Statically stable designs such as the viggen gain positive lift from the canard, it also provides stable airflow over the wing to higher angles of attack allowing for higher approach angle and lower speeds. Short takeoff and landing is made easier.
Designs that are neutrally stable with canards up front like Gripen will need to trim canards down or the entire trailing edge flaps down to keep nose from pitching. This is causing negative lift / trim. This is actually bad for energy maneuverability but allows great agility. The aircraft can suddenly become fully unstable and naturally provide positive lift through fast turn rates but the aircraft is unable to sustain such maneuvers. When the canard is feathered or in neutral state, it provides the aircraft with relaxed neutral stability and energy maneuverability above that of a stable delta.
The difference between a design like M2K and Gripen is that the Gripen can safely decrease the stability margin due to the canard. Any departure for a pure delta of negative stability would be practically unrecoverable.
With the Rafale, the aircraft is not neutrally stable but rather unstable in neutral state. The aircrafts slats, trailing edge flaps, and canard are used in unison to keep pitch rates under control. The canard needs to produce negative lift to keep nose from pitching and the vortices generated benefit stability at high angles of attack. Without a neutral position from which it can feather to increase stability - the Rafale requires a more precise and reliable fly-by-wire.
This is why tail designs are superior for energy maneuverability. The tail (elevator) contributes to overall positive lift and reduces energy loss. The downside is that negative stability margin cannot be as high without compromising the size of the aircraft with increased wing area or you run the risk of being incapable of recovering after departure.
Mate I don’t know why you bring up stability again, I’m only speaking about the influence the canards has or hasn’t on the wing, depending on the configuration.
On that point, every close-coupled canard uses the same principle to generate upwards or downards lift, depending on whether it’s fixed or not, as well as its angle. This is compeletly independant from the aircraft being unstable or not.
Also you’re not adressing my initial point which is the difference between the canards philosophy of the Rafale and Typhoon.
What the canard does depends on the basic layout. Stable, not stable, close coupled, not. The primary difference in function between the two is that any airflow provided over the wings for typhoon from the canards will be turbulent due to the greater distance. This is detrimental to sustained turn performance. If the canard provides positive lift to produce the required instability similar to the F-16’s tails, it is possible that it can be somewhat beneficial to sustained turns.
The Rafale close coupled canards provide smoother airflow over the wing to larger angles of attack, reducing drag at marginal AoA where flow separation usually begins without the energized additional airflow. The Rafale will bleed less speed during instantaneous turns, but the peak instantaneous turn rate may be less than the Typhoon. The sustained turns may be similar because of the design differences. The Typhoon is better suited to higher subsonic sustained turns and the Rafale better for low speed.
The Rafale should dominate the typhoon in dogfights in war thunder imo.
Theres such thing as “too much, too fast” the fact some nations are getting MAWS while many others arent in an update that was “supposed” to be balanced at top tier air is already a major issue, particularly in sim, were planes with MAWS could realistically be pushed a whole 1.0 BR above every other plane imo, as it makes it borderline impossible to surprise them anymore. The M2K5F with the MICA, FM buff, and MAWS is already arguably too strong for 13.0 and should be pushed up, like the MLD was back when it was added. Itll arguably be less of an issue in RB though, as you already have missile diamonds, and too many players anyways, but in every other mode except ARB, the MAWS jets are at such a massive advantage its not even funny.
Cant wait for next major for there to be 120-C5 and R-77-1 on F-15E and SU-30 (or whatever SU-27 we can have next im unsure) but still no Eurofighter or Rafale (the game is still not ready for them guys)
I don’t see why not if the Gripen is to have 2-3x the specific excess power of anything else… why not have a few European delta canards with worse performance?
F-16C Block 50 & F-15C MSIP II (USAF), F-16A Block 20 MLU (ROCAF) and JAS 39C EBS HU (HuAF) capability with AIM-120C-5
In the future F-15E, F/A-18C/D, F-15I Ra’am and F/A-18E Blk 1 & Blk 2 armed AIM-120C-5 AMRAAM
I guess MiG-29K (9-41R), MiG-29M2, Su-30M2, Su-27SM3, Su-30M2, Su-30SM, Su-30SM2, Su-35S, Su-30MKK & Su-30MK2 (PLAAAF & PLANAF) and Su-30MKI available with R-77-1/RVV-SD. but now MiG-29SMT (9-19) only armed R-77-1
IMHO, I’d think from f2p marketing prespective, this buff is part of Gaijin attempt to make France as popular as other nation. As we know, France currently still being one of not popular country in War Thunder, only getting popular when Mirage F1C-200 pack and Mirage 2000C-S4 came out. So, I don’t think it’s absolutely game changing for M2K5F Player since M2K never flooded the entire match (of course when this happen, only when the event M2K came out, and then it’s not flooded again somehow).
This aircraft serves as the counterbalance to Soviet/American Spam, so that French Player would survive the meta, or better, can changes the meta.
I assume Tornado F3 Late would be Tornado F3 AOP because refer to camouflage ZG757 / Demonstration camouflage with insignia of 43 Sqn. RAF 52 from gszabi99 post in part 4
