Based upon those stats (and just realised those are the stats with fuel tanks and not baseline) this thing will straight up outperform the Hunter F1 unless it has some crippling weakness, even then, 8.3/8.7 would be pushing it
Stock Hunter F1 for Comparison
We will have to see, but these stats read a 9.0 jet any day of the week,
from wiki so not the best but a good baseline
Yep, they are, so assuming they arent making it OP to make Britain’s jets look really really bad. I shall instead assume the BR is completely wrong
and yeah, when first announced I looked at wiki and thought "hunter F1 equivalent near perfectly. "
So 7.7 is a joke if it remains
Or they are fed up of adding indian stuff no one plays, so this is an attempt to make people play one XD
Instead of giving up on the subtree again. Its odd they do this but we still have yet to see the gnat or the cheetah two jets that would be very well received.
Haha, yeah perhaps. I am surprised they removed the shell from the T-90 when they lowered it when first added rather than leaving it at 10.7 with a totally cracked shell.
Or even stuff like the Hawk. given just how many TTs could both get it and greatly benefit from it. Britain, Sweden and Japan
They are just a collection of vehicles i dont often see, atleast with SA there are vehicles that do see play, with india its just stuff thats there and you dont see, which means i dont think people are playing it. I spaded the bish to break up my chally slog and it just makes me sad we never got the oz abrams, as its the literal only oz vehicle not in the brit tree, and it would have offered something different that the brits dont have, a spry mbt.
Or a Canadian Leopard.
Let alone a half dozne really interesting British things like the Chieftain 2000 or the Jordanian Challenger Falcon. They really dropped the ball with this Indian nonsense.
Its just going to clog a TT that could barely handle 1 Sub-TT
7.7 is insane, especially when it has a “strike aircraft” tag with “Rank V”.
This could indicate it has an airspawn.
I am thinking if this plane has some fatal flight performance defects so that it can be at this position.
Else 7.7 may be just a placeholder imo.
Lmao, 7.7?
It shouldn’t be too bad as according to a Pilot Interview it’s:
Fast and responsive to controls
Good instantaneous turn at low levels, Limited by the G-Limit (10.2G was achieved before blacking out according to another source)
Decent Sustained turn as long as you don’t go below 420 knots
Slow responses to controls under High AoA (but stable)
Good acceleration at low level until around 580knts but drops off heavily at altitude
Good climb rate at low levels
This Pilot also Flew the Hunter
Though I’m not sure which mark of the Marut this would be, as it doesn’t distinguish
seems it’d be 8.3/8.7 material unless gaijin fumbles, or there’s some other issue with how it fits in the Meta
Though on the flip side, from what I have read the Indians had serious issues in performance with them too which is why they rerolled almost immediately into a ground attack role?
I will also say dont forget that statlines can be misleading, everyone thought the strikemaster would be cracked going 800kmh at 6.3 until it was realised its a struggle bus to even go above 600-650kmh at times xD
Though it would indeed be funi if its superior to the hunter and a lower BR, maybe gaijin will finally look at the BR balancing of UKs non mach fighters like Hunter, Venom, etc xD
Technically this is our third subtreee, we have had australia since british air was added
it wont stay there. It probably wont be able to turn more than once without becoming a brick.
britain traditionally gets jets put 1+BRs too high (just look at the vampire/venom or hunters lmao)
its current placeholder BR is not where its gonna stay, I’m expecting 8.0 as its going to be a scimitar but worse in flight handling and A2G payload
It was meant to be a high performance aircraft meant of Mach 1.5 (minimum spec) and ideally Mach 2, and the Orpheus engines were meant to be for the prototypes only, but they were kept for the production models. which limited it to a speed of mach 0.93-0.95, which severely limited its capability
I’m well aware, i’m just going off of the information i have at hand, and the main issue with the Strikemaster is the guns, its great otherwise, and still quite nimble, it’s just annoying when you get slow due to the RR Viper being a bit doo doo (gaijin when are you going to give it M134 pods or M3 .50cal pods?)
the Vampire is especially sad, 8.0 with comparable flight perf to the Meteor Mk.3 at 7.3, the Venom works at 8.7 because it has a functional engine and great turn but its really an 8.3 aircraft, and likewise with the Hunter F.1, it’s worse in today’s Meta than both the MiG-17 / MiG-17PF and F-86F-2 despite being a higher BR, its even the same BR as the Swedish Hunter F.4 with Missiles
its really sad how gaijin treats minor nations
seems like it doesn’t have too many issues getting to speed, nor any major flaws in manoeuvrability from what little is shown, manoeuvrability seems to be average / just below average for its type
Seems decent enough, though I will say be careful judging on that, a lot of it is when losing altitude to gain speed too which could throw off how well it retains energy in a dogfight etc. I do love his vids but sometimes they are a little too short to really grasp the feel.
I doubt it will stick at 7.7 and assume gaijin will fix that issue quick if it is stupidly good ofc, it is in the UK TT afterall ha. I always assumed it would be an 8.7 in GRB myself, so anything around that and I would be happy (happier at 8.3 for Vijayanta lineup but eh)
bit of a better video for judging the flight performance
8.3 absolute minimum I’d say
realistically 8.7
With Britain tax 9.0
Given its lack of advanced 8.3 GRB, 8.7/9.0 air RB indeed with a boom and zoom feel, though ofc the mass of 9.x low end mach jets kinda negates that sadly.
Id like to point out that the Hunter F1, with no bombs, no rockets and no CCIP, is 9.0 in ground,
Hunter FGA9 with roughly comprable (though overall less) A2G is 9.3