Called it earlier, it seems to have no drag, it can play every (even the F15) fighter in vertical, and rates so well no jet can outrate it… In terms of high AoA it seem to have very little AoA at low speed… it’s utterly broken
From what info do you have to back that up
3 Likes
Yeah it does have very little drag, thats kinda the big thing of the Gripen airframe.
1 Like
Get a video of its sustained turn rate and then see how it compares to declassified documents. Just stating a number is meaningless.
My report shows this pretty well
2 Likes
Gripen at 1000m and higher does 27 and more deg/s it has better energy retention than an F14, lacks lot of AoA at low speed (strange considering it has little to no AoA at slow speed, strange for a canard design…) and I won’t talk about the way it behave it doesn’t slow down or bleed speed…
May I get a link for the report ? ^^
@Mytho61734 can we get someone more trustworthy to test this?
Mig23m is the same person who earlier attempted to pass off a document about the g regulators for inflating g suit trousers as a reason to limit the gripen FCS g limiter.
That’s either some agenda or embarrassing ignorance. Neither or which I think should be influencing GJN’s balance decisions.
And before you plead that you were just misunderstood - please, give it a rest. Be more honest with yourself.
I believe the Gripen ingame has a built in AOA readout on the HUD, which at 430~ KMH at 300m~ altitude is pulling “24”
This is the Spaded SAAF Gripen C With 20m of fuel and no pylons equipped.
I’ve flown the Gripen and flown against it in Air Simulator.
The plane pretty much dumpsters everything in a dogfight. If you merge with one…you die.
From my testing it can rate around 22-24 degrees per second with weapons and load out. However biggest advantage is initial turn rate and energy retention means that it can also sit in the 30 degrees per second region for a long time.
Merging with the Gripen while flying any of the F-15s is just a mistake. Even the Su-27 doesn’t really have a chance outside of gimmicky HMD + Funny AoA shot.
There is irony here, and they all see it. Fools gold.
On a sidenote, I never did any reporting on the maximum overload of the Gripen. Quit lying to people and spreading rumors about me just because you don’t like it when people bug report discrepancies you benefit from.
Gripen AoA seems fine, stability beyond 35 degrees is a bit too much… adverse yaw should develop pretty bad spin conditions but it can deflect canards IRL to become statically stable. Should not suffer from deep stalls at all.
Yes, but when I report this absurd performance I get death threats on discord.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/YKhI5oNKuwKG
1 Like
I will have to admit I’ve been a bit oblivious to the extent of the Gripen’s over-performance in game. I’ve personally been flying outside that flight envelope where it seems to be broken and I’ve been told it’s currently being outperformed by M4K and F16 Block 10 FM wise. During my posts I was mainly focused on what I believe the Gripen is capable of IRL, not so much what it’s currently doing in game since the FM seems to have changed many times in the data-mines anyways.
I checked out your bug report, and although there are a few caveats with your sources
(These caveats being: 2 of your sources seem to contradict each other regarding M2K vs Gripen °/s, the SAAF one seem very outdated - with lots of statistics redacted from the document, the AERMACCHI chart stating Mig29, F16 and Rafale perform the same? and generally the JA37/JAS39 comparison figure seem to lack information/numbers)
Your claim itself that the Gripen is over performing when it comes to sustained turns is very accurate. And the caveats of the sources doesn’t take away from that. I just think we should be careful using those sources when setting up the proper FM for the Gripen.
I personally believe Gaijin is really struggling modelling a low-drag aircraft such as the Gripen, basically getting the drag down without significantly changing stuff like the sustained turn rate. I still stand by what I believe the Gripen is capable of IRL in relation to something like the F16 and hope to see it represented in the FM
Also, most of my discussion’s regarding the Gripen the past few days have been regarding the amount of G’s it’s able to pull, and it’s wing-snap G-loads - which is unrelated to it’s sustained turn and other characteristics, which is where our conversation started
A petty response. Is that really all you have to say for yourself? You’re just going to pretend you didn’t either:
- Just expose yourself as someone who tries to pass off any old documents inaccurately, to get changes you want implemented.
- Expose how absolutely out of your depth you are reading this subject, when you managed to confuse g suit trouser regulators with FCS g limiters.
It doesn’t really matter to me, I’m not wasting effort by engaging. I just want to highlight your behaviour clearly for others to see.
As for the Gripen, if it needs nerfing I completely agree with that. I just want someone who knows what they are doing to be the one investigating.
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