Tech moderators are entitled to their own opinion. However, they are not legal representatives like @Smin1080p, who is management.
Regarding reports, when moderators speak directly for the Developer, they let it be known with “The developer would like to add” etc.
For example, here is a message from the developer straight to you, to please stop spamming reports about the JAS39.
@TrickZZter & @_David_Bowie are moderators. They help with the game & are critical to its quality of life. But are not legal representatives of Gaijin Entertainment.
Hope this helps.
What conspiracy are you on now?
No one is rule breaking, good sir. You are just projecting & claiming that Moderators are “Dropping the ball”??? Are you implying they are not doing their jobs?
Banned 4 times? Nonsense, that would imply there is favoritism.
You are undermining staff & challenging moderation publicly. If you feel moderation has made an error. There is a process. Posting in forum is not the place.
I’ve gone through several Red Flag reports and pilot interviews and the supermaneuverability can be an advantage but also a disadvantage. Simple example: the Su 30 MKI and the F-15/16 on Red flag. In dogfights, the Indians lost surprisingly often because the Su 30 pilots would lose speed very quickly when maneuvering using TV and the American pilots would get into a position to destroy the Su 30 if they reacted correctly. So manoeuvres using TV have to be timed correctly, and that brings us back to the fact that it’s the pilot in the aircraft, not the aircraft itself.
The other thing is the use of helmet sights, which equalized the less agile aircraft to the more agile aircraft.
This is evidence totally worth discussing & changing my position on. But blindly saying its useless (not saying you said this) is propaganda because Russia, US & China utilize these in their 5th generation fighters.
This is a very specialized combat capability of the 3 world superpowers in air-to-air combat. I am happy to see you take it a little more seriously & open investigation into it.
there is nothing supernatural about its aerodynamics.Moreover, its aerodynamic quality is worse than the Su-27. There is nothing surprising about the thrust vector either. Yes, the design solutions of the engine itself are very interesting
I heard one negative thing about this aircraft was the poor visibility the canards induced. Nothing to do with performance. Read it was quite good iirc.
Btw… Why do you think they considered thrust vectoring in the F-15?? For 6th generation ACE application in 6th generation fighters? :)
So, since you, someone who is not a pilot, a combat pilot, or a Russian trained combat pilot cannot think of any scenarios. Means it’s never been used offensively ever?
Why would it be used offensively on non-supermaneuverable aircraft? Supermaneuverable aircraft turn better by default you do understand? Angles of attack 90 degrees and above is not the only benefit of the capability. Control and better conventional maneuverability increase besides alpha.
Are you implying the Soviet Union, Russia, China & the US invested in nothing?
Forget bug reports you better call your State representative & tell them they are making a huge mistake wasting your taxpayer’s dollars all these years on useless capabilities.
Probably an archive with lots of footage. It received the 3D nozzles while on loan to NASA. Prior to this it was using 2D nozzles, and there is also footage of that, but likely not during its early tests
Usually when people say STOL they are referring to a more Harrier/F-35B type takeoff or landing. The modifications to the F-15 for this program significantly improved takeoff and landing roll, but not to those levels
It was a 3D nozzle (F-15 ACTIVE) I think the VT on the F-15 was earlier than the Sukhoi. Even the first design was in the late 60’s for the FX program.
