I’m not sure about that. The vNE went from 1470 km/h (= mach 1.2 at sea level) to 1470*1.05 = 1543. This implies the 1.05 multiplier is already included.
I misunderstood the change then, thanks
So, if indeed 1.05x should be included in the max mach number too, they got it wrong. Do we know that it should be?
Yes, Sweden used Rb 75T = tung stridsdel = heavy warhead.
It just sounds like to me gaijin is holding the same standard they normally do to all aircraft including the Gripen, and they aren’t reducing top speed based on ordnance / pylons which means Su-27 with 10x R-77 won’t be subsonic due to wave drag.
Is that value in datamined values above or its separate? Wondering by how much it changed.
But as I understand it, gripen didn’t have the RB75T?
Fuselage drag increased from ~0.004 to 0.006
damn… thats pretty big increase
That’s what I’m asking: what is the standard procedure? 1.05x at the IAS limit but not the mach limit? Or 1.05x on both.
I’m unsure, haven’t really tried reporting top speed stuff before so I’d have to inquire about it
Can we ask @Metrallaroja who closed the report – should maximum mach number be IRL or 1.05*IRL? If it’s the latter, there’s a mistake in the report (Community Bug Reporting System).
As the proud owner of a Ka-52, I can tell you that the missile is still ridiculously over performing compared to any footage of it in real life. Funny how @MiG_23M wants that one buffed though.
Yeah, let’s see your source on that? I obviously can’t post videos from the recent conflict, but I trust you’ve seen them? The vikhrs in use I mean. It does not seem anywhere near as manoeuvrable as it is in game, and the designator for guiding it seems much more imprecise.
Is there a repository of information for all the variables in fm files? I know you’ve kind of explained them, but are you able to go into a little bit more detail about what the changes to Machcrit5, MachMax5, MultiMachMax5, and MultLimit5 all do
I wonder how big that drag change actually is, considering its in decimals, iam not sure if it can be considered 50% nerf. Not good at math.
probably soemthing like a 30-50% nerf id imagine (knowing numbers itll be a 33% nerf)
Is CdMin the zero lift drag coeff? The total drag can be written as the sum of a zero-lift part and an induced part, which depends on the Oswald number also mentioned above. I don’t know enough to say how big this change is relative to the total drag, but the force acting on the aircraft at zero lift will be 62/48 = 1.3 times greater.
Where did you get these numbers from?
Here
That’s only for the FuselagePlane. So the zero-lift drag of the fuselage is increasing by 27.7%
Yes, you’re right, I was unaware that the coefficients were separated by airframe parts.
So while the drag force is linear in the drag coefficient, we don’t know how big a part of the total zero-lift coefficient the fuselage contributes, or how big a part the zero-lift drag contributes to the total drag. I can’t speculate in how big of a change this is overall.
1 Like