While the MLD performed better than peers, and still mostly does… it wasn’t due to an error in the FM causing severe overperformance.
The gripen, while performing above its’ peers… does so due to an erroneous temporary flight model pending fixes that allow unstable designs to function with instructor.
Excuse me, it’s unrelated this topic but another fighter aircraft with active radar homing BVRAAM as a researchable before JAS39C Gripen from SAAF would be Atlas Cheetah C or Cheetah D for UK tech tree ?
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
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
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.
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)
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.
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