uhhh no predominantly RB. So yeah, once again idc for his performance it’s not relevant to the discussion and I have my own set of vehicles that I absolutely suck in. But yeah he’s mostly an RB player.
Yeah, sorry I got a slight bit intrigued. Lord knows my statcard is horrendous anyways. It doesnt really matter much to the discussion though
The problem, when a game like this runs this long and crosses over multiple platforms is sometimes find that people who’ve played for long times don’t always have just one account….
Sometimes it’s life occurrences like having a PSN account compromised. Sometimes it’s life events like deploying for a year and it being very hard to take a DCS style computer sim setup on deployment. Or you cross from enlisted to officer and you spend 6 months in a hotel and then work on multiple long term TDYs and find it way easier to fly with a Xbox or a PS4 or PS5 than a desktop.
I mostly play one nation per platform because otherwise I found myself double spending GE to unlock things I have on one account to the other when I don’t focus on one.
UK is PS5 (awful waffle)Xbox is something related to waffle but I can’t remember the whole name. But I’ve been playing since atleast 14 or 15 🤣
I do enjoy the logical fallacy and focus on me to circumvent getting caught though.
Love the excuses. But be better 🤣😘
Wrong. The Finnish variant was stripped of its A2G capability specifically to meet treaty requirements. They only recently had to pay a huge sum to reintegrate A2G stores onto their airframes. The precedent for removing it from exprt customers already existed. Using it as leverage for cost savings is inline with the Swiss buy, and consistent with their refusal to integrate stores on cost reasons with their modernizations.
Sorry thats not how physics works. Composites are useful but they aren’t magic.
1 Like
The finnish base f18C and MLU 1 also miss a2g ordance. Only the MLU 2 can use A2G. So voth the Swiss and Finish F/18’s would be in the same boat for A2G weapons.
1 Like
Sorry to break it up to you,but that sometimes happen. The RCS of the EFA can become incredibly small considering the lack of an optimal stealth shape and the lack of Radar-assorbant paint,making a lock hard to maintain especially when that thing can notch any radar with ease
Knowing gaijin there probably going to give it a2g anyway and call it a day.
lmao its directly inferior to the rafale the only thing it has over the other 4th gens is Meteor but that only applies to the later tranches
1 Like
Genuinely the dumbest thing you’ve said so far
1 Like
Better T/R, in newer variants it has a much more potent AESA radar, it has a better flight performance. The only place where Rafale might have an advantage in is low-visibility, but other than that (fyi, early Rafales didn’t have AESA, but PESA), it’s pretty much a superior craft.
I’m sure @Fireball_2020 would be willing enough to fill you in on what EFT does better than the Rafale in more detail though :)
Oh so we’re pretending RBE2-AA is worse than CAPTOR now
The reason why Rafale has a lower T/W is to keep its vastly superior range over the typhoon there’s simply no need to have more T/W if its negatively affecting its range to such a degree
2 Likes
the rafale had PESA at early C variants and AESA at later C variants, while the EFT didn’t even get AESA until the Tranche 4 not even a decade ago…
Like it took forever for the Eurofighters to get to AESA, and their radar before that was pretty garbage when compared to the competition.
Okay? Range is irrelevant in WT. Also, their ranges IRL are more than enough for sorties over Europe.
Oh so we’re pretending RBE2-AA is worse than CAPTOR now
We’re not pretending. CAPTOR-E is far more potent. It is TWICE the size of RBE2-AA, with over twice as many T/R modules made with GaN which in itself is 4 to 5 times as efficient as RBE2’s GaAs T/R modules.
It’s you who is pretending a far larger & more modern radar is somehow inferior to an older and smaller radar…
1 Like
Rafale received their first AESA in 2013 or 2014, Eurofigter Tranche 3A received AESA in ~2019.
(Did you forget about Kuwaiti and Qatar’s EFTs…?)
this is all to say, the EFT is not bad. But you are heavily overrating it-
He really isn’t…
Range most certainly isnt irrelevant or are we pretending the Mig-29 can keep flying on AB for 10 minutes without being forced to RTB, the rafale will be able to keep itself lighter than the Euro as it wont need to bring as much fuel
Its not the CAPTOR-E only runs at around 9-12 KW compared to RBE2-AA at 15-20 KW the only thing CAPTOR is better at is not having as of a degradation issue that all E-scan radar have its still pure performance wise inferior
1 Like
Wdym Captor E, MK0?
Congrats for finding out what afterburner is and what it does (do you have any actual data on Rafale’s flight range?)
Its not the CAPTOR-E only runs at around 9-12 KW compared to RBE2-AA at 15-20 KW the only thing CAPTOR is better at is not having as of a degradation issue that all E-scan radar have its still pure performance wise inferior
Mk.0?
Mk.1?
Mk.2?
Anyhow, it’d be nice for you to post a source on the power usage of all four of these radars, seeing as you seem to be an “expert”.
I’d also love to know how a radar with a significantly higher T/R module count can be “inferior”, especially when its T/R modules are a lot more efficient and in theory, can achieve better raw performance than RBE2s even at lower power settings…