Not to mention that doc provides 0 info on how they reached 12 deg/s. No weight no loadout no altitude. Just look at the “Mach 1.4 MAX MACH in combat config” above it. That data is not useful at all
To be honest, I can’t believe anyone is able to take him seriously after it.
If i’m honest there’s a reason SlowHand will never get banned from the forums, and that’s because he somehow makes it lighthearted thank god 😂
I’m not arguing anything with the data i provided. I’m just providing data for people to compare for whatever they want to do in War Thunder.
Without someone to tell us what the test parameters of Gripen was in a real life test, and the real-life results of that test, I cannot copy that loadout until that example exists.
Flanker is probably getting buffed (fixed). Apparently bug report for low maneuverbility was approved and sent to devs.
it should be better at low speed
1 Like
“sustained turn rate 12 deg/s”
I know we’ve debunked that, but how the heck did they obtain that result. Did they run full fuel, Ext Fuel tanks and Bombs…?
I meant it more in general. We are here talking about something that pretty much cant be even proved or disproved due to nonexistent data.
Would kinda hope so. DCS aint the be all and end all but the Flanker felt reasonably matched against a F-15C. that said F-15C is upengined iirc so that is a bit meaningless as a comparison.
oh so its debunked based off vibes cool, ever considered its not for sea level then lol, I recall reading its for 15000ft which aligns pretty well. Also its a primary source lol from Armscor lol
Should it? As a layman I understand that Flankers are incredibly maneuverable at low speed, but that this is more in terms of AOA and stall control. It should pull too much AOA for its own good to comfortably outrate meta jets at low speed (although the AOA is enough to get r-73 off).
edit: it should probably win vertical, not horizontal
Instantaneous 24 deg/sec lands dead on with Lavi, nice.
If it has a lower T/W, around 12-13 for gripen looks reasonable.
4 Likes
yeah thats pretty much what im thinking
Whilst again i’m not really in a position to question the legitimacy, but that paper isn’t exactly giving much idea about what they did to obtain the result of 12 deg/s sustained.
Also, it’s not impossible Armscor had an ulterior motive. It’s not Saab, who would be trying to market it.
From what I can see Armscor seems to be primarily invested in small arms, that said thats only a cursory glance. Could be the wrong company altogether.
once again for 15000ft 50% fuel thats a pretty reasonable rate figure
M8 At 18deg AoA wing lose mostly all lift. In RL planes just can’t rate at stall speed like in this game. And is many more things and ways why FM in this game are broken. I doubt it’s any fighter plane 40+ tons can do 200KTS 16deg turn rate XD
What?
1 Like
Where on that paper is stated 50% fuel and what was supposedly loaded up?
Money laundering the report can’t be trusted
Not like that 😂