Its about how the i-225 is a interceptor but its classified as a fighter instead with no air spawn

Machinery of War Discussion Aircraft
,
41

So if I hopped in any 5.7 fighter of my choosing you’d be able to handle me in a J7W1? Please man, listen to yourself.

So you just haven’t actually did any testing?

1 Like
42

No. I think it should stay 6.0 and not be given an air-spawn as it is. I don’t think any adjustment is needed.

Given War Thunder gives altitude (potential energy) as a meta, and I could outclimb you in 52.04% of the choices you could possibly make, yes.

Can’t imagine actively refusing to read a post before replying to it, lol

Also, you don’t need to make multiple posts to reply to me. :)

43

I don’t see how. Any experienced pilot I’ve ever spoken to and my own observation indicates it is a very, very mediocre if not downright underpowered plane.

I don’t really trust your shakey data analysis on this, especially when you’ve already made the mistake of saying a J7 outclimbs a P51H.

I read it, you just aren’t convincing in the slightest and sometimes straight up say things I’m about 99% certain are untrue.

1 Like
44

Objectively, it does.

I don’t really care if I am. I’m not trying to convince you. This isn’t an argument. You asked me a question, and I answered. It’s not even the topic of this thread.

Look big man, you can have whatever cope you want. I don’t really care, but objectively, you are incorrect.

45

Can you show real evidence

1 Like
46

He won’t have any because his “source” is literally the statcard.

47

Also, forgot to mention this, outclimbing somebody by 3 seconds to 5000 meters altitude doesn’t secure you a real advantage in air RB, especially when your aircraft flies like shit.

1 Like
48

There is a knock-on effect of climb-rate for when it’s an 1 vs 1 duel though, to play devil’s advocate.
And that is climb rate is indicative of energy generation, and energy generation enables higher energy-cost maneuvers to be done longer or more often and also permits more vertical fights over flatter fights.

As it is, it looks superior to Bf 109 G-14 without WEP in vertical fights and slightly worse with WEP enabled (and 109s love their loops and spiral climbs to drain the enemies of energy (both dominate F Mk IX in such, LF Mk IX beats them except for a narrow 1.5-2.5 km perforance gap where G-14 and I-225 have P/W and SEP advantage. Over 5km, I-225 beats both G-14 and LF Mk IX handily)

Again, just devil’s advocate to reinforce that “time to altitude” isn’t the only way climb rate affects the way a fight goes.

1 Like
49

I’m not talking about historically arcuate br’s or the fact that it was a prototype and warthunder has tons of aircraft that were never produced

50

Ok - but what kind of historical accuracy you are asking for with this sentence?:

I don’t understand this then…

51

Haha, you believe stat cards, completely disregard altitude effects on climb rate, and then give suggestions about balancing. You should apply to work for Gaijin.

1 Like
52

Hey… super Noob here… took a 5 year break, have maybe 200 battles since I came back and like 700 total… so excuse me if this is a dumb question, but where do you go to get accurate aircraft stats?

Everyone harps on knowing aircraft performance, but short of flying and/or fighting them all and slowly learning I’m just not sure how to do that.

I knew the in game stat cards were wrong… but I didn’t realize they were not consistently wrong. Their wildly inconsistent nature makes even comparison very difficult.

53
  1. WTAPC for Thrust to Weight. Caveat: Thrust to Weight does not consider prop efficiency. As a rule of thumb, aircraft with 2 engines generate more energy even with less TWR - classic example is the XP-50 being far better in a vertical fight than its TWR would imply.
    Link: War Thunder Aircraft Performance Calculator
  2. WTRTI gives you aircraft stat cards to reference based on coded values.
  3. WTRTI gives you real-time readout of nearly everything you could dream of in Test Flight
  4. WTRTI gives you fewer, but still sufficient readout in real matches.
    Link: WTRTI
  5. For aircraft with Jet engines, refer to Statshark’s FM charter. It gives you Maneuvering-energy diagrams at given altitudes for instantenous turn, best sustained turn and all that. It gives you time to speed, time to altitude and so on.
    Link: StatShark - See All Player, Missile, and Vehicle Statistics
    (they’re working on a prop plane version as well, but prop efficiency is a biiiit super complicated)

Some added bit for WTRTI:

It has a real time benchmarking function. At first pass, you can have it generate you graphs but when this does so, it also generates a .csv in the wtrti directory. You can import the CSV to whatever data analysis/graphing tool you use (excel, python, R, sheets etc).

As such, with WTRTI if you are curious about aircraft performance you can go into benchmarking and record stuff like time, IAS, TAS, Altitude, Turn rate, Roll rate, Prop Efficiency, Drag, Thrust, Specific Excess Power, Climb Rate, G-load. Start benchmarking once on the runway and proceed to do your desired tests.

(Time to speed from stop, time to altitude from stop, time to speed from dive, Turn rate at given G and IAS and so on. It does need some management of the CSV but it should be easy enough.)

3 Likes