These are meters
This is not even a unit for RCS.
And m^2 is certainly not it, dBsm was used.
1 Like
Once again, square meters were used for the Su-27
If you use dBsm, the Su-27 will have 1000m ^2 in front, which is not possible
1 Like
Do you even know what decibels are? how they are calculated from linear units? HOW TO PASS THEM FROM dB TO LINEAR?
It says 10 dBsm front and 30dBsm sideaspect. I’ll let you figure that out yourself
just ask him what dBsm means and it will tell you everything you need to know
He knows. The lines on the left which correspond to a real aircraft and the right with reduced RCS. The line of the left are impossible to read tbh. And you have another set of graduation 1 and 2 which are an average ±30° or something like that, which I don’t understand.
Either way, it’s a computer simulation, which he generally discards like on others like the SU57. But either way. 10dBsm front and 30dBsm at the sides is reasonable.
Where does it say m^2? That is scale logarithmic using decibels, you should have better intuition reading these kind of charts, dBsm or log is the standard as RCS varies alot.
It is shown here to simplify perception. And not so that the reader sits with a calculator and translates
1 Like
I have a Su-30 model of fairly good quality, I can conduct a simulation
1 Like
You guys are all arguing over a language barrier… I think InterFleet was just exaggerating numbers rather than looking up the correct ones.
Its not an exaggeration. RCS is comically large from the sides as you saw above. 20-30 dBsm from the sides isn’t a joke. AT certain frequencies I’ve seen spikes up to 40dBsm at certain frequencies and just low RCS from things you’d expect huge. You really can’t say much of RCS without mentioning wavelength or polarization used, but you can talk with order of magnitude with decibels.
Yes, but InterFleet is very knowledgeable on this. I don’t think he was quoting actual numbers for the Su-27. It was just a generic example.
Never, or maybe next update for export grips
Yeah, would be good. Allow a little CAS whilst maintaining at least a half decent multi-role loadout. One thing im always a little disapointed by the Gripen. its really good in A2A or CAS but kinda sucks at doing both at the same time.
Im just hoping they change the Gripen C cockpit, its in english on the swedish gripen (literally copy pasted they cpuodnt even bother to make it correct lmao). If gaijin really cared about fixing the gripen C it would have MAWs and its voice warning system. Also 5th pylon
Yeah… A lot of aircraft need a LOT of TLC.
As much as I would love something like the BAE Hawk next update. Id be just as happy with them just spending the next major finishing all the British aircraft added in the past 18 months. Like the Gripen and it would be more than just Britain that would benefit from it. Its getting stupid just how unfinished some of these aircraft actually are and some of it isnt even big stuff. Took 20 months just for the Harrier Gr7 to get its 540 bombs on all pylons.
Yeah Sea Harrier FRS1 and FA2 both still ahve the Harrier Gr3 HUD with no symbology for radar contacts at all.
They still havent fixed some spelling errors in the JAS39A cockpit or added agm 65G’s to the gripen C, of course theyd not bother adding it on launch guess itll be here sometime next year or so. The war label is Kreig from german, not swedish for Krig
Yep. Its a real shame. Im glad they keep up a consistant pace of new content, but I think they’ve clearly got a bit of a backlog that they could do with spending a major update clearing. Maybe they shouldnt add any new vehicles in September, focus it on bug fixes and improvments then do the same small update in October
Pls for the love of god fix hull aim, and the depression on them they are so annoying to deal with for the strv 103. Id like to see some placeholder cockpits from WW2 planes get their historical ones added.