The amraam Viggen was pretty lazy though, they’ve also just copy pasted the same Viggen radar on all of the viggens, even the AJ’s. They should have A2G radars (already reports on it). My guess is they’ve ignored it because they had not added A2G modes at the time and the Attack viggens also does not have its A2G munitions that use it (RB04). I hope we get the RB04 soon though, a bunch of nations have gotten cool anti-ship missiles recently.
Again RB player so Sim is worthless. The Viggen cockpit screens are still wrong.
Im still waiting for the JA37DI Otis which is what should’ve been added same with the JAS39A
You might have seen this or maybe not
1 Like
37C and 37D were both pretty busted until FM nerf and the RWR update where most stuff it fights got the RWR’s with ID. It used to excel in tracking people sneakily at low BR’s with a great TWS, which didn’t ring many alarm bells to people because 1. There was no RWR IFF, 2. There was no RWR ID, people mostly reacted to hard-locks.
They’re still good but unfortunately the matchmaker has gotten extremely bland and shitty since those glory days. You used to fight a great variety of fighters (F4’s, F5’s, F8’s, Mig23’s, Mig21’s, Su25’s, A10’s, J7E’s, Tornado, Mirage, Harriers) very consistently, each with their own advantages.
Nowadays if you join lobbies at either BR enemy teams often just consist of whatever is the busted premium jet. I’ve been in lobbies with literally full teams of only the French premium F1C. 10+ of them lmao
We should get BK-90 lol, now that would be cool. It would also be cool if we see our pilots hand controling the missile if we get RB04 given the controls are on the left side of th3 cockpit.
They still weight 1000kg more than they should which effects their flight performance. They also need a revision of their damage model idk why but they get a slightly yellow wing and they fall out of the sky sometimes.
yeah. From what I understand tho, the current grippy fm is based off this one chart that shows grippy vs viggen sustained
and since the viggen was overperforming (and still is) when it was modeled, it made the grippy over perform, though i’m not entirely sure.
@FeetPics would know more, hes done a billion times more research into this
Viggen is underperforming in some areas, do you have Del 3?
ik its underperforming in stuff like empty weight and engine temps (?) if i remember right. but overperforming in sustained turn
idk what del 3 is
so performance charts?
Yeah and some other stuff for them.
1 Like
I saw that report, however it seems like a nothingburger? It assumes the current Gripen FM is based off the Viggen’s old (overperforming)ingame flight-model, not the Viggen’s EM diagrams that are available?
MIG23’s original FM report used the Viggen EM diagram when he made the comparison (using that chart), not the ingame performance which has since changed. To quote:
OG Grippy report
“According to Saab (see source 1), the Gripen appears to have approximately 1.435x the performance of the Viggen in regards to peak sustained turn rate as seen in the chart attached on page 17. According to the JA37 manual (see source 3), the sustained turn rate is around ~14 deg/s for the Viggen on the deck with a clean airframe and 40% fuel.”
Community Bug Reporting System
Also IIRC the devs alluded that they had some other source for it’s FM, and weren’t purely using the ones that were brought forward back during FM discussions.
1 Like
The current Gripen STR does not match this chart either way you interpret it. You can index it to 4km or sea level and it will still be over-performing in sustained turn rate.
Only other documents available provide for peak STR values at 5km and those have differences in them as well.
The real turn rate numbers in this chart are extrapolated by indexing AIAA chart and assuming that “low-altitude” is equal to 4km. The curve present in the AIAA chart for the Viggen are a closer match to the 4km ones than the sea level ones. However there will also be similar difference if assumption is changed to mean that low altitude is at sea level. Also iirc, I tested at 50% fuel instead of 40% fuel which is what is specified in the Ja-37 manual to give the Gripen the benefit of the doubt.
This is using the same manual that MiG-23M used. However it should kept in mind that the Ja-37 turn rate was not reported until much later.
Game Version 2.35.1.87 vs 2.33.0.19
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/maa7nVdMHGAX
The other sources for the Gripen STR are an AerMacchi document that puts it at 13 degrees per second at 5km, an Armscorp document that puts it at 12 degrees per second at 5km, and a British MOD document that puts it at 13 degrees per second at sea level w/ full fuel and air to air missile load.
Referencing pretty much any of these documents and comparing to the in-game turn rate would result in the plane losing 1.5 - 3 degrees per second of sustained turn rate in most conditions.
2 Likes
but yeah the only reason why i did the report was cause someone else shared the brochure talking about something else (radar range), and i was like oh cool. then i read it, saw that it said ps-05 had a 60 degree gimbal, and since i literally played gripen last night, I’m like oh that’s wrong in wt so i just reported it. low k surprised it hasn’t been reported earlier considering it’s something that requires literally no testing and a gripen fanatic surely would’ve reported it earlier. imo not bug reporting stuff becuase it would nerf stuff/only bug reporting only when getting a buff in return is “cringe”, things should just be bug reported if its off/not right and thats that imo. and i love the grippy man but i dont let that get in the way of having something thats wrong thats easily reportable
sgd
I’ve never done these tests myself since I don’t have access to WTRTI and other resources on console, and I’ve been away quite a bit in the past 18 months so I’m out of the loop but my opinion at the moment(not that it matters) is basically based on that I recall people saying it was “close enough/overperformed similar to everything else” after the last nerf, mig23 saying it was subsequently underperforming quite a bit in acceleration as a result of it (but also that he believed it should be ~2° worse STR, but he couldn’t prove it with available info(?), and that he felt it was hopeless until they properly modelled the instability) and then on the FM report 9 months ago devs claimed that it was pretty much accurate based on data from “other sources”
dev response
The data from other sources suggests the turn rate for 50% fuel load and 4 missiles to be 13…14deg/s at 15 000ft. The Gripen’s performance in the game is now matching these figures, as it is 13.5deg/s with 2+2 missiles and 50% internal fuel at 15000ft.
Which I assume is the AerMacchi source, based on the figures mentioned. Which is interesting since we rarely get any insight into what sources Gaijin is using.
Not saying it’s accurate right now, I think it’s a mess like all FM’s. I was just questioning why the latest report made the assumption that they used ingame values for old Viggen FM to make the Gripen FM as I never had the impression anyone used ingame Viggen data. But I see now why one could make that assumption based on the supposed over performance alone
You’ve taken a far greater interest than me in everything flight-model wise and I’ve seen some of your videos which are very cool. Not to beat a dead horse but I think an interesting topic could be to compare different aerodynamic configurations STR/SEP performances with each other at similar TWR’s and/or wing loading values, by trying to match those values using fuel-loads and whatnot. Not an easy task with the limited information that’s out there though. We already have a pretty good idea on why they chose certain designs over others, but understanding the energy (SEP/STR) impacts those designs have across the flight envelope would be interesting
Very interesting, so over performing pretty significantly at M0.55+ based on the JA37 charts, but fairly accurate at low speeds? Also I’m a bit confused why is the ‘statshark’ one so high? Is that the old Gripen FM?
statshark just in general over estimates delta canards (overestimates eurofighter as well)
1 Like