That would be ideal as the C has a BVR radar and then the Cheetah E with something like V3S or V3B missiles.
1 Like
It is legitimately solely to do with the overperformance caused by a FM error
The erroneous FM?
From what info you have which is none and just comparing to a mirrage 2000
please if you want to whine about the flight model do it in a different thread
2 Likes
My reports are very well sourced and there is far more than sufficient data to indicate 2x the specific excess power of the F-16 is a-historical.
This is 100% within the scope of the discussion on the characteristics of the Gripen. It falls within bith “technical data” and “discussion”.
1 Like
do i need to bring up Eurasian times
stop
1 Like
Dozens of well sourced reports, constantly points to the use of an invalid source made once about a totally separate topic some time ago… As though it somehow invalidates anything I’m currently saying… Hmm
yet agains what sources we all know you hate euro canards
Stop
I’ve got several open reports covering the Gripen’s inaccuracies and you were here / present for the data and discussion of the flight models current issues. You can’t just pretend they went away because it hasn’t been brought up recently.
You even tried slandering me in the Mirage 2000 thread only to be corrected by a few dozen people about how wrong you were for doing so. Just another user who isn’t happy with their vehicle receiving a historical nerf as opposed to a buff.
1 Like
One what nerf you hate euro cannards
all not a bug except a few
No. No you dont. your reports were either listed as not a bug or fixed, and in one case the developer literally stated “This is actually duplicate of previous report. But with some conclusions that are not right. Please stop create any report about saab jas39 stability and canard behaviour. Aircraft has positive stability margin, and canards works as they should for positive stable aircraft. Wished movements will be for negative stability aircraft but this is not current case.” (Community Bug Reporting System from this report)
3 Likes
they are wrong there though, the gripen is a negatively stable aircraft. (i do however not agree with MiG_23M on a vast majority of his points though)
1 Like
Not quite correct, it was clarified that the other issues brought up didn’t need separate reports. They’re covered in the second report seen below. I wasn’t wrong, rather they think canard behavior is correct as they’ve purposefully modeled it as statically stable.
Currently the static stability isn’t modeled;
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/WRSLHA5Nowjl
Canard and flaps schedule / behavior is incorrect;
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/lnUaYuLUn8Dh
@FeetPics pretty thoroughly covered the specific excess power issue.
Dear christ I thought we were done with the Gripen OP pls nerf when that other thread got bonked by Pacifica
For crying out loud, take it to the Balance & Bias thread in Game Discussion.
They were talking about R-Darter/BOL rail integration
Gaijin have made their stance on the stability matter crystal clear and there’s not enough evidence that Gaijin wants to believe (apparently) been presented to do anything about the SEP
We all concluded the Flight Model was a bit wonky but until FBW became a properly modelled feature with discernible differences from the “Instructor” we have in game, Gripen’s FM is unlikely to be changed unless someone is a magician and pulls some papers and stats out of their ass from a reputable source (such as Saab), regardless of whether it’s right or wrong based to irl
6 Likes
Sorry we live in a timeloop where all we can do is winge winge and winge some more because implimentation of Y doesnt fit their world view
4 Likes
Lads, invest in pharmaceutical shares. I’m gonna have a mega migraine should this can of worms open. Again.
10 Likes
İ already started taking pills and some Whiskey.
Helps a lot tbh.
Hello mig
I’m not trying to silence you or anything but I personally really like this thread, I know others do too. It’s a cool place to share Gripen information and pictures and I’d honestly hate to see the thread turn into another sh*tfest for a week and then have it get locked again due to the huge inevitable toxicity from certain people.
Could you make a new thread about it? If you made an original post with your findings/reasonings and chose a title, it would get even more attention/traction than you and feet would starting random arguments here about stuff like win-rates that’s leading nowhere in terms of the flight model. Despite our disagreements about fore-planes/canards, I’m sure you’d be able to get a far more productive discussion going than riling people up here or feet’s ‘creative interpretations’ of data.
3 Likes
i just want to know if R darter can be use with BOL and i get this headache
1 Like
be careful
1 Like
Ah dont worry mate everything is under control.
Cant say the same thing for other people tho :)
1 Like