The karma for the JAS-39A being OP when it was first released xd
If that was the case where the nerf to the British air tree for the Gripen C which came at the same time?
FM wise. The 39A and SAAF 39C got a bunch of FM nerfs over the years (wouldn’t be surprising since the 39A and 39C are the same performance wise)
1 Like
Yet they still didn’t even add K-Band to RWR.
Honestly this is annoying, the whole point of new engine is to compensate additional weight and keep the T/W ratio at 1 in all scenarios, instead we get:
Worse flight performance
Still lacking Bands on Rwr.
4 Likes
I mean they did give it an engine buff but it’s not really substantial with the FM nerf.
Plus they usually account for channel loss for installed thrust so instead of stated 98 kN from brochures and what not, it’s around 94.90 kN
Otherwise yeah not much to offer unless you’re an avid Gripen fan like me lol.
The in-game engine is listed at 9880kgf which is roughly 96.9 kN.
That’s a channel loss of 1,2% which in the circumstances is practically nothing given that the average channel loss for when the devs don’t have data is 5-15% .
Doesn’t account for much when in-game performance is lacking. As the power gain should account for a higher T/W ratio which in turn should account for somewhat improved performance.
While we did expect the already heavier airframe to loose some Agility, this should have been mostly (not entirely) off set by the T/W and redesigned wing.
And we had a slightly less agile E compared to the C, now however. We have a substantial decrease in performance.
There’s probably not much we can do currently without diving deep and trying to find more documents or files.
Still trying to find the wing area between the 39C and 39E, since with calculations taken thru statshark and whatnot, both roughly have 30m cubed for wing area, and doesn’t help we have the old wing model, with not much news on the new wing for WT.
The devs use channel loss as an instrument to fine-tune flightmodels. They don’t use ‘realistic’ channel losses for any vehicle (unless by coincidence)
Minor nations in a nutshell.
I found this image
It seems to be an earlier versioon of a gripen-e (or at least one without the irst)
Yep, the 38-8 is the absolute first Gripen E prototype and is owned and flown by SAAB :)
All planes with the tail numbers 39-X are all SAAB pre-production prototypes (Edit: the 38-8, 38-9 and 38-10 are all Gripen E prototypes with different focus, the 38-8 doesn’t have the IRST or the MAW sensors for example). They have however been used for bug reporting in the past to show loadout on the pylons as it technically satisfies the “technical feasibility” requirements for munitions.
:D yippieeee now to add it to the issue someohow (i’ve run out of space in the description [mainly bc of formating but i want it to be readable])
Which issue are you thinking of?
My GBU-39 issue (missing belly mounted SDB I)
2 Likes
Have they bothered to respond to the state of MAWS or are we still sol?
While looking for more photos (via image search for the photo you sent) i found this one:
( Countering electronic warfare threats with confidence )
Where it has Taurus and the Arexis Electronic Attack pod on the wing pylons
( https://www.saab.com/contentassets/b04bbc0285b24996ace22a31be6b10d9/arexis-enabling-mission-success )
Might be something for a future report if EA pods are ever added :)
2 Likes
When i tried looking for images 3–4 months ago i couldn’t find anything, now if find two in a row ;–;
Sometimes i spend hours and hours looking for something, never find it and give up. Only for me to accidentally find that thing months later while looking for something else… x)
1 Like
To my understanding the Swedish 39E should have substantial EA capability built in to the Arexis EW suite mounted in the plane. Clean 39E closing in on what the E/A-18 can deliver with it’s pods. That is at least what I’ve gathered from the various interviews and such I’ve seen.