Its from the german JG-9 training documents, which used the MF and ML. They list the maximum G as 8.5 for the ML and 7 for MF. Which would suggest that the manual shows like MiG-23M said is listing them a bit lower as actually maximally possible
I am inclinded to trust these more than the actual manuals as this was specifically used to train against F-4/15/16 in all aspects of air combat
With those on it can only do like 1.6 Mach and still that’s like 10-15 minutes of fuel and with that on it a harrier will out rate it.
BVR combat doesn’t even work that way anyhow.
I’m not denying that a supersonic launched missile has more energy but an eagle doesn’t push out supersonic at 40,000 feet it can’t it doesn’t have the fuel.
They will be at 25-30,000 feet .8-.9 Mach and will accelerate and climb once threatened.
The FA.2 was designed to push out at 40,000 feet at .88 Mach.
The harrier RCS is low bc it’s tiny by the tiny you’ve detected it you’re within amraam range from the FA.2.
The FA.2 and the sea harrier as a squadron average maintained a 3-1 k/d over the Eagle until retirement in 06.
Assuming it will stay at Mach 1.6 once it launches missiles (which will not).
Not to mention you will not get into CQC engagements with Eagle’s in real life scenario because you can’t get close in the first place.
You’re talking about sustaining supersonic cruise while in reality it only needs to pass Mach 1 before launching Aim-120.
Under what condition, what load and how much fuel?
If we talk about design ideas Eagle designed to be superior to anything during its time.
With fuel tanks and missiles? Good luck.
Not to mention your tiny radar will struggle against F-15’s radar/EW combo in practice.
In what scenario, under what circumstances?
You’re praising a subsonic platform that was already outdated by new standarts.
Harrier was initially designed to operate in VR range while Eagle designed to be BVR machine and close range fighter from the beginning.
Anyway this thread is not suitable for this kind of conversation like @EstrogenKitten said, if you wish to discuss more you should switch to F-15 thread.
4 amraam 2 x 190 gallon tanks
A full combat loadout
Agreed
nope f18 overperforms as well
in acceleration, sustained turnrate, top speed and bleedrates
and it is even worse for the auper hornet
Leave my Super Hornet alone.
It already suffers enough.
its acceleration is twice as fast as it should be at sea level
and its sustained turnrate is overperforming by over 1° /s
the superhornet somehow manages to have a better acceleration than the legacy hornet despite having a worse TWR and being draggier
Superhornet is overperforming by unreal margins it’s not even funny
Yet its one of the worst plane at 14.3-14.7 bracket.
At least thats how I feel everytime I fly that beauty.
and?
the mig-29 also dosent fly nicely yet it isnt massively overperforming just becasue its bad
And?
Many jets also overperforms quite a lot compare to irl performance, Super Hornet isn’t special in this case.
F5E/20’s are worse in this case.
Should we complain because MiG-29 doesn’t?
the issue is that the F-18, F-5 and F-20 overperform
“but it is bad ingame” is not an argument that justifies a jet overperforming
the Superhornet is known to perform worse in several metrics to the legacy hornet
yet ingame it performs better in those metrics than the legacy hornet
Many jets overperforming in this game including Flankers but I don’t see you mentioning them right now.
Or should we talk about fantasy SM2 implementation having IRBIS and AL-41 engines?
Sure it doesnt justify Hornets overperformance but judging Gaijin’s decision this is not something special to SH in this case.
If you wanna see accurate Super Hornet make sure to report all other jets that are overperforming as well.
man do i love whataboutism
but i already have complained about the Su-30SM2 implementation in the flanker threat
I don’t know, it sounds skeptical.
You mention how SH overperforms but the minute someone mentions that its global problem you suddenly ignore it.
I would like to see accurate SH as well, only if they also adjusts other jets flight performance according to manuals, otherwise its pretty pointless to complain about one of the worst top tier jet in this game.
becasue this convo was about the SH and nothing else
you started with “but what about that”
which is totally irrelevant when talking about the SH
Actually the convo was about which high tier jet overperforms in this game, you just decided to pick SH out of all the convo.
becasue someone said that the F-18 is pretty accurate
which is wrong
Oh no doubt, it overperforms as hell.
Just that it’s not the only plane that performs like that and that was the main topic of convo.
