I think they are saying it can only produce more thrust than the -402 across the entire flight envelope, but I have already admitted that it produces better static uninstalled thrust. The curve of the -402 can be discussed at which point the values might cross over, but the truth is that the RM12 would have to be overperforming in-game since it produces drastically more thrust than the -402 at all airspeeds currently.
Firstly, your source says the 402 goes to +175, not +200 like you say. Temperature limit is not the only thing that impacts jet performance. Pressure ratio and airflow also matter, and we know the RM12 is superior in those categories.
The stuff about a lower pressure ratio is just pure copium. Just because you don’t understand the ins and outs of jet engine parameters doesn’t mean you can start making ridiculous generalisations.
The F-18 documentation that shows the final production engine has +200 are not permissible for sharing on the forums but can be found with google.
Regardless, the Gripens’ sustainable temperature limit is 165 degrees according to their documentation. It mentions a +75 degree improvement and a short duration +90 degrees above that. So, as we can see… they ended up with a improve +190 degrees from the +165 degree goal based on the newer documentations shared.
Similarly, the -402 had a 175 degree goal and ended up with +200 degrees. The difference is that the -402 doesn’t have to use a short burst increased power mode to get the higher limit.
You come in here to make fun of me as if I don’t know what I am talking about, but when I discuss something you don’t understand you are flippant about it and pretend I’m making stuff up. This is basic physics. Does a higher pressure ratio increase temperature more than a lower pressure ratio? YES.
so info you can’t use
you don’t you have a ego the size of the moon you are according to you never wrong
The Devs have said your wrong on the Gripen FM
The Devs have said your wrong on the RM12
Just stop
4 Likes
These goals were well discussed in other available documentation as well and verified by the source I am not directly quoting from for obvious reasons. The -402 seems to use all the improvements of the RM12 + Core II technology and is installed on F-18s from 1992.
What is interesting is that the higher flow fan increased the RM12’s airflow by 5% with an additional potential growth of 5%… the Core II increases airflow by 5% without increasing the pressure ratio, while having higher temperature limits. Of course it produces more thrust than the RM12. Y’all are suggesting this is absurd and won’t address my arguments directly.
Source
I’m wrong all the time, and admit when I am.
They said that the additional reports were not necessary, and that my thoughts on some of it weren’t correct. The single report that those other issues were generalized into is still open pending a fix.
The devs said they think the RM12 produces more thrust than the -402, what I am showing you suggests otherwise. That is what the discussion is about. You simply don’t want to respond to any of my actual arguments.
Because they are baseless
1 Like
1 Like
That’s not a insult it a fact he can never say he is wrong
1 Like
You’re criticizing him as a person, you should be criticizing any flaws in his arguments
1 Like
he makes wild assumption a presents them as facts
1 Like
Good, you made the first step of criticizing. Add the rest too:
Do you believe that his “assumptions” are correct or wrong
What information could confirm/disprove his assumptions
Are there anything in his assumptions that are reasonable/unreasonable
Cite any sources you may have
Try to address any information he has, any argument he makes where reasonable; if he makes a claim about you as a person, you would ignore that
Ofcourse criticize information in depth - Saying “your info is wrong” doesn’t add much context to a reader trying to understand both of your views
3 Likes
The Devs have already told him he is wrong i don’t need to go in circles
1 Like
know*
It’s funny how the sources which back him up are “not allowed to be shared” and can supposedly be easily found on google, yet no F-18 manuals I’ve found corroborate his claims.
Finally we agree on something.
Nothing you have shown suggests that, unfortunately.
2 Likes
=> source
=> does it nullify the point he is correctly making?
=> could the developers be wrong?
=> does his information prove this to be right/wrong or neither?
He was addressing you mentioning the devs, so continue here:
Here. He argued against that claim, should you further participate in the conversation, address his counter claims that he made for you*.
1 Like
I’m trying to help you improvize your arguments so that they are easy to understand for an observer, since this is a forum other people are trying to understand what you are saying, so try to add context for your claims
The problem is mig23m just repeats the same thing over and over again, and insists everyone is wrong without ever actually addressing their arguments. Once he has decided he “knows” something, he will employ every possible tactic to support his position and dismiss any that contradict it.
When you finally catch him in his lies/mistakes, he gaslights and shifts the goalposts/changes subject/claims he can’t share the sources. The last few days he has used his experience of jet engine thermodynamics, the equivalent of someone dipping their toes on Google, to try and say that whilst the RM12 has higher static thrust than the 402… and higher airflow… and higher pressure ratio… and that GE advertise it as their second best engine in the F404 lineup… that the 402 “has better temperature limits” and therefore has a markedly better thrust curve across the envelope. One of his tried and true methods is misrepresenting sources, like how he is insisting one line about “The RM12 was designed with an aim for 10-15% increase thrust of the 400” must apply across all airspeeds and altitudes. It’s honestly pathetic.
1 Like
I think he has been addressing some things but something like “you’re wrong, that doesn’t suggest anything” isn’t very addressable. Basically a way to address this would be just another “no you”, if you get me. It would easily devolve into a tomato throwing contest.
Maybe we can try to restart the arguement instead of getting stuck in the past -
@slowhandclap what do you think of the above statement with a source?
I was just curious what the top speed it could achieve at Sea Level was, because I remember hearing it was slower than other jets, but couldn’t recall the exact number. Wasn’t debating engine performance in that comment.
3 Likes
Except I’ve used sources and shown them here for everyone to see, but the sources he uses to backup are conveniently restricted, and from the ones I can find on Google none of them backup what he is saying. Like I said, he constantly lies and twists sources. I remember when the Gripen was on the dev server, and he was looking for sources to restrict its ability to pull G. He ended up linking a study about the G-regulator for the G-suit trousers the pilots wear…to say that “it seems early Gripens had problems with the G-regulator”. Comical.
edit:
the link for his “source” doesn’t work lol.I can’t remember which one it is from and what the context is.
3 Likes