Lol no.
You expect nice Swedish livery?
Hopefully, it’s fairly iconic for the NG/E
Dont wanna use a userskin
Should have picked a tree other than Sweden then lol
I made this to help see the differences, there are a lot more than people seem to think:
1 Like
JAS39C:
Empty weight: 6800kg
Thrust: 8208kgf
TWR: 1.207
JAS39E:
Empty weight: 8000kg
Thrust: 9993kgf
TWR: 1.249
Just empty clean configuration, not accounting for any channel losses (which should be the same for both).
The extra 0.042 TWR won’t feel that significant since you’ll be carrying extra weight in missiles. However its TWR will be less impacted by extra weight overall.
Add 4x aim120 to both, and 39C TWR reduces by 0.105 and 39E TWR reduces by 0.094
3 Likes
JAS39E in dev server has thrust 9490 kgf for now not 9993 kgf
1 Like
I believe current engine stats in x-ray dont reflect actuals stats of the engine in game
Yeah well every engine in game has some “channel loss”. It’s not something devs strive to be accurate, they just use it to tune the FM until it matches whatever datapoints they have
Some engines have minimal channel loss, like Gripen C, I think some planes like the F15 have over 20% loss (in game)
While i do want to see the in-service skin as the default, it is a relatively boring paintjob IMO.
I hope we see the early E Paintjob
as an unlockable skin and the Prototype paintjob
as a GE one or something.
1 Like
so that’s mean the engine still bugging ? why it is just 0,04 different too slow for E with 17% engine faster as they said JAS-39E for Sweden - #950 by Necronomica
You will get plain grey and nothing else and you will like it.
F/A-18A/C have negative channel loss or so Im being told
1 Like
that comparation the E should be 0,1 M faster at least without payload
That’s Game Convention. It’s lower than stated values for every plane in the game.
I asked Interfleet a long time ago
Anyways, FM is not final, still in dev. Developers are still tuning it probably, doesn’t really make much sense to report channel loss
need more test for engine JAS39E I think, that’s kinda same while data say 17% faster
I don’t understand. The 17% comparison was full afterburner. There is also a difference in thrust based on speed.
Also, @JFIESTASR where did you get those numbers and could you compare to the C version?
3 Likes
He is tested fly away without armament in same time
Not sure what point you’re trying to make, I just used IRL stated figures for their thrust and weights
39C is marketed at 80.5kN and 39E at 98kN