since the first time i asked you answered me smelling with entitlement.
now don’t be a coward trying to cut it up with a simple “huh i can explain but you’re a waste of time so bye bye”
again, one last time, can you explain to me why the F5E has a better STR than a mig21bis despite it having a lower TWR? or should i ask to someone more polite than you?
This is because the F-5E is overperforming severely.
i should clarify, i’m talking about irl data, not in-game
Depends on airspeed, the MiG-21bis technically beats it at low speed and instant turn rate.
yes, i took this as a reference, you have a wide range between mach 0.5 and 0.8 where F-5E does have a superior STR than mig21
considering the lower TWR it is quite a performer amirite?
I have a suspicion that this guy doesn’t seem to like confrontation much @draghettoverde
You’re just wasting his time lol
I’m not sure how ro answer you… Why do you keep using random formulas? That One Is from the straight Flight with either acceleration or deceleration… In a sustained turn (by hypotesis with no acceleration or deceleration) T=D hence they do not contribute on the maneuver performance… And Just to point out your statement before about glidersalways loosing Energy, you might find interesting slope gliders that can reach low transonic Speed with no engine and accelerate in a turn :/
that’s quite… dedication sir
I feel like the F5s are just a hot mess at the moment and shouldnt really be used as benchmark. Among other things, their afterburning engines are colder than that of a Harrier at less than 90% throttle.
So please i would love to know how Thrust affects turns in a Plane with no engine
it was my bad that i did not specified i was talking about irl data, as the graph posted by Mig23M
Ah okay.
The wings are straighter, more efficient than that of a delta wing with additional properties such as leading edge root extensions, leading edge flaps. This is a no-brainer. The low speed T/W disparity allows the MiG-21bis to produce better performance, however… slightly.
yes yes and yes, that’s why i’m still crushing my head with the TWR thing because, of course, TWR isn’t everything! the F-5E is a case of a more efficient aerodynamics, something something we could see on gripen too, instead of whining it can’t do 20°/s because “hurr twr low”
The Mirage 2000 has a higher leading edge sweep (58 degrees), and less instability. He has some level of trim drag at medium speeds because the static margin is smaller. Thanks to the canard the Gripen can reduce trim drag, safely increase the negative static margin, and along with the 52 degree sweep angle… produces more lift with less drag at those speeds.
More lift, less drag, more than accounts for a slightly lower T/W ratio and allows the Gripen to sustain a higher turn rate.
Also we have multiple first hand sources (but not necessarily primary sources) stating 20 deg/s sustained and 30 deg/s instant turn rates.
I laughed so hard
If I may ask, why wouldn’t Gripen be able to do 20° specifically with its TWR? At what TWR does 20° become possible? You make it sound like sustained is linear with TWR or something, disregarding other factors? I’m genuinely curious as someone that’s not an “Engineer”
he doesn’t have time to give you an explanation, you should check by yourself /s
This isn’t helpful, attacking someone who’s incorrect like this is just going to get moderators involved when they don’t need to be.
Apollo is trying to be sincere and give him a chance to elaborate further and if he’s as wrong as you want to say it should be easily shown.
I cant wait for the threads about the Typhoon and Rafale when they get added. Wait till the US and USSR mains have to face those.