https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/NFTjdm8sbpAI
GJ can play deaf all they like, but it is what it is. Similar to your AIM-120 FoV report.
You made a report about the Rafale’s supercruise with just one secondary source (and no cover?) and expect Gaijin to not only accept it but have it overrule a report with multiple sources?
Rafale lacks supercruise capabilities // Gaijin.net // Issues
Also, it’s absurd to compare your report with a secondary (un)sourced pictures and then compare it to the AIM-120 FoV report that used a primary source and act as if both reports are on the same level.
1 Like
They have barely any high alt drag. Everything else hits a brick wall in terms of acceleration, Rafale just doesn’t. Not too mention they basically don’t bleed speed at high alt either
Your “primary” source is explained in my “secondary” source. Dassault, conveniently, forgot to add the engine type when they made that single pamphlet than never appeared anywhere else again btw, which is also why GJ’s devs couldn’t make it do M1.4 in dry thrust. IRL, Rafale wasn’t able to supercruise in India and with the recent acquisitions within the NATO, it isn’t really a big secret anymore. You can argue about level of “primariness”, but the JDW’s french correspondent from Paris spoke to SNECMA, so, you know…SNECMA is kinda primary-er source.
I mean, if it flies like a duck, swims like a duck, quacks like a duck…it’s a duck, no matter what you write on the paper. Considering this and MICA performance, it’s really rich to see you complain about Rafale being “underperforming” and “massive” at that.
In reality, Rafale is what it was when it was introduced back in Dec’24, minus some minor issues regarding top speed. The rest is circus.
If the base su-30/su-27s can super cruise I’m sure rafale can as well.
Saying rafale can’t supercruise is an utter meme
Transonic speeds are commonly M0.8-M1.2. Below is subsonic and above supersonic. In this particular case the Rafale wasn’t able to reach or push past M1.2 in dry, ie., it wasn’t able to push past transonic into supersonic, in dry, which disqualifies it in terms of supercruise. That is not to say it wasn’t able to do M1.15 eg. in dry and in particular loads, but the term supercruise is quite specific and has aforementioned stipulations.
Can’t comment on Su27/30, since I simply don’t know.
1 Like
Broski anything over Mach 1.0 is supersonic territory.
The transonic you are talking about is flow behavior and the way the shock cone develops.
It’s still supersonic above 1.0
4 Likes
The terms “supercruise” is anything but specific. No one can agree on what the specific stipulations should be. The only two universally agreed upon points are:
- Speed greater than Mach 1
- Sustained in a “fuel efficient manner”
Some people / organisations take that to mean the only requirement is being able to fly at over Mach 1 without an afterburner. However I’ve also seen various combinations of the following requirements suggest by different people / organisations:
- Achieveable speed must be at least Mach 1.X
- It must be possible to accelerate to cruise speed without afterburner (i.e. it doesn’t count if you accelerate to supersonic speed with burner and then cruise there without it)
- You must be able to sustain at least X arbitrary speed for at least Y arbitrary length of time
- You must be able to carry a “useful” (whatever that means) payload while supercruising
Really it seems like supercruise means whatever an aircraft manufacturer’s marketing department want it to mean.
Ok, let me rephrase, supercruise refers to supersonic flight, without subsonic flows around the aircraft in dry. What matters though is some reports suggest that Rafale exits transonic sooner than common M1.2, which is important to understand Rafale’s performance.
Sure
Regardless we don’t know the exact supercruise speed. It’s classified.
Just like it is on many other aircraft.
We do know what SNECMA said and in what conditions.
Just out of curiosity can you show me
You have a link a few posts up.
I don’t see any
March statshark results are here and these are the notable changes:
-
Su-30SM2 went from winrates of 51 → 54% while KPS and K/D went up slightly, this is interesting with Su-30SM2 being on both teams but going up in winrates anyway.
-
British Eurofighter had the highest increase in KPS (11% higher compared to last month) and K/D (10% higher than last month) out of all aircraft. The British Eurofighter now has a 20% higher K/D than the Rafale defeating the narrative that the Rafale was carrying the British Eurofighter in the first place. The British Eurofighter’s K/D and KPS may continue to trend higher as time goes on and more players spade it.
Thats not the narrative. The narrative is that the british Typhoon is performing better than its brethren, because it faces less Rafales, not because the Rafale actively makes it better.
5 Likes
this aged well innit
Oh no! The plane that was the 2nd highest performing last month is now the checks notes second highest performing this month.
Note that number of Rafale games far exceeds British Eurofighter games. It’s almost like after a year of the plane being by far the best plane in the game that a bunch of lower skilled players rushed to it and this idea of “French superior player skills” is mostly a myth.
Also note it doesn’t even perform worse on average to the other Eurofighters…only the British one.
3 Likes
I don’t think what you said goes counter to what I wrote. I didn’t allege that the narrative is that the “Rafale actively makes it better”.
The difference is a wash at the level of games that both the British Eurofighter and the Rafale are at, which are the low hundred thousands. You would have a point if it was something like 700k versus 200k but you’re talking about 260k versus 133k.