any other primary source state the Loadout of the Aircraft? All the ones I know of simply say Mach 1.5 without specifying if that clean or not. This is the Engine manufacturer saying that it reaches the number with missiles
2.0? I thought it was 2.25
Time for the docs drop. Jk
yeah you’re probably right. Confused mach 2 with mach 2 class, could mean anything closer to mach 2 than 2.5
given how the USAF tends to present speeds, could be anywhere up to like 2.8 or 2.9 (and maybe even those if they feel like understating it)
1 Like
i doubt it. Su-57 for example has a top speed of 2500 kph (around mach 2.3!), but is limited to mach 2 operationally due to aerodynamic heating warping the coating.
Maybe if the f-22 didn’t have stealth coating it would go that fast, but with it on? Doubt it.
true, but that doesnt necessarily mean how it will be implemented in game
as there is a certain plane whos manufacturer says can go up to Mach 1.8 IRL but easily passes Mach 2 in game, so I could very much see them implementing F22 with a 2.5+ top speed
1 Like
lmao true.
I would presume that if no stealth coating, f-22 would probably be the fastest 5th gen in the game, until su-57m1 actually starts to exist (if it ever will)
who knows, maybe they will PW-229 the F119 with all the F-22 upgrades happening
Dont they just continue to slap it on as the coating may get eroded if high speed takes place during a fly out or normal flight whatever? Atleast i keep hearing them doing that, and makes sense.
iirc they have upped its thrust already
and the official numbers are definitely low balled given that they give the engines a worst thrust to weight than the F100-100s used by the early F15s
either the engines wieght is overstated or its thrust is way understated
damn, supercruise at 18km altitude is wild
the f22 engine upgrades to my knowledge will offer no or very little thrust increase, its mainly a reliability and sustainment program to keep them flying until F47
the worst thrust to weight your referring to more than likely is due to the TVC which adds like 1000kg or something onto the f119
page 82 3900lbs dry
and is supposedly 5000lbs wet or with the oil + thrust vectoring nozzle on, so not my exaggerated 1000kg probably mean lbs but still would cause the difference in power to weight. i think without the nozzle its power to weight is 12:1 in AB i remember reading somewhere. but with the nozzle its 7:1(rated power may have more or less) in AB for the f119. then for the PW 229 its 7.8:1 wet. so yea with the nozzle definitely underpowered but comparing engine to engine raw the f119 has a much better T/W
edit - took a look at the notes on the wiki, a source locked behind a paywall said actual thrust output is between 37000-39000 lbf which would put it about on par with what the french said and similar P/W with the nozzles equipped to the 229
that would give it a thrust of 46,800lb which i would not complain about getting
is this and the f35 the only US fighter planes with maws?