I was discussing Gripen, in Gripen thread. This is unrelated to anything you’ve said, stop baiting and attempting to derail threads. No need to bring your nonsense into the F/A-18 thread… the discussion is on the topic of the F/A-18s engine and performance.
He is not capable of explaining how a heavier F-18C is going to outrate the lighter, smaller, far better thrust to weight, more aerodynamically equipped F16.
Sure, it might have a better sustained turn rate at 200 knots at landing speed for a moment, but will immediately die out in any real kinetic dogfight engagement because it has no thrust to weight comparable to any F-16.
3 Likes
Yep. I think it would take at least two or more updates.
1 Like
@acroute posted the wonderful references for us all the way back up near the top…
There is plenty of available performance data for comparisons, I’m not making this stuff up or guessing at all. There is no “I think–”… It simply performs as im saying because I am referencing real data.
At 60% fuel with 2x AIM-9 and 2x AIM-120 performs on par with a clean F-16C w/ 30 minutes fuel.
3 Likes
So it is even better than an f16 then?
That’s not what I said, no.
Yeah ever since i saw the documentary top gun maverick i realized this plane is just the best
1 Like
Wouldnt this mean that its better?
This is all an entire interpretation based on study regarding the F-18 E/F
My guy will literally grab numbers, obscure them from one source add them to another source like this.
Where does it say anything about an F-16C w/30 min fuel??
No where in the entire source.
3 Likes
Ah i read 30% fuel on the f16. Why did you use different numbers when comparing
The data for the F-16C in-game with 30 minutes fuel aligns with the performance given of the F-18C from the source. Therefore, sustained turn rates for the F-16 loaded with only 2300kg internal fuel are equal to that of the F-18C loaded with 3,000kg of fuel and 2x AIM-9, 2x AIM-120…
That is the data available … If you want better data feel free to reference the easily available EM charts for either… It will confirm what I am telling you but isn’t permissible for sharing on the forum.
Yeah, he was doing similar in other threads. He is acting in bad faith trying to switch or obscure numbers and mix sources to confuse. Very standard propaganda work
3 Likes
The word F-16 shows up twice in the entire source about the F-18 E/F and says nothing in regard the F-18C with 2x Aim9s being on par with the F-16C at 30 min fuel clean.
This guy grabs numbers smashes them together, inserts his own numbers and obscures data to prove his personal point.
Just post the entire source and hopes none of you look into it and just take his word for it. This is the equivalent of him using WTRTI for his test and pretending he does not know why GJ developers told him not to use it.
1 Like
Speaking of which, we also have this data.
4 Likes
Now he is comparing the IN GAME f16 (which he says is over performing by a lot) to an f18 and says the f18 is better than that… damn it gets worse and worse
1 Like
Here we see how it will have better performance thanks to the lack of G limiters. 20 deg/s is indeed superior to the F-16C depending on conditions. Too bad this discussion can never happen without nuisances.
2 Likes
LMFAO!
My boy, you are all over the place.
He intentionally conflates reality with the game performances with other aircraft and will go great lengths and quite literally bending over backwards to push whatever agenda he has at the time.
At the same time he fails to let us know how he exactly comes up with wild conclusions. He will never run down his formula, but instead post a source and hope none of you read it.
Like here, the National Security and International Affairs Division cost review of the F-18E/F.
All this is nothing but as cost effectiveness review of the F-18E/F for the United States Accounting Office.
All this is, is nothing but a written review by Louis J. Rodrigues
Director, Defense Acquisitions Issues telling the congressional committee the Navy is totally wasting money on the F-18E/F.
The title literally says “F-18E/F is barely adding any operational improvement, but costing us a crap ton of money.”
1 Like
I believe gaijin add legacy hornet with SARH MRAAM AIM-7 Sparrow this year but not first major update
And legacy hornet with AIM-120 gaijin might consider after introduced rank 9
3 Likes
True, but the data was provided by NAVAIR. Whatever the purpose of the document, the data itself is trustworthy.
3 Likes
Hence the reason for referencing the public source. The manuals are not permissible for sharing on the forum but are easily found on Google with a simple search and verify the data / what I’ve been saying.
1 Like