it doesnt require much knowledge if any to hold a rate, see what the rate is, see if its going over IRL known figures, and come to the conclusion its overperforming. Also developers aren’t zombies that implement every report they see acknowledged without questioning it, especially flight model devs. If the report had errors it would get not a bugged p quickly, even minor errors can brick entire reports for flight models.
I just noticed. they spelled the Swedish word for “WAR” wrong in the cockpit. XD
It’s supposed to be “KRIG”.
Literally unplayable! /s
1 Like
I just want to point out that armscor number of 15000ft with 2 missiles stat which is not included in that document itself came from YouTuber making things up after he went on a misinformation tirade about the Gripen.
1 Like
should be 26 degrees but yeah
Tallies with what i’ve had in ARB. Damn thing is pretty insane in any sort of close combat. Half my problems with it is the pilot blacks out instantly because I haven’t experted him, even with G-Suit Mod.
Quite frankly the FM is insane. It feels reasonably realistic but I can imagine it getting nerfed… couldn’t have something to beat the Su-27 and F-15s (which don’t hold even a candle to this in a dogfight)
I would like to see how it performs against M4K in a 1 to 1…
What are you talking about? According to the AerMacchi document the 50% fuel, 15,000 feet chart shows north of 13 deg/s for the Gripen. The rest of the performance metrics are roughly approximate to those aircraft under similar conditions as well. Something especially noteworthy is that the estimation for 20 deg/s sustained based on my first source in the report matches the fact that it is just ahead of the F-18.
This is because at sea level, the F-18’s sustained turn rate is ~19 deg/s peak under similar loads (with missiles)… and the F-18 is better suited for sustained turn rate at low altitude.
Overall, the Gripen performs well above the metrics given by just about any source on the internet. WELL above. Like, completely off this entire chart.
FLCS is not modeled outside of Dampening mode for SAS. High alpha performance in air RB is not going to go above 23-24 degrees anyway until you purposefully roll + pitch + yaw at low speeds.
i mean without being pedantic here but define “50% fuel” (with or without ext. tanks?) and “combat load” for each aircraft…?
Because not all of us are using 50% in game. I’m running min fuel and a drop tank, and i ditch the drop tank when i get to first contact. so by the time i roll in i am about 8 mins fuel,
Which is more like 25% in game, which is hugely favourable to a light airframe like Gripen.
I don’t know if you’ve actually put those qualifying factors into your report but…
2 Likes
I’m on about the armscor one from SA not the aermachi one
Don’t think we need to go out of our way to get him blacklisted. His sources are a bit… odd. I wouldn’t have used an Aermacchi graph to bug report a Saab Gripen performance, as far as i’m aware they never possessed one, so it’s almost definitely presumed/inferred data in there.
I’m sure we can leave this to suggestion mods
1 Like
Seriously, F-16A and MiG-29 have the same rate on there… hahahaha. It’s like those world maps in movies where all the continents are slightly malformed but look fine if you don’t pay attention.
Dude is pulling out all the stops to try and get Gripen nerfed to the ground
3 Likes
I mean if we take that as gospel then War Thunder is miles out… I highly doubt that that Graph is accurate. As I said before, Aermacchi likely didn’t have access to a Gripen airframe and has even less chance to know where a MiG-29 stands in terms of performance.
If anyone’s any good with russian, maybe give this a nose.
You are calling him incompetent but it is not even airspeed…
Just look at this FM , in this part of the video the only modification he has unlocked is the compressor, so a fully stock JA 39 is this oppressive.
“its this opressive” not surprising a Delta wing jet with canards and Positive thrust to weight is Incredible in dogfighting. i dont know why people are surprised that this thing is really strong in a dogfight when not to mention the factors above again but also its a incredibly low drag airframe.
4 Likes
He is fully stock in that part, the video owner shows this. @MiG_23M claims it is overperforming according to real charts as well
1 Like
Su27 1984
Gripen 1996
And so it begins
2 Likes
Yes. I know, the “real charts” he shows are of dubious quality im personally not holding much faith in them considering theyre putting MIG-29, Rafale and F16 all on a equal playing field lmao, not to mention his arguement has changed so much over the past what 4? days since patch release he might have had more arguements than people who have played WT
4 Likes
SU-33 (year 1995) with improved stuff would have been this monsters equal, not SU-27 with broken FM just like SMT
The JAS-39C MAY, key word here MAY be overperforming in rate fights but we have no real clear data on what its capabilities are outside of dubious quality test reports.
Your also making the point of the SU-33 being a Equal to JAS39 and probably so because the JAS39 was designed to be able to beat things like SU-27s in dogfights
1 Like
No cause this Gripen hasn’t got its ARH