I suppose time to start using this thread.
Seen this image shared for Gripen C + AMRAAM + BOL and the possiblity of whether BOL+AMRAAM Means that BOL+Skyflash could/should be possible. Im guessing we’ll need more sources than just this photo for that bug report. Anyone know where we can find sources for that?
Little appreciation post for the cockpit and hud, they look great. Looks like it will be a nice little fighter in sim.
@Gunjob Heya. do you think this is a suffecient source for missing centre line weapons? Currently that hard point is fuel tank only
I was going to raise them myself when I got home.
I’ve got some reports in for the Gripen, also max overload shouldn’t be 17G…
haven’t they said in an earlier post talking about the gripen IRL that it can do on maximum 12G’s not sustained ofc and with the G limit that gaijin’s put that is 1.5X it should do 18G’s? be cause 1.5X12G’s=18G
so the 17G is justified in game?.
Unless you mean It can’t do more then 17g’s which means it’s under preforming but i can’t know be cause i still didn’t try it In game
No, it’s safe limit is 9G. 9 x 1.5 = 13.5G.
people in the british weapons thread linked a pilot interview who himself said the aircraft can do 12Gs at high speeds, its not hard limited to 9Gs
Saab (primary source) documentation states design limit is 9G, 12G puts undue stress on the airframe. Likewise the F/A-18 can do more than 9G but airframe lifespan is generally significantly reduced in doing so.
From 14 mins
I think this is something quite a few have seen. It talks about a soft stop of 9G and then a hard stop of 12G. Its finding a Primary source to confirm
Yes, as a precedent I would want the rip limit to be based off the safety limit. And the overload/paddle limit to be the flight control limit.
ye but that’s a game it’s not real life other wise there’s Tons of other planes that needs to be nerfed your Argument is Pointless in Warthunder,it’s good now there’s a balance between a mid loadout and good performance unlike other planes that have mid performance compared to the gripen (Not compared to Other 3rd gen planes) and very good air to air loadout
ey back i was test flying the gripen,on avg it can do 14g sustained on high speeds and 14g no sustained on low speeds,min fuel 2 9L’s-Min fuel No missiles so Horayy ig
Same with the F-16 the “UFO” plane.
With a pitch stick command to the softstop, the pilot commands load factor to the load factor limit, when the aircraft speed is above corner speed (corner speed
is approximately 600 km/h). Below corner speed a
pilot command to the soft stop means an angle of
attack command to the angle of attack limit. When the
control stick is pushed max forward, the pilot
commands normal load factor to the negative load
factor limit and below corner speed negative angle of
attack to the negative angle of attack limit. The
maximum stick forward position is -7 degrees.
There is a possibility for the pilot to override the soft
stop in an emergency situation and pull the control
stick back to the hard stop and thus get an extra 3g, when aircraft speed is above 600 km/h. This requires
an extra stick force of approximately 135 N.
“In parallel the so-called integration missiles that went to Saab. So they have in Sweden already integrated the missile with the structure of the aircraft, the mechanical integration of the missile with the aircraft and with the avionics, which is very complex on the Gripen. They conducted a series of flight tests where they flew with this missile in extreme angles of attack up to 12G, (12 times standard earth gravity) and up to 13 700m in altitude to ensure the aircraft wasn’t damaged.” The firing of the missile off the aircraft will be tested as a separate activity but it is these days fairly predictable.
That’s a quote from, who was at the time, one of the executives of demel dynamics, who were making the A-Darter with South Africa.
Being able to pull closer to the ultimate load factor does not increase the ultimate load factor.
According to the Aeronautical Research Institute of Sweden the design limit load factor is 9G with an ultimate safety factor of 150% (1.5x), or 13.5G. This is when the laminates are capable of buckling.
Your own source says approximate data/design requirements. I can’t look any further because I can’t find anything on Google scholar with that title and author. Must be a high quality source.
It’s in here; and it’s quite thorough about the design requirements. It also says the Viggen’s load factor max is only 1.2x the safe limit (9G?)…