i would rather suspect the Su-35S
Nah it’s a fictional flanker
Flanker gained around 3 tons from su-27 to su-35 so it’s impossible for it to have kept its performance
There are some brochures for the SU57 saying max 9Gs as well (MAKS 2019 for instance). The Zhuhai one said 8G subsonic and 6G supersonic. They also differ in max speed (M2.25 vs M2.0), max SL speed (1350 vs 1400) and other info. IIRC there’s a video where Bogdan reported the SU57 can push a lot of Gs even at very high speeds, I think I posted it in the SU57 thread.
Anyhow, Jay Miller’s material on the F22 mentions 6G as the limit for a M1.8 sustained turn. Another one I think I hadn’t seen before is a max roll rate of 100 deg/sec.
Then, from keyaero forum: "Flight International about flight testing and on page 41 they quote Mr. James Brown, LMCO test pilot on the F-22:
"I had to perform a missile [AIM-120] shot at 40.000ft, M1.6 and 7g" "
1 Like
Note the rafale figures might be incorrect, they are identical to the ESRD requirement from which these documents were based. There was a previous doc with different values entirely.
1 Like
i suspect that it is a case of safty/airframe lifetime limitations
where the aircraft could push further but isnt supposed to
What theoretical max speed? The max speed is M2.5 with the -229 engines.
That’s the maximum safe limit, which also can’t be reached in War Thunder since they nerfed its drag shortly after release.
F-15E is a chronic mach 2.3 plane in War Thunder currently, and that’s clean.
And yes, the altitudes tested were 14,000 and 15,000. Drag is just too high at those altitudes for the thrust produced.
1 Like
Exactly
and it seems that around mach 2.3 is the correct to speed as well
with the 15E only being able to go faster for a limited time during colder days
Which is in-line with this statement:
There are many aircraft that can go beyond their safe limits at and above 15,000 meters in-game:
F-111C/F, Mig-25, Mig-23, Su-17, Rafale, etc.
Why are we not letting players make that mistake with F-15E? Hand holding?
maybe becasue the F-15 cant push past its airframe limits at high alt
the chart clearly shows that it cant push past it at high alt
the F-15E isnt airframe limited but thrust limited
except the engines could have been improved or uprated since then
which makes sense given the USAF claims it has a max speed of M 2.5+
https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/104499/f-15e-strike-eagle/
-3/+9G is pretty standard (has been since 4th gens) so I guess it’s more about brochures being unreliable.
you guys know we HAVE f-117 right
Back in 23 I don’t think they knew man
1 Like
This is not the case. The chart here is not a direct comparison against ESR-D requirement. This is the same document that had the bar graphs for Gripen and Rafale when compared to ESR-D. The long story short is that both of those planes fall significantly short of the requirements and not by insignificant margins according to the document. At the same time the MiG-29 and Su-27 compare more favorably to the requirement.
2 Likes
Yeah, that’s much more like actual M2000 and Rafale.
GJ should refund players for 3+ years playing against their made up creatures.
There are no “stealth” tanks. The issue isn’t the ordnance shape but wing/pylon/ordnance interaction that produces unwanted returns.
Probably separation tests markers.
F-22 pylons arent “jettisonable”?
I’m guessing they’ll just nerf the drag so it doesn’t go that fast, but I mean there’s no damage to the Mig-25’s engines from going mach 3 in game so don’t see why there’d be damage to the RAMs
2 Likes