There is no need, they are already performing as they should.
However… If you have primary documentation you can post it in the relevant threads for those aircraft and discuss it there. If legitimate discrepancy is found and you wish a report be made I would willing to assist.
i see, why dont we try to improve the instructor or fm for the f16s then? there is nothing we can do about it? It’s not fair that the plane continues to fly like a UFO
Ah I see. Lazy scientific work. Refuses to look into a matter lest he prove himself wrong.
How do you know? Since when does the F4E maintain the same rapid pitch up capability as the Mig29 with 6x missiles hanging from its front end?
Being already 30,000lbs empty?
It is already reported. Gaijin plans on implementing the FLCS in the future. Currently, they believe modeling the high alpha instabilities would brick mouse aim. The result is the broken FM we have currently. It will be fixed when they update the instructor and game’s FM engine to handle unstable designs without bricking mouse aim.
It doesn’t.
I have video evidence. You know, the evidence you refuse to watch or acknowledge. Claiming its flawed before ever watching because you do not know how to read titles.
F4E immediate pitch up and pulling 11Gs @ 900km with 6x short range IR missiles @ 20min fuel.
Same as the SMT pulling up 11gs @ 900km with 6x short range IR missiles @ 20 min fuel.
Same map @ sea level under 1,000 feet.
What do you have? Your word?
BTW I was not the first person to claim the F4E is performing on par with the SMT in some circumstances. Many other community members have made the claim when I initially thought no way.
I understand that, but can’t they see how the plane is overperforming compared to the mig29? there is no way the f16 can behave like this in 1 circle beating the mig29 easily and it also manages to have much better maneuverability than the mig29 in fights where both are at extreme low speeds (like 300/400 kmh) cant we show them(gaijin) somehow that this is not right?
This guy is so hurt right now lol. I got videos to upload brb team
I’ll move this conversation to the relevant thread and answer you there.
11G instant G loading =/= better rapid pitch-up capability. You’re free to test with localhost and compare the F-4E to the relevant flight manuals if you want to find a discrepancy. The high alpha is already accurate for the MiG-29 from my own previous testing and reports.
The MiG-29 can Cobra from 200 knots quite easily in-game, even the SMT.
The same can’t be said for the F-4E.
@dragonflaine71 I will upload the Mirag2k and even the RD1 that is not even spaded performing much better than the SMT with 2,000lbs of bombs on it to simulate how irrelevant the weight of those upgrades should be on the SMT.
How do you know the F4E is performing on par to relevant flight manuals? YOU NEVER studied the aircraft EVER in this forum or the old.
So, lets be honest for once in our life,
You have not a damn clue.
Which F-4 and manual would you like to reference? Can we do it in the proper channels?
Again, because you have them saved on your hard drive means nothing. Show us how its performing on par in WT. Where have you ever discussed on this forum or even the last specifically indicating the F4E is perfect in game
I already know you collect everything ever and save it.
Why can’t you do it? Please, can we do it in the relevant threads tho?
You are the one making the CLAIM! You are the only person making the claim the F4E is flying perfect. Go make a relevant thread then. Make the thread. You made the claim. You sure love making topics don’t get shy now.
And the JH-7A? Performing totally on par too? lol.
please send me the user manuals for that one too and see you in the JH-7A thread.
I did make the claim, I don’t care to prove it. The F-4E is performing according to the manuals.
You haven’t provided a basis for any of your claims, none. No source to speak of. When I compare the MiG-29 to the primary documentation and find no discrepancy you continue to claim it underperforms. You refuse to test against the relevant datapoints and continue to build massive flawed strawmen. This has gone on for months now.
So why waste my time further testing every plane in the game if you’re just gonna cry wolf?
The JH-7 stuff has it’s own thread, you can tag me in there if you want to discuss that.
WRONG. If the Mig29 structural integrity is really a 9Gs.
They WOULD NEVER fly it near the limit as it will drastically degrade the life of the airframe. They fly 9gs for tourist my guy.
Your brilliant interpretations of the Russian language is on full display once again.
You’re very well aware of the 1.5x safety margin applicable to both Russian and US fighters. That’s why the F-4E is safe up to ~11.25G and the MiG-29 is safe to ~13.5
Gaijin allows a small amount of overhead above that, as airframes don’t instantly crumble at the upper limits. Your farce is on full display.
Me and you can fly to Russia right now and pay some drunk to fly us 9Gs in the Mig29 two seater.
Not when they are referencing the structural integrity of the airframe little guy. No you are making it up the F4E will not fall apart or render the airframe useless. They do not mess around with the structural integrity limitation. There is no room for interpretation.
The farce is still on full display, please take the discussion more seriously. We both understand that the G limits shown in the sustained turn rate chart are for airframe longevity and the 1.5x limit applies to the actual limits. What are you trying to say here?
