@Firestarter
Gonna post some examples of 2 missile min fuel rates as of 0.25 rating in their slowest speed since that’s the fastest to test.
JAS-39C: 23.5dps.
Mirage 2k: 20dps.
F-16A MLU: 18.8dps.
JH-7A: 18.6dps.
F-16AJ: 19.8dps.
F-15J: 19.6dps.
Su-27: 16.7dps.
Mig-29 9.12: 19.5dps.
F-16C: 19.1dps.
F-14B: 19.9dps.
F-15A: 20.5dps.
cheers - i’ll follow up on this in a sec
theyre both light delta canards the primary difference is the gull intake and cranked delta of the Lavi but the lavi has a higher TWR, I dont think the gripen would have a magically significantly better rate, also the south african rate figures for what should be the same conditions are pretty well aligned
1 Like
This paper was debunked multiple times as absolute BS.
2 Likes
oh? how so?
Lol they all over performing hard XD
Well WT and Gajin.
Something about sales and being “older” than SAAF even getting the gripen or proper hard numbers of it. 12°s is worse than phantom by 2,5° btw, if thats ground level rate. Which is, BS.
No they aren’t. My test was minimum fuel, essentially no weapons.
Which isn’t tested in real life.
You cannot compare my results to documents.
This made me crack up 😂😂😂
What are we arguing about then? Considering data for these edge cases are nonexistent, its pointless banter.
Gripen, M2K all make sense to me. F-15 also kinda does if we use the fact the thing has a bit of a bonkers TWR.
Again i’m not best placed to make use of such info but most of it aligns with what would make sense irl. The flanker is a bit more of a bus than i’d expect i will admit.
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.