If anyone is interested, I made a comment on the Bug report under this username with my critique of the sources.
True!!!
Also is it just me that finds it a bit weird that all the 3 fighter jet’s rate speeds are redacted everywhere in the document, but for whatever reason is not redacted on those fact sheets on top?
Yeah I’m absolutely perplexed. One minutes he’s humbly confessing he’s an amateur with no training/education, the next he’s making broad assumptions, and asserting that any criticism against him is just opinions of people venting.
Ultimately we want to see the aircraft modeled correctly. What I don’t want to see is it being over-nerfed just based on hunches.
i think he is confusing people being concerned about what is the best UK air addition in literally forever being nerfed as UK stuff getting nerfed has a history that does not require much digging to find out how it ends on average and instead is interpreting it as we want it to be this super fighter with no counter (which it isnt already but i do think it could be overperforming but at the same time i can see it being relatively realistic)
Nice graph. Coefficient lift… it means Drag also rise 1.6 times. That means to sustain air flow you need increase your thrust… it’s static airtunel AoA test now go look for dynamic one…
It it’s how when you post things what you don’t understand.
What I find fun about different planes in War Thunder is that each one is unique and has its own strengths and weaknesses. When I purchase the Gripen, I wan’t the Gripen experience. I don’t want it nerfed and I don’t want it buffed. I just want the Gripen.
In AIR RB the meta is extremely defined. You are immediately spotted to the entire enemy team and vice versa, and it levels the playingfield in a very boring way imo, it’s the same encounter every single time.
That’s why I fly in sim, where you can have fun and make more use of your jets strengths whilst avoiding it’s weaknesses
But you know it’s not sustained?? The Drag increases with the square of the velocity. You misunderstood coefficients with values
Oh yeah, it is obvious it is not sustained…
It’s coefficients between lift and drag. Not lift as value in Niutons or Kg per given AoA
At 1 they are equally=best/optimal wing performance. From graph around 18…
The Gripen thrust might be incorrect.
According to GAO, the F/A-18’s GE-402 model engine (which should have similar total thrust output to the RM12 and I’ll explain why in a moment…) produces approximately 19,000 pounds of thrust at mach 1.
The Gripen in-game is producing ~23,800 pounds of thrust at mach 1… @Metrallaroja Should I investigate and report this as well?
About to write up a comparison of the GE-402 and RM12
2 Likes
It was just an interesting graph about F-15, nothing more. Idk what did you understand
fine by me
2 Likes
That coefficients it’s optimal around 1. From graph it’s like 18 AoA.
worth noting installed thrust would be different for the gripen and F18 though granted by nearly 5000Ibs is quite a lot
Gripen should have more intake losses than the F-18C, other sources indicate that the Gripen is slightly better than the Mirage 2000 in sustained turn rate and slightly inferior to the F-18 (likely discussing the F-18C with GE-402 motors… they have ~15+% increased installed thrust rating)…
Source is world air power journal.
As shown in the charts previously… the Gripen is WELL AND ABOVE the performance of the Mirage 2000, even with 30 minutes fuel.
Source?
You guessed it …
Is intake losses even a correct term? Does he think the installed thrust losses comes from just the intakes of the aircraft?
I’d be VERY interested in where you’re getting this assumption from as I believe I actually have a source of the Gripens channel loss laying around.
2 Likes
They felt the need to increase fan size on RM12 as compared to the F404-GE-402, just an assumption of mine.
Channel loss information would be really useful.
2 Likes