they nerfed the overperforming STR tho by quite a bit. so no, the first changes they made to it were hilariously wrong. Its more to do how Fms are in general… always kinda overperforming in high speeds from what ive noticed.
However since its a flanker thread, the aim of that bug report was never to have some fantasy FM that we got 2 days ago. This one seems closer but yet further away. Sukhois even w a more nerfed high speed sustained turn rate can still be very easily BVR viable.
We are all experiencing the issue with the limitations of the game engine.
It is not designed for modern unstable airframes.
Hopefully Gaijin one day rework the game engine.
Or we just accept the game is going to be ace combaty and nothing has high levels of realistic values assigned to it.
Possibly… although. From a person who has good idea about FMs, and data/code work. Its less limitations, more of insane code implementation to achieve whatever they see from their pov. Remember even if somethings get passed, they really dont have to accurate follow it and just go up or beyond of what was asked or completely ignore it too lmao…
But yeah engine limitation is a factor in a multitude of factors that are within their control
Like everything it is a cost vs benefit, is it going to sell more premiums rewriting the code and FM for every single high tier jet in game.
Or should they be working on Gen 5 and IIR new BVRAAMs.
I think we both know the answer
fair point. Sometimes ignoring bugs they cant fix in time is just better for the business too, in the long run cuz sometimes stuff gets fixed itself or whatever.
Nope
It’s a Belorussian one, they also still use R-27s. Probably gonna eventually replace them with new missiles but for now it is what it is.
Situations like these is why I like having a maws. Disorientated myself due to the over roll and completely messed up my initial notch, but because of the maws i was able to correct myself into the proper notch.
Usually, it is enough to modernize the avionics and the aircraft can serve for a long time.
New comparison of STR vs the two charts that Gaijin uses to figure out STR for Su-27.
Maximum underperformance is only .6 degrees per second from manual values to game vales. However it appears that Gaijin turn rate performance is based on haphazardly smashing both of these together to create a hybrid flight model.
Essentially you have the STR curve from the T-10…except its just been lifted across the board. An then they have increased lift to match STR of the Su-27SK manual at around 550kph.
Orange line is generated by taking the sustained g-loading values in the Su-27SK manual, correcting between Indicated and True Airspeed, and then performing turn rate calculation on them.
Blue line is from the T-10 prototype STR diagram. This is the diagram you typically see that compares Su-27 to F-15/F-16.
This is probably the final iteration of the flight model unless Gaijin goes back and decides to implement a more realistic supersonic flight regime.
It can no doubt, but as I said the design limitations cannot be ignored.
Su-27/30/35 are perfectly serviceable but I would bet when put against the Su-57 they all feel that gap in design.
all the early variant/prototype first flew in the 80s tho ? u make it seem like all the eurocanards were designed freshly in 90s ? even if we go by your logic then the gap between something as modern as su57 and the eurocanards would be greater the gap between su27 and eurocanard simply cus its “modern”.
Prototype the EAP flew in 1986 Typhoon first test flight was 1994
EAP is very different from the Typhoon.
Yes it should be that’s where the Typhoon will have to rely on it’s arguably superior missiles and sensors and is why Britain has procured the F-35 and is developing Tempest. Su-57 is generation 5 in the same way Rafale and Su-35 and Typhoon are gen 4.5.
Based on your logic we should have just put some thrust vectoring engines on a Tornado, improved the Radar and then it would be a match for Gen 4.5.
The aviation world does not work like that.
first you compare an intercepter to a pure fighter then you copare a fighter to a stealth aircraft. nice
Opsie, looks like i touched some nerve.
When it comes to you it never gets old i guess.
Yeah which is based on viggen and that has nothing to do with Gripen, second guy who made the report entirely focused on viggen’s current flight performance while decided to include MIG’s report in order to justify his point.
Smells a lot like you tbh.
Anyway back to the topic.
do you have a better source for the gripen ? or the source for its current FM ?
Do you? Aside from some calculations based on Viggen’s flight performance, if you dont stop derailing this thread.
We already talked enough about delta canards on Flanker Thread.
so the best source we have is its comparison with the viggen and you dont want that ?
Which has nothing to do with Gripen and yet you claim it has the best source?
Guess some people will try anything to do justify their claims
Whats next, you’re gonna tell me Su-27 can go toe to toe with EFT in any situation?
Ok then a MiG 31 the end result is the same the limitations are the same.
Yes Su-57 will be superior to the Eurocanards and Su-30/35.
Because it is newer design the airframe can do things that other jets cannot. Each aircraft has a development cycle built into it and the Su-30/35 - F-15/F/A-18 etc are at the limit of theirs the Typhoon, Rafale and Gripen are not. Otherwise we would just upgrade existing airframes without ever building developing new ones.
